The New World Order and its Kingpins, “Saviours of the Planet,” Paid by Our Thankful “Green” Taxes
 Print Post |
Posted by Anders under English, Euromed
As shown on this blog, the New World Order is busy cheating us into believing major global crises – created and invented by its illuminists – are demanding global solutions – through a UN-world government: their home made War on terrorism, Pandemics (BSE, SARS, avian flu, swine flu etc), Financial crisis , and Threatened Biodiversity, and Immigration and here – but their trump card is the “climate change” scam.
This hoax has now been spread by mendacious propaganda all over the world to an extent that most people believe in it – much to their own future cost. In Norway, an advanced New World Order state, climate change deniers are even beimg called “climate hooligans”!
Why is the climate hoax so important to the new World Order?
By Cliff Kincaid June 24, 2009 NewsWithViews.com: While our media sleep, the United Nations is proceeding, with President Obama’s acquiescence, to implement a global plan to create a new international socialist order financed by global taxes on the American people.
“The UN Conference on the World Financial and Economic Crisis and its Impact on Development” that begins on Wednesday will consider adoption of a document calling for “new voluntary and innovative sources of financing initiatives to provide additional stable sources of development finance…” This is U.N.-speak for global taxes. They are anything but “voluntary” for the people forced to pay them. [Read Cliff’s book: “Global Bondage: The UN Plan to Rule The World”]
The most “popular” proposals, which could generate tens of billions of dollars in revenue for global purposes, involve taxes on greenhouse gas emissions and financial transactions such as stock trades. The document was agreed to at an informal meeting of expert “facilitators” and was made available. It is doubtful that any changes will be made to it.
Paul Stiglitz squealed about the mafia methods of the New World Order organisations, The IMF and the World Bank, towards poor states.
The Obama Administration’s unofficial point man in U.N. deliberations has been economist Joseph Stiglitz, Nobel Prize winner, who has been coordinating a “Commission of Experts” that has reported to U.N. General Assembly President Miguel D’Escoto, the notorious Communist Catholic Priest who received the Lenin Peace Prize from the old Soviet Union. Stiglitz produced his own document which called for “the issuance of additional SDRs,” “additional sources of funding” for global institutions, a new global reserve currency, and a new global credit facility. Key recommendations have been incorporated into the official U.N. conference document but Stiglitz and his “experts” provide far more details about them in their “Report of the Commission of Experts” – especially Chapter V:art. 90–100 under the section: “ Global Reserve System” . The Outcome Document of the Conference supports Stiglitz´ call for innovative, climate related income for developing countries.
In terms of new funding sources, the document furthermore calls for “innovative sources of financing such as emission rights trading and financial transactions taxes…” The concept of “emissions trading” enables corporations to avoid limits on greenhouse gas emissions if they pay taxes to government. It is part of the “cap and trade” legislation that the liberals are now pushing on Capitol Hill. The bill for this New World Order tax is then passed on to you and me by the price of the merchandize!
Chapter Five of this document, “Report of the Commission of Experts,” goes into detail, declaring that “For some time, the difficulty in meeting the UN official assistance target of 0.7 percent of Gross National Income of developed industrial countries as official development assistance. This has generated proposals on how to guarantee a more reliable and stable source of financing for these objectives (V.92).”
The document notes that an international airline ticket tax is now in effect.
This is taxation for global objectives. There have also been suggestions to auction global natural resources—such as ocean fishing rights and pollution emission permits—for global environmental programs.”
It goes on to say, “These taxes should be nationally imposed, but internationally coordinated (V:94).” So the nations of the world, including the U.S., will collect the taxes but then turn them over to institutions such as the U.N. The world body will function, in effect, like a global Internal Revenue Service.
Comment: So, this must be trumped through – even through threats – or bribes – secretly.
No matter how insane, the New World Order always has its way
The Huffington Post 26 June 2009: The House of Representatives passed the most sweeping climate change policy ever considered by Congress. Instituting a cap and trade system, the bill aims to cut America’s production of greenhouse gases by 17 percent by 2020, and 83 percent by 2050.
Climate Depot 26 June 2009 The House of Representatives passed a bill it did not read, did not understand. A bill that is based on crumbling scientific claims and a bill that will have no detectable climate impact.
The Los Angeles Times 22 June: Reporting from Washington — Coal-fired power plants are the largest source of heat-trapping gases that cause global warming, but President Obama’s plan to fight climate change would result in the nation burning more coal a decade from now than it does today.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
is an agency of the federal government of the United States charged to regulate chemicals and protect human health by safeguarding the natural environment: air, water, and land.
The Washington Monthly 17 April 2009: Having received White House backing, the Environmental Protection Agency declared that carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases are a significant threat to human health and thus will be listed as pollutants (although there would be no life without it).
However, the passing of the bill was based on the active EPA suppression of “climate change” knowledge
CBSNews 26 June 2005
The Environmental Protection Agency may have suppressed an internal report that was sceptical of claims about global warming, including whether carbon dioxide must be strictly regulated by the federal government, according to a series of newly disclosed e-mail messages. Less than two weeks before the agency formally submitted its pro-regulation recommendation to the White House, an EPA centre director quashed a 98-page report that warned against making hasty “decisions based on a scientific hypothesis that does not appear to explain most of the available data.”
The e-mail correspondence raises questions about political interference in what was supposed to be an independent review process inside a federal agency. After reviewing the scientific literature that the EPA is relying on, EPA-veteran Carlin said, he concluded that it was at least three years out of date and did not reflect the latest research. “My personal view is that there is not currently any reason to regulate (carbon dioxide),” he said. Global temperatures are roughly where they were in the mid-20th century. They’re not going up, and if anything they’re going down.”
EPA boss Liza Jackson is loyal to Pres. Obama for her promotion and hurried EPA´s recommendation through
Here is an excerpt from a speech by a member of the House of Lords, UK
VISCOUNT MONCKTON OF BRENCHLEY, former policy adviser for Margaret Thatcher. Sir Monckton has witten many articles on climate in the big newspapers of the world and was a key figure behind the British court of justice ban on using Al Gore´s film “An Inconvenient Truth” in British schools due to at least 11 severe errors. He has repeatedly challenged Al Gore to meet him on US TV – but never had an answer!“There are now sound theoretical reasons, repeatedly confirmed by empirical observations, for suspecting that the IPCC has exaggerated climate sensitivity by up to tenfold, and that it has also exaggerated the rate of accumulation of CO2 in the atmosphere by twofold. There is plenty of evidence that the majority of the scientists participating in the IPCC’s process were not involved in the climate sensitivity calculations. Even a very small exaggeration in the value of each of the four key parameters will cause a very large exaggeration when the four parameters are multiplied together to give the UN’s projection of anthropogenic temperature change over time. Most scientists are unaware of the magnitude of the UN’s exaggeration, because the UN’s treatment of the central question of climate sensitivity is obscurantist in the extreme.
Correcting for the UN’s exaggerations of each of the four key parameters reduces climate sensitivity from 3.26 C to a small fraction of this value at CO2 doubling.
The cost of each 1 degree of K of “global warming” prevented by the Waxman/Markey Bill, even if it were fully implemented, would thus be $60-$600 trillion. This cost would fall disproportionately upon the poorest. The Bill will achieve precisely no reduction in global mean surface temperature but will cost a great deal to run.The editor of the Chemical & Engineering News has brought himself into trouble with the world´s largest scientific group. On June 22 he wrote: “The science of anthropogenic climate change is becoming increasingly well established. The scientific consensus on the reality of climate change has become increasingly difficult to 
challenge, despite the efforts of diehard climate-change deniers”.
There is not, was not and will not be any climate crisis”
NIWA´s atmospheric CO2– graph. No correlation to increasing temperature.
The editorial was met with a swift, passionate and scientific rebuke from Baum’s colleagues – the largest scientific group of the world. Virtually all of the letters published on July 27 castigated Baum’s climate science views. Scientists rebuked Baum’s use of the word “deniers” because of the terms “association with Holocaust deniers.” In addition, the scientists called Baum’s editorial: “disgusting”; “a disgrace”; “filled with misinformation”; “unworthy of a scientific periodical” and “pap.”
Comment
From the above we clearly see that the New World order needs our money to build their one-world state. Since they have robbed us nearly entirely through their home-made financial crisis and will do so even more when tax-payers are to pay for the New World Order central banks´bail-outs – i.e. gifts to the thieves who took our houses, jobs and shares in the first place – it is obvious that we are to pay for them to rule the Earth entirely to the extent that we are impoverished. The self-declared EU-illuminists´ (explanatory statement) means and aim are money and power for themselves.
And they are very keen on that: The EU-Commission supported Blogactiv 8 Aug. 2009: “The combination of environmental taxes, incentives, trading schemes, carbon accounting, regulation and voluntary measures accompanied by a well designed, comprehensive global climate agreement to replace the Kyoto Protocol is essential to help the world move to a low-carbon economy.”
It is also becoming more and more obvious that these totally mendacious illuminists are desperately lying, and here, and here. Now they are even setting up our own children as climate police against us climate criminals!
In a US Senate Minority Report last autumn, 650 scientists had very hard words to say about the climate fraud:
“Global warming has become a new religion”.
“Warming fears are the “worst scientific scandal in the history… etc.
I showed this to a former Danish Minister for the Environment. His answer: “This comes from the right. I still think there is consensus on climate. Now we are to save the planet”!!!
You cannot discuss with New World Order ideologists – only protest that we and our children don´t want to be milked by the illuminist bankers making themselves the kings of the world.
But only united can we stop them. And people will not see it.
Centurean2\'s Weblog 
Getting the picture yet?
But what is the true nature of the Fabian Society? It’s image is that of a socialist ‘think tank’, but its influence worldwide since 1884 has been enormous. In his paper “Communist” Councils in New Zealand John Christian describes the Fabian Society thus — “a mixture” of Fascism, Nazism, Marxism and Communism all bundled together. However, it is much more deadly because it is much more clever and subtle. The only difference between Fabian Socialism and Communism is that Communists take your house by directly sending in the “secret police” to knock your front door down ? Fabian Socialists do it much more subtly and cleverly ? by “gradually” taking your individual rights away, by “gradually” increasing property taxes and rates, and finally, when you can’t pay them, they send in their regional “council tax inspectors” to take your house away ? but the end result is the same’. It has long been a Fabian aim to incrementally downgrade the Monarchy of Great Britain but they are too subtle to overtly push for abolition. Their approach is to promote ‘debate’ about the necessity for ‘modernisation’ of the Monarchy and that it should be operated more economically etc. They always attempt to change the climate of opinion as a prerequisite to the slow, incremental achievement their aims. This is achieved by operation of the Hegelian Dialectic, the use of which was perfected by Fabian co-founders George Bernard Shaw and Sidney Webb. It is usual to find Fabians on both sides of a discussion, however their debates are carefully managed.
http://eurorealistnewsletter.blogspot.com/2008/10/elizabeth-becketts-submission-august.html
FABIANS ON BOTH SIDES—STAGE MANAGED SET PIECES…………BY THE SALESMEN IN WESTMINSTER!!
As i’ve said many times before…Westminster is just A for profit CORPORATION…
Your vote changes nothing the scam goes on and on.
Westminster actors register their profit making mafia at Dunn and Bradstreet..small business /corporation..
Stick in westminster or parliament one or the other……………
Why would it be registered………….
http://smallbusiness.dnb.com/
Councils- cops etc small businesses–to make profits’ notice how nowadays—-it’s all take££ take ££££££ take££££££££££……………
The NWO Fabian and Fabian Bankers will bleed you dry then spit you out————————–IF YOU LET THM THAT IS!!!
WHAT IS….
Why is it important for you to understand the subject of the Hegelian Dialectic? Because it is the process by which all change is being accomplished in society today. More importantly, it is the tool that the globalists are utilizing to manipulate the minds of the average American to accept that change, where ordinarily they would refuse it.
The Hegelian Dialectic is, in short, the critical process by which the ruling elite create a problem, anticipating in advance the reaction that the population will have to the given crisis, and thus conditioning the people that a change is needed. When the population is properly conditioned, the desired agenda of the ruling elite is presented as the solution. The solution isn’t intended to solve the problem, but rather to serve as the basis for a new problem or exacerbate the existing one.
When the newly inflamed difficulty reaches the boiling point of a crisis, it becomes the foundation upon which arguments may again be made for change. Hence, the process is repeated, over and over, moving society toward whatever end the planners have in mind.
It’s also important to understand that as this process is being driven, arguments are created both for and against certain measures of change. All arguments are controlled. The presented solutions — each with varying levels of unadornment — are “debated” publicly by the manipulators or their minions. This is done until a perceived compromise has been reached on the best measure to take in route to solving the crisis. Then, the outcome of the “debate” — which purportedly weighs the concerns of the public with the mandate to do something — is enacted as public policy.
Such is a summary of the Hegelian Dialectic. Though few in American society have ever heard of it, still fewer have not been profoundly impacted by its use in the effective neutralization of opposition in the formation of public policy.
For more on the Hegelian Dialectic, including examples of its use, see the links below.
What is the Hegelian Dialectic?
The background and history of the process.
Draft Resolution of the Revolutionary Communist Party U.S.A.
A perfect example of the Hegelian Dialectic in action. In this document, the communists complain about all of the evils that they have created to blame on capitalism. Their solution to the problem? “Evil” capitalism must give way to their “fair” and “just” form of government — communism.
Who Made the AA ‘Put’ Options in the Days Prior to September 11th?
The Profits Of Death: Insider Trading and 911
9/11 Insider Trading
9/11 and ALEX Brown, Inc.
http://www.amerikanexpose.com/hegel/
Rense.com
——————————————————————————–
The Profits Of Death –
Insider Trading & 911
(Part I of a special three-part Series)
By Tom Flocco – Edited by Michael C. Ruppert
© Copyright 2001 From The Wilderness Publications
http://www.copvcia.com. All Rights Reserved.
May be recopied, distributed or posted on the
worldwide web for non-profit purposes only.
12-6-1
(FTW) – On October 9th, FTW broke a story on insider trading connected to the 9-11 attacks on the World Trade Center that sparked worldwide controversy. In that story we reported how the Israeli Herzliyya Institute for Counterterrorism had documented that unknown individuals — with accurate foreknowledge of the attacks — had purchased an obvious and unusually large number of put options on United and American Airlines shortly before the attacks.
Additional companies hit hard by the insider trading included Axa Re(insurance) and Munich Re as well as American investment giants Merrill Lynch and Morgan Stanley.
Put options are essentially a bet that a stock s price will fall abruptly. The seller, having entered into a time-specific contract with a buyer, does not need to own the actual shares at the time the contract is purchased. Therefore, if a holder of the put option has a contract to sell a stock such as American Airlines for (e.g.) $100 a share on a Friday and the stock falls to $50 on Wednesday, they can purchase the stock, sell it on Friday and double their money. The person on the other end of the contract (the call) has an obligation to buy the shares at the agreed upon price. The bank handling the transaction as a broker is the only entity knowing the identities of both parties.
FTW also revealed that the A.B. Brown (Alex Brown) investment arm of the banking giant Deutschebank/A.B. Brown had been headed until 1998 by the man who is now the Executive Director of the Central Intelligence Agency A.B. Buzzy Krongard. In fact, Krongard is but one name in a long history of CIA interconnections to stock trading and the world s financial markets. We also discussed, in detail, the evidence indicating that the CIA and other intelligence agencies monitor stock trading in real time for the purpose of identifying potential attacks of any nature that might damage the U.S. economy.
The original FTW story is located at:
http://www.copvcia.com/ stories/oct_2001/krongard.html.
Critics of FTW’s initial story – not having read any of five related stories dating back to an October 2000 piece on PROMIS software – claimed that we had not made the links to establish culpability. But we knew that the links were there, that our case was solid, and that new evidence would not go undiscovered for long.
Now, investigative reporter Tom Flocco digs deep and strikes pay dirt in a three-part series that reveals not only deeper links between the CIA, Wall Street and the insider trades of 9-11, but also discloses that a key executive at Deutschebank – an American – became, just weeks before the attacks, a convicted felon. His crime: conspiracy to launder drug money to arrange the purchase of U.S. weapons – in association with two Pakistanis who also attempted to acquire nuclear bomb components – for use by Islamic fundamentalist terrorists. – MCR
CIA Does Not Deny Stock Monitoring Outside U.S.
(Part I in a series)
In a returned phone call from the Central Intelligence Agency, press spokesman Tom Crispell denied that the CIA was monitoring “real-time,” pre-September 11, stock option trading activity within United States borders using such software as the Prosecutor s Management Information System (PROMIS).
“That would be illegal. We only operate outside the United States,” the intelligence official said.
However, when asked whether the CIA had been using PROMIS beyond American borders to scrutinize world financial markets for national security purposes, Crispell replied, “I have no way of knowing what operations are [being affected by our assets] outside the country.”
Extensive media reporting confirms that investors at Deutschebank-Alex Brown and other global financial entities may have profited from prior knowledge of the attacks while purchasing disproportionate pre-attack put option contracts on targeted U.S. airlines and related insurance or investment firms. All of these firms suffered serious losses resulting from the September 11th attacks and their stocks abruptly plummeted.
Confirmation that the CIA or other U.S. intelligence agencies were monitoring financial markets and had seen these trades before the attacks would have staggering implications for thousands of victims families.
The CIA official also declined to comment on the actual capabilities of PROMIS. The highly technical software has been described as a system that “interfaces with any database…as police can input an alleged terrorist s name or credit card, and the software will provide details of the person s movements through purchases…,” according to an 11-10-01 Toronto Sun report.
The importance of PROMIS is that it is not only capable of interfacing with a wide variety of data bases in different computer languages and then integrating the data, but it has also been modified for intelligence purposes. It has then been sold throughout the world by spy agencies through third parties to clients such as banks and investment houses envious of its unique capabilities. One key modification by agencies such as the CIA and Mossad not disclosed to most users — is a secret back door that permits those with the right codes to enter databases undetected, retrieve and/or alter information, and leave without a trace. PROMIS has been extensively reported as being used throughout the world s financial markets because of its versatility in facilitating international transactions.
Further clouding the issue of pre-attack stock screening by U.S. intelligence, the Canadian daily revealed that U.S. police said many of the suspected terrorists were apprehended (and detained) “through use of the state-of-the-art computer software program PROMIS.”
In March 2000, CIA director George J. Tenet told the Senate that Osama bin Laden s group (Al Q aeda) was “embracing the opportunities offered by recent leaps in information technology.” A FOX News story and stories in FTW disclosed in November that Osama bin Laden was believed to have the software.
The issue of CIA monitoring of stock trades follows on the heels of wide reports indicating that investigators are carefully probing the insider trading with its resultant profits, reported to be in the 10 s of millions of dollars — some of which a Deutschebank investor has yet to claim.
A promis is a promis
Crispell also declined comment when asked whether the Treasury Department or FBI had questioned CIA Executive Director and former Deutschebank-Alex Brown CEO, A.B. “Buzzy” Krongard, about CIA monitoring of financial markets using PROMIS and his former position as overseer of Brown s “private client relations. [Note: Krongard stayed with A.B. Brown to head private client operations after it was acquired by Banker s Trust in 1997. As Krongard was leaving in 1998 to join the CIA as counselor to Director George Tenet, Banker s Trust was acquired by Deutschebank. Banker s Trust had been previously criticized by the U.S. Senate and regulators for money laundering. Krongard was promoted to Executive Director at CIA in March 2001. – MCR]
Wide reports — including a 9/28/01 story in the Asian Wall Street Journal and a 10/1/01 story in The Guardian — indicate that investigators are checking Deutschebank s alleged links to Saudi “private banking,” terrorist bank accounts, and $2.5 million in unclaimed United Airlines (UAL) put options profits; however, no government acknowledgement had ever been given of CIA s alleged use of PROMIS software prior to the attacks.
In a recent phone conversation, when asked about alleged terrorist ties to Deutschebank and potential pre-attack CIA trade monitoring via PROMIS, Treasury Department spokesman Rob Nichols remarked, “This is clearly an interesting line of questioning regarding conflicts of interest.”
However, news searches indicate that no member of Congress has publicly questioned whether wealthy terrorist-connected Saudi nationals participated in the private client operations of Deutschebank-Alex Brown. Osama bin Laden and almost all of the alleged 9-11 hijackers are of Saudi nationality. Also, no member of Congress expressed public interest in asking Krongard about whether or not the CIA affected “real-time” pre-attack trade monitoring using PROMIS software at any location.
[Note: Under a program known as Echelon, the governments of the U.S., Britain, Canada, Australia and New Zealand routinely circumvent prohibitions on domestic electronic spying by having the agencies of the other governments do it for them. – MCR]
Michael Ruppert, editor and publisher of From The Wilderness (FTW) newsletter (www.copvcia.com), has been interviewed by both the House and Senate for his expertise on illegal covert CIA operations. He said recently that, “It is well documented that the CIA has long monitored such (suspicious or unusual) trades — in real time — as potential warnings of terrorist attacks and other economic moves contrary to U.S. interests.”
Ruppert was the first to point out after 9-11 that CIA Executive Director Buzzy Krongard has extensive past ties to Deutschebank-Alex Brown. Ruppert added, “There is abundant and clear evidence that a number of transactions in financial markets indicated specific [criminal] foreknowledge of the September 11 attacks…and the firm which was used to place put options on UAL stock was, until 1998, managed by the man who is now in the number three position at the CIA.”
Ruppert also confirmed that two October 17 calls to the FBI resulted in spokespersons declining to give their names after revealing that “the FBI has discontinued use of the PROMIS software.” Moreover, on October 24, Justice Department spokesperson Loren Pfeifle declined to answer any questions about where, when, or how PROMIS had been used and would only say, “I can confirm that the DOJ has discontinued use of the program.” This followed almost 17 years of denials by the FBI and the Department of Justice — in court and under oath — that they used the software at all in a law enforcement or intelligence capacity.
Krongard’s current lofty intelligence community position, combined with his prior leadership of a financial institution allegedly connected to terrorist hijacker bank accounts [see Part II], suspicious UAL options contracts, and “private banking” is so controversial that it has not as yet sparked any official investigation. That said, the evidence is substantial enough to potentially expose the prior-knowledge issue — if Congress chooses to act.
And while Treasury Department official Rob Nichols agreed that unresolved conflict of interest questions remain, the CIA Executive Director is still currently charged with supervision of the U.S. intelligence investigation of his former firm and its “private banking” operations.
Reuters has reported that Krongard “was [also] involved in setting up the CIA experiment into investing in high-tech companies with the goal of acquiring innovative technology for its own use.”
Commenting on the CIA s venture capital firm In-Q-Tel, started in 1999 to encourage development of private-sector technologies for use in the intelligence world, Krongard said on August 1, 2001 — just 5 weeks before the Trade Center attacks — “I think In-Q-Tel’s a wonderful model…in accessing the capabilities of the private sector.”
On October 16, Fox News reported that, according to sources, accused Russian spy and FBI agent Robert Hanssen sold high-tech PROMIS software to Russia, and that Osama bin Laden allegedly purchased it from Russian organized crime sources.
Fox reported that, “Government officials suspect bin Laden may have the highly sophisticated U.S. government software that has been used by several other governments, including the United States, for classified intelligence and law enforcement information.”
The admission by U.S. government officials that PROMIS was widely used by a number of governments further blurs the pre-attack stock monitoring issue since intelligence officials will likely continue to decline comment, save for closed-door congressional oversight hearings or challenges by those victims families choosing to bypass settlements adjudicated by the Attorney General s office in favor of direct intervention by the courts.
The buck stops where?
Tom Crispell, the CIA official, was cooperative while attempting to maintain intelligence confidentiality in the face of what he termed as “ongoing investigations surrounding the Twin Towers tragedies by the CIA, FBI, Justice, and Treasury Departments.” However, this was in great contrast to an FBI spokesperson who refused to offer either his first or last name, while declining comment on any matter related to events of September 11.
During a series of calls, some spokespersons quickly attempted to defer and deflect questions to another government agency, i.e. “We don t deal with that issue. Call the other [entity].”
However, many would agree, given the evidence, that the 9-11 terrorism is closely linked to economic issues. President Bush has stated that this is economic warfare. Yet few appear to be questioning an apparent paucity of critical information sharing among key government agencies on the issue.
As U.S. investigators retrace the financial trails connecting the Twin Towers, terrorist hijackers and their accomplices, many of whom may still be in the country, evidence is being turned up by FBI, CIA, Justice, Treasury and NSA that does involve global banking conglomerate Deutschebank-Alex Brown.
$2.5 million unclaimed UAL investor profits
For example, according to a 10-19-2001 Wall Street Journal report, an unnamed investor purchased 2,000 United Airlines (UAL) put option contracts through Deutsche Bank-Alex Brown on September 6 — betting the stock would shortly plummet. And USA Today reported that an individual purchased 810 UAL puts on August 6.
A Baron s source claimed on 10-8-2001 that the pre-attack UAL order placed through Deutsche Bank was for 2,500 contracts which were “split into 500 chunks each, directing each order to different U.S. exchanges around the country simultaneously.”
According to San Francisco Chronicle reporters Christian Berthelsen and Scott Winokur a source familiar with the UAL trades said investors have yet to claim $2.5 million in profits on contracts purchased before United airliners crashed into a New York Trade Tower and a deserted Pennsylvania field on September 11.
The Chronicle source also identified Deutschebank-Alex Brown as the investment firm used to purchase some of the UAL options; and Rohini Pragasam, a bank spokeswoman, declined to comment on the transaction.
The source (who requested anonymity) said, “Usually, if someone has a windfall like that, you take the money and run. Whoever did this thought the Exchange [NYSE] would not be closed for four days. This smells real bad.”
The German news weekly Der Spiegel revealed that Deutschebank also handled accounts worth about $100 million for Osama bin Laden’s family. These were part of 10 accounts it suspected were linked to terrorists or terrorist activities and which it later handed over to German authorities after the attacks, according to a report in Britain s The Guardian. But no further comments have been forthcoming from the financial giant.
German Central Bank President Ernst Welteke said a study — concerning principal hijack subjects residing in Germany and unusual patterns in short-selling of insurance, airline and other financial company shares — pointed to “terrorism insider trading” in those stocks.
The SEC Is Investigating
A phone interview with Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) press spokesman John Nester, of the Washington, DC office, revealed that the Commission, has already forwarded a general request to Deutschebank-Alex Brown and other investment firms for unspecified information related to the suspicious put option contracts placed prior to the attacks on the Trade Towers and the Pentagon.” But the spokesman declined comment regarding the identities of complying banks or the contents of any information obtained.
Nester augmented his response by adding that “according to SEC Associate Director of Enforcement Bill Baker — who just spoke on a panel outside New York last week — our SEC probe is much broader than investigations made by countries in Europe (who also lost citizens), many of whom have already closed their financial investigations of investment banks like Deutschebank.” No results of those probes have been made public.
While the SEC media director said “the investigation is still ongoing with no current conclusions,” Nester (speaking for the SEC), had difficulty explaining the job description of current New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) Executive Vice President for Enforcement, David P. Doherty. He would only say that the NYSE “regulates itself as an SRO or self-regulating organization….” This vague answer is all the more provocative because Doherty is a retired General Counsel of the Central Intelligence Agency.
Nester added, “The SEC has oversight responsibility regarding the NYSE, and we are also working with Justice, Treasury, and the FBI, having set up professional point men at each firm we are looking at — so we don t have to reinvent the wheel every time we call a company [related to the attacks] to get an answer to a question.”
The “reinvent the wheel” statement raised an eyebrow regarding the level of corporate cooperation in the investigation, although Nester declined to add further comment.
In Spite of CIA Ties the NYSE Is Little Help
When asked about the status of the investigation into the disproportionate pre-attack stock option trades involving United and American Airlines, Merrill Lynch, Marsh and McLennan Insurance, Morgan Stanley, Citigroup, Bear Stearns, and American Express, etc. — all icons of American capitalism — NYSE Communications Director Ray Pellecchia said, “We don’t even confirm that there is an ongoing investigation.”
“We report to the SEC as a matter of course,” Pellecchia added. But after being referred to as a “persistent piece of work,” this writer asked Pellecchia to discuss Doherty s role in the investigations. He said, “We stand by this statement.”
And after pressing for information about what the NYSE is actually doing to investigate the suspicious trades on behalf of thousands of victims families who may be concerned about the “prior-knowledge” issue, Pellecchia still declined to confirm that Doherty’s enforcement office had even sent a report to the SEC.
When asked why so many former key CIA executives currently hold, or have held in the past, top level executive management positions connected in some way to the stock market via either the SEC, NYSE, or other investment banking entities, Pellecchia replied tersely, “I am quite aware of Mr. Doherty’s background and experience.”
Pellecchia also declined to discuss anything related to current CIA Executive Director A.B. “Buzzy” Krongard and his past relationship with Alex Brown.
Expecting Miracles?
Questions remain as to who will ultimately take center stage in investigating conflicts of interest or the real-time monitoring of world financial markets by U.S. intelligence entities to protect national security; let alone terrorist ties to wealthy Saudi private clients at global financial institutions having direct access (via correspondent banking relationships) to U.S. banks.
For while thousands of American families, victimized by terrorism, still remain numb with grief, information is being advanced daily regarding what could be described by some as casual, if not negligent, long-term, slipshod governmental responsiveness to fundamental internal national security and safety questions — or worse.
Tom Flocco is a freelance writer and researcher. TomFlocco@cs.com
MainPage
http://www.rense.com
Introduction : Why study Hegel?
“… the State ‘has the supreme right against the individual, whose supreme duty is to be a member of the State… for the right of the world spirit is above all special priveleges.'”
— Author/historian William Shirer, quoting Hegel in The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich (1959)
“Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain…”
Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (1770-1831) was a 19th century German philosopher and theologist who wrote the Science of Logic in 1812. For many historians, Hegel is “perhaps the greatest of the German idealist philosophers.”
In 1847 the London Communist League (Marx and Engels, pictured left) used Hegel’s theory of the dialectic to back up their economic theory of communism. Now, in the 21st century, Hegelian-Marxist thinking affects our entire social and political structure.
The Hegelian dialectic is the framework for guiding our thoughts and actions into conflicts that lead us to a predetermined solution. If we do not understand how the Hegelian dialectic shapes our perceptions of the world, then we do not know how we are helping to implement the vision for the future.
Hegel’s dialectic is the tool which manipulates us into a frenzied circular pattern of thought and action. Every time we fight for or defend against an ideology we are playing a necessary role in Marx and Engels’ grand design to advance humanity into a dictatorship of the proletariat. The synthetic Hegelian solution to all these conflicts can’t be introduced unless we all take a side that will advance the agenda. The Marxist’s global agenda is moving along at breakneck speed. The only way to stop land grabs, privacy invasions, expanded domestic police powers, insane wars against inanimate objects (and transient verbs), covert actions, and outright assaults on individual liberty, is to step outside the dialectic. Only then can we be released from the limitations of controlled and guided thought.
When we understand what motivated Hegel, we can see his influence on all of our destinies. Then we become real players in the very real game that has been going on for at least 224 years. Hegelian conflicts steer every political arena on the planet, from the United Nations to the major American political parties, all the way down to local school boards and community councils. Dialogues and consensus-building are primary tools of the dialectic, and terror and intimidation are also acceptable formats for obtaining the goal.
The ultimate Third Way agenda is world government. Once we get what’s really going on, we can cut the strings and move our lives in original directions outside the confines of the dialectical madness. Focusing on Hegel’s and Engel’s ultimate agenda, and avoiding getting caught up in their impenetrable theories of social evolution, gives us the opportunity to think and act our way toward freedom, justice, and genuine liberty for all.
Today the dialectic is active in every political issue that encourages taking sides. We can see it in environmentalists instigating conflicts against private property owners, in democrats against republicans, in greens against libertarians, in communists against socialists, in neo-cons against traditional conservatives, in community activists against individuals, in pro-choice versus pro-life, in Christians against Muslims, in isolationists versus interventionists, in peace activists against war hawks.
No matter what the issue, the invisible dialectic aims to control both the conflict and the resolution of differences, and leads everyone involved into a new cycle of conflicts. We’re definitely not in Kansas anymore.
1. The origins of deductive and inductive reasoning
Methods for reasoning are mathematical formulas that base their conclusions on ideas, experiences, or information from outside sources. It was introduced to the world by the Greeks in the 4th century B.C. Aristotle gave us the foundations for the most often used methods for logical and critical thinking. Deduction is a process that moves from the general to the specifics. Induction moves from the specifics to the general.
Kemerling (2002) explains: “In a deductive argument, the truth of the premises is supposed to guarantee the truth of the conclusion; in an inductive argument, the truth of the premises merely makes it probable that the conclusion is true.”
Here is a chart from Whitworth College explaining inductive and deductive reasoning.
At Lander University: Philosophy 103: Introduction to Logic: The Nature of Logic.
The History of Western Philosophy posted at marxists.org.
Deductive reasoning is often defined as pre-Enlightenment thinking because it’s based in the commonly held belief that God created the universe. Inductive reasoning is considered to be the scientific, non-religious formula that gained authority after the enlightenment. Aristotle wasn’t all that concerned about which method was preferred, or best used, but a well-founded scientific argument that uses deductive and/or inductive reasoning establishes strong premises that relate directly to the conclusion.
Man’s capacity to reason beyond the knowable can be seen in modern universal principles, such as with the theory that said the earth was round and not flat. For centuries the established religious belief was that the earth was at the center of the universe, and the naked eye tells us the earth is flat and the sun goes up and down. The deductive principle was that God created the universe and man was created in God’s image, which placed the earth at the center of God’s universe. This belief also designated the monarchy and the established church as the divinely appointed rulers of man. Unseeable, unprovable conclusions (such as the earth is round and the earth circles the sun) were formed under an inductive form of reasoning based in man’s abilty to think beyond what can be seen or is commonly believed. The original methods for reasoning based its premises on commonly held truths and used mathematical principles to advance mankind into realms of greater knowledge and truth.
Deductive reasoning dominated up until the 16th and 17th centuries when rational thinking expanded to include both deductive and inductive reasoning. This paved the way to applying inductive scientific reasoning to political and economic systems. Many amazing scientific advancements were made by the greatest rational thinkers in the world who were able to apply both. Rational thinking was the foundation behind the documents used by Americans to obtain their freedom.
The scientifically based political ideas of man’s natural rights to property were based on the writings of John Locke, who historically may be one of Englands most rational thinkers. He is remembered as “the intellectual father” of the U.S. Locke used both deductive and inductive reasoning, as did the Americans who inherited his ideas. Locke subscribed to the three levels of law: top-God’s law, middle-Natural law, bottom-Civil Law, and he believed that each type of law must correspond up to the next level. Men believed that while God’s law was unknowable, it was possible to understand God’s law through an understanding of nature, and that civil law was bound by the rules of natural law. The realization of U.S. laws and citizen’s inalienable rights to individual freedom were attained via both the belief in a Creator and purely scientific, rational thinking.
The most commonly used formula for reasoning is called Modus Ponens: If A and B both exist, it’s probable that C exists if it is a combination of A and B.
For example: (A) 1 + (B) 1 = (C) 2.
Or: If (A) I live in a country where everyone is free under God’s laws, and (B) you live in my country, then (C) we’re both free under God’s laws.
2. Merriam-Webster’s definition of the dialectic
Main Entry: Dialectic
Date: 14th century
1 : logic
2 a : discussion and reasoning by dialogue as a method of intellectual investigation; specifically : the Socratic techniques of exposing false beliefs and eliciting truth b : the Platonic investigation of the eternal idea
3 : the logic of fallacy
4 a : the Hegelian process of change in which a concept or its realization passes over into and is preserved and fulfilled by its opposite; also : the critical investigation of this process b (1) usually plural but singular or plural in construction : development through the stages of thesis, antithesis, and synthesis in accordance with the laws of dialectical materialism (2) : the investigation of this process (3) : the theoretical application of this process especially in the social sciences
5 usually plural but singular or plural in construction a : any systematic reasoning, exposition, or argument that juxtaposes opposed or contradictory ideas and usually seeks to resolve their conflict b : an intellectual exchange of ideas
6 : the dialectical tension or opposition between two interacting forces or elements.
Main Entry: Dialectical Materialism
Date: 1927
1 : the Marxist theory that maintains the material basis of a reality constantly changing in a dialectical process and the priority of matter over mind.
3. How the Hegelian dialectic changed the formula for deductive reasoning
The original method of deductive logic based its premises on the presense of agreed upon truths which led to an otherwise unknowable conclusion.
Hegel altered deductive reasoning from a simple 1 + 1 = 2 formula to a series of progressive triads where two opposite premises combine into a synthesis, and then each synthesis becomes the premise in the next triad, and on and on it goes (where it ends, nobody knows).
He established that history follows a “logical” progression through the dialectical process of constant conflict between extremely different ideas that keep blending together, over and over, forming new ideas that keep merging and blending again and again, until mankind realizes perfection in philosphy.
Most importantly (to us) is that “Hegel’s version puts all of the emphasis on the collective expression of what is best for the people rather than on each individual’s capacity to discover it for herself or himself” (Kemerling 2002).
Hegel took logic to the next logical level, in what many consider to be a higher intellectual level, claiming an (A) ideology conflicting with its (B) opposite ideology = (C) a new and sometimes better philosophy. The dialectic pits A against B in a constant conflict and resolution, which eventually creates an outcome that may or may not have any resemblance to A and B. According to modern social scientists, C does not have to be a reasonable conclusion, since Hegel’s dialectic takes pure reason out of the reasoning.
If you don’t get it, that means you got it, because anything arrived at using Hegel’s “logic” doesn’t have to make any sense.
Here is a quote from Bertrand Russell on the end of rational thinking.
The dialectical method of reasoning is based on the premise of constant conflicts of opposites, or ongoing tension between two or more commonly acknowledged truths. Good versus evil is the most commonly understood dialectic.
In Hegel’s version it is through our understanding of what is evil that we are able to understand what is even better than good. Hegel’s dialectic was an inward discovery of being versus nothing. This method changed the format for deductive reasoning into one in which truth is obtained by pitting truth against a falsehood which leads to a false truth.
Frederick Engels and Karl Marx expanded on the Hegelian dialectic to suit their own purposes. See: Critique of Hegel’s Philosophy in General by Karl Marx (1844) and Marx’s Grundrisse and Hegel’s Logic by Hiroshi Ouchida (1988).
Hegel’s dialectical idealism was founded on the premise that the abstract thought process comes before the actualization of the idea. To Hegel, the idea came first. Marx and Engels said the opposite, and wrote that human events preceed the ideas about the events. They used the dialectic to explain the necessary conflicts that will lead mankind into social perfection. State control of the production of goods and services and equal distribution of all wealth was to be the final crowning achievment of mankind. The communist theory of human progress proves life is an ongoing conflict between people at various levels of material wealth, and Marx thought of himself as a scientist who had discovered the key to human history.
Dialectical materialism changed the Hegelian formula in several crucial ways. First they excluded God’s law from the formula altogther, then they pitted a lie against a lie, claiming the result was a perfect synthesis. Their theory of inexorable, inevitable world evolution into totalitarian communism was attained via the Hegelian dialectic. The modern theory of global spiritual evolution into global communitarian collectives was as well. Transformational Marxism is the Hegelian dialectic applied materially, as opposed to ideally.
The Soviet Union was based on the Hegelian dialectic, as is all Marxist writing. The Soviets didn’t give up Hegelian reasoning when they supposedly stopped being a communist country, they simply modernized their language.
Hegel Resources from Andy Blunden. Mr. Blunden is an Australian communist who studies Hegel’s contributions to totalitarian “dictatorships of the people.”
American author Steve Montgomery explores Moscow’s adept use of the Hegelian dialectic in Glasnost-Perestroika: A Model Potemkin Village.
For a lengthy analysis of Hegel’s dialectical reasoning, the University of Idaho has an online version of Studies in the Hegelian Dialectic by John Ellis McTaggart (1896). In Chapter VI: The Final Result of the Dialectic, the author explains the confusion inherent in Hegel’s philosophy:
“Hegel taught that the secrets of the universe opened themselves to us, but only on condition of deep and systematic thought, and the importance of philosophy was undiminished either by scepticism or by appeals to the healthy instincts of the plain man. But there is some difference between taking philosophy as the supreme and completely adequate means, and admitting it to be the supreme end. There is some difference between holding that philosophy is the knowledge of the highest form of reality, and holding that it is itself the highest form of reality. It seems to me that Hegel has been untrue to the tendencies of his own system in seeking the ultimate reality of Spirit in philosophy alone, and that, on his own premises, he ought to have looked for a more comprehensive explanation.”
4. Why it is almost impossible for a layman to understand the Hegelian dialectic
Hegel’s theory that philosophy is the ultimate achievement of the human spirit is extremely difficult reading for a well-educated person. It’s almost like reading a foreign language to the average student, and it rings false to the “healthy instincts of the plain man.”
Detective Phillip Worts’ 2001 article Communist Oriented Policing is a nice explanation of the influence Dialectical Materialism has had on America.
Henry D. Aiken, a Professor of Philosophy at Harvard explains the Hegelian theory of no-reason in Introduction to the Age of Ideology:
“…Beginning with Kant, the very conception of the philosophical enterprise that had prevailed since the time of Aristotle underwent a profound sea-change, with the consequence that the meanings of even such basic terms of the traditional philosophical vocabulary as ‘metaphysics’ and ‘logic’ were altered beyond recognition… Much of the obscurity that pervades nineteenth-century philosophical writing is directly related to this fact.”
Considering the power it wields, and how many people have embraced the ideology, it’s amazing how very few people in the world will tell you they understand the Hegelian dialectic. That’s because it was never written to be understood. Even Hegel’s biographers call his writing “impenetrable” which means: “incapable of being penetrated or pierced,” innaccessible to knowledge, reason or sympathy” and “incapable of being comprehended” (Merriam Webster).
At one point, Karl Marx planned to simplify Hegel for the “common man,” but we have not been able find this explanation, if it exists.
We think there’s a very simple explanation for why the Hegelian dialectic is not simple, and why it can never be simplified. While the American’s 18th century political system ranks among the top modern scientific achievements, the 19th century’s educated imperialist writers pursued the highest achievements in irrational thinking about thinking. Hegel is at the top of our list of the world’s most irrational thinkers.
How is it possible to consider a Hegelian argument? If the ideas, interpretations of experiences, and the sources are all wrong, can a conclusion based on all these wrong premises be sound? The answer is no. Two false premises do not make a sound conclusion even if the argument follows the formula. Three, four, five, or six false premises do not all combine to make a conclusion sound. You must have at least one sound premise to reach a sound conclusion.
Logical mathematical formulas are only the basis for deductive reasoning. Equally important is knowledge of semantics, or considering the meanings of the words used in the argument. Just because an argument fits the formula, it does not necessarily make the conclusion sound. Hegel knew this when he designed his dialectic. He was an imperialist con-artist who established the principles of dialectical “no-reason.” His dialectic has allowed globalists to lead the world by its nose into a superstitious, unreasonable, racist age of global dominance.
National governments are supposed to protect the common man from imperial controls over private property, trade and production. They insure their workers against imperial slavery by protecting markets. But if you use Hegel’s twisted logic, the only way to protect people from slavery is to become a slave trader, just for a while.
Like Hegel and Marx, the best street con knows his spiel has to be based in truth to be successful, and good cons weave their lies on logic. This sort of twisted logic is why cons are so successful. Hegel twisted it in such a way as to be “impenetrable.”
5. The communitarian purpose for the Hegelian dialectic
Hegel was an idealist who believed that the highest state of mankind can only be attained through constant ideological conflict and resolution. The rules of the dialectic means mankind can only reach its highest spiritual consciousness through endless self-perpetuating struggle between ideals, and the eventual synthesizing of all opposites.
He believed that all conflict takes man to the next spiritual level. But in the final analysis, this ideology simply justifies conflict and endless war. It is also the reasoning behind using military power to export an illogical version of freedom and false democratic ideals.
The reason we can call it the justification for modern conflicts and war is because no one can prove Hegel’s theory is true. No matter how many new words they make up to define it, or how many new theories they come up with to give it validity, we can prove beyond a doubt that it is all false. And, we can show the final equation in Hegel’s dialectic is:
A: The [your nation goes here] System of Political Economy (List 1841) + B: State-controlled world communism = C: State-controlled global communitarianism
The Hegelian dialectic was created because the American colonials won their national independence from Imperial domination.
In the War of 1812, the United States of America defeated the Imperial British Navy. That same year, Hegel published his confusing theory in The Science of Logic. Coincidence? Not hardly. The Hegelian dialectic was used to justify expansionist colonial policies and terrorist acts against Americans. It was an academic elitist ploy to cloak British interference in national trade, now that they’d lost their naval-piracy power over the world’s trade routes.
The Americans won their second War of Independence, which was fought for the same reasons as the first war: to stop British control of local manufacturing. Americans declared their right to produce and trade as a sovereign nation. They insisted they were free to trade without thuggish European merchants and banks getting in their business. After this embarrassing defeat, the imperialists needed a sneaky way to regain domination of American trade. Hegel’s theory created a justification for the conflict between European merchants and the American system of Political Economy, which allowed merchants to operate as independents.
Americans have forgotten that theirs was an economic revolution. The American Colonial Revolution wasn’t a “revolution of ideas” — it was a revolution against the European imperial mob, which controlled the production of goods and services in its colonies.
The American idea of an economy free from tariffs and constraints spread like lightening across the world. Colonies and peasant workers everywhere took actions to regain control of their own national markets and stop imperial gluttony.
By 1824, colony after colony had declared independence from imperial domination. Greece declared independence from the powerful Ottoman Empire and based their successful revolution on American principles for self-governance.
The imperialists were also losing control to new national unions, which formed to protect local production from foreign imports. The government of the United States was formed simply to protect labor and markets, and American economics was the foundation for the protected German manufacturing unions in the 1840s. Considering how many nations embraced the idea so quickly, it must have been a pretty easy sell to the “healthy instincts of the plain man.”
So, what did the imperialists do next? They created a theory of collective worker’s rights and claimed that abolishing private property and controlling world markets was the best way to help laborers.
Marxism was the foundation for the Fabian Socialist agenda when they merged with the British Labour Party in 1904, and the entire labor movement has been convinced their principles are based in Marxism. Modern labor unions have no idea what they are factually based in, which is entirely in the protected individual merchant principles inherent in the national system of political economy. The U.S. constitutional framers also agreed to require all public servants to abide by a fixed standard of law, whereas the British constitution is continually evolving.
There was a time when Americans had the ability to call a duck a duck. The former colonials were fearless in their devotion to The Rights of Man (Paine 1791). Some of our citizens maintain the founding principles of economic liberty to this very day, in spite of how most of the world drowns in the brown matter that clouds the dialectical head game.
While Darwin’s theory of evolution is still being debated, there is absolutely no proof that societies are continually evolving. So when the London Communist League used the dialectical method of spiritual advancement via constant resolution of differences, they based the theory of communism on an unproven theory. Marx and Engels later changed their minds, amazingly, and redesigned communism around the anthropological theories of Lewis Henry Morgan (also unprovable). When Amitai Etzioni used Hegelian reasoning to base the Communitarian Network on a “balance” between rights and responsibilities, he built the entire theory of communitarianism on nothing but disproven and unprovable, unscientific theories. This gives credence to the Anti Communitarian hypothesis:
(A) Communitarianism did not evolve naturally
(B) and it was never a movement that arose out of U.S. society
(C) therefore, communitarianism has no natural home in the United States.
6. How we interpret the history of the dialectical argument
Aristotle gave the world his methods for deductive logic in the 4th century B.C. American colonists used John Locke’s philosophy of man’s natural property rights to form a free country in 1776.
British economist Adam Smith published Wealth of Nations in 1776 to distort and redefine American economics. In 1791, Immanuel Kant challenged reasonable, logical principles used by Americans with his Critique of Pure Reason.
Edmund Burke backstabbed France and America both when he wrote Reflections on the Revolution in France. Thomas Paine published a rebuttal to his ex-friend Burke called The Rights of Man. Paine’s reasoned arguments against the imperialists rippled further than his motivational pamphlet Common Sense did during the American Revolution.
The Rights of Man went global with the French Revolution, and something had to be done to stop it. In what could be called the most brilliant act of desperation of all time, the imperialists used Kant and Hegel to redefine logic and exclude reason from logical formulae.
In 1841, Friedrich List published The National System of Political Economy and successfully disputed imperialist free trade ideology. His book is still in use worldwide, such as with the Social Movement Pan Russian Eurasia.
In 1844 Engel’s published Outlines of a Critique of Political Economy, and in 1845 Marx wrote a A Draft of an Article on Friedrich List’s Book, where he repeatedly calls List a “German Philistine.”
Accounts about the life and death of Friedrich List are full of inconsistencies. According to some, he was the most outspoken opponent of free trade, and was becoming a venerated source for ideas to protect local labor and markets. Others claim he was ridiculed for his outlandish protectionist theories, lost hope and became despondent, wandering aimlessly around Europe.
In 1846 List died mysteriously after (or during) a trip to London, where he was discussing English manufacturing and free trade with regular folks and leaders of the Comden Club. There is a huge disparity in the record of his death, so that it is impossible to determine how, when, and where it happened.
However he died, List’s body was barely cold before the London Communist League began preparing their 1847 draft of a manifesto for world peace and economic justice via a mass revolutionary movement against private property. German-British merchant Frederick Engels revised Hegel’s theory to suit his needs, and then passed it on to Karl Marx, who rewrote it with “proper revolutionary flair” (Chaitkin 1985). The Communist Manifesto was published in 1848. In 1850, a French economist named Frederic Bastiat wrote The Law and logically disputed Marxist fallacies used in France.
Amazingly, the logic of Locke, Paine, List and Bastiat are relatively unknown to modern Americans, and yet Karl Marx is a household name.
Already gaining substantial ground against the Americans, British Marxism was bolstered when Charles Darwin published his theory of human evolution in 1859. Engels, according to modern day scholars, seized upon Darwin’s theory to substantiate communism: “When Marx read The Origin of Species he wrote to Engels that, ‘although it is developed in the crude English style, this is the book which contains the basis in natural history for our view.’ They turned against what they saw as the social, as opposed to the biological, implications of Darwinism when they realised that it contained no support for their shibboleth of class oppression. Since they were slippery customers rather than scientists, they were not likely to relinquish their views just because something did not fit.” (see: Marxism and Darwinism by Anton Pannekoek, 1912.)
In 1877 Lewis Henry Morgan published Ancient Society, or Researches in Life, Lines of Human Progress from Savagery, through Barbarism, to Civilization. Then the “slippery” Engels seized upon Morgan’s work as the constantly “evolving” basis for the totally unsubstantiated theory of natural social evolution into utopian world communism.
In 1887 the First World Zionist Federation was formed to plan for the creation of a Zionist nation state. In 1947 Israel was formed in Palestine. In 1958, Fabian-Zionist Amitai Etzioni emmigrated to the U.S. from Israel. This former terrorist became a sociologist, joined the “peace movement” in the 60’s, and created the Communitarian Network in the 90’s. The “father” of communitarianism also created the “new” science of socio-economics and has been advising the White House to incorporate Hegelian solutions into domestic policy since 1979. Today Etzioni is often called a “guru” by mainstream media. It’s not unusual for Hegelian players to change their modus operandi, as can be seen in other writers like fellow Fabian H.G. Wells, who was an early supporter of ethnic cleansing. As Well’s biographers explain, “Wells’s political evolution was from an optimist who believed in casual eugenic slaughter to a pessimist who cultivated humane virtues.”
In 1889 the British Fabian Society-London School of Economics created Socialist Clubs across America and worked with Oxford, Harvard, Columbia, and Yale to infiltrate the Marxist’s more socially evolved ecomonic theories of Maynard Keynes, using the Hegelian dialectic to describe the conflict between Marxism and the un-American “capitalist” theories of Adam Smith. The definative authors of American political and economic practices, such as Locke, Hamilton, List, Paine and Bastiat were somehow relieved of their former influence and position in the “debate.”
By the time Dr. Etzioni “introduced” the academic world to the Hegelian communitarian synthesis, re-educated American students were well-prepared to accept any new Hegelian based theory without ever hearing the real and valid American arguments against global imperialism and free trade. Hegel’s formula has been so successful that in 2003 all U.S. domestic and foreign policy is dominated by “communitarian thinking,” the whole country is living under the new laws, and yet Americans most affected by “impenetrable” Hegelian laws have never once heard the term used.
“… some historians have depicted the United States as a society centered around Lockean values, those of rights and liberty 8. Actually, it is now widely agreed that the United States had, from its inception, both a strong communitarian and individualistic strand, a synthesis of republican virtues and liberal values.”
— The Emerging Global Normative Synthesis by Amitai Etzioni. Published in The Journal of Political Philosophy (2004). Postgraduate Certificate in Spiritual Development and Facilitation University of Surrey, UK.
Political communitarianism includes market communist/socialist economic programmes, free trade, appointed citizen councils, exportable freedom programmes, faith-based funding, intervention programmes, mental health testing, emergency preparedness training, FEMA, The Vatican, The Talmud, The Earth Charter, The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Earth Summits, sustainable development, European royals, British royals, Communist Party leaders, elected Socialists, friendly dictators, sociologists, fascists, mobsters, Fabians, international liberals, G-8, Bank of England, The City of London, billionaires, Bilderbergs, secret societies, think tanks, private foundations, philanthropists, alchemists, theosophist organizations (like 1000 Points of Light), environmental law firms (like 1000 Friends of Washington/Oregon etc.), UN, LA-21, EU, WB, ICC, NATO, WTO, GATT, NAFTA, NSC, OAS, AID, IMF, FED, IRS, SSI, UI, NEA, CFR, TR, AIPAC, NOW, ACLU, NLG, FBI, CIA, KGB, Mossad, M-15, M-16, NSA, WH, DOD, DOJ, HS, War on Terror, PNAC, War on Crime, War on Poverty, War on Drugs, War on Obesity, Neighborhood Watch, Volunteer America, ABCD, NGOs, churches, WCC, NATS, DON, SPO, COPS, IACP, USDOE, USDOA, USNF, USNP, HUD, Weed&Seed, Citizen Corps, CAOs, EPA, Crime Acts, DV Acts, DUI laws, COMPASS and much, much more.
7. The Anti Communitarian League’s conclusion
The Hegelian dialectic presupposes the factual basis for the theory of social evolutionary principles, which coincidentally backed up Marx. Marx’s Darwinian theory of the “social evolution of the species” does not adhere to the basis for all good scientific research, even though it has been used for a century to create a vast new scientific community, including eugenics and socio-economics. It appears to exist mainly to advance itself, and all its sub-socio-scientific arms, as the more moral human sciences.
To us this means the entire basis for the communitarian solution is based on a false premise. There is no factual basis that “social evolution of the species” exists, based as it is on mankind’s supposed evolution towards a British version of utopia.
The Marxist platform in 1847 was “to abolish private property” and the American Revolution was to protect private property rights.
Marxist societies confiscate wealth and promise to “re-distribute it equally.” America promised everyone they could keep and control what was the product of their own labor. Modern Marxist adherants openly claim they will “rebuild the world,” and they train activist change agents to openly support overthrowing the legitimate governments of the world.
Since their inception, Marxist agent provacateurs can be linked to every anarchist assasination and student uprising that caused chaos to the established European civilization throughout the 18th and 19th centuries. Modern Americans have succumbed to the conspiracy theory label and will only listen to what the propaganda machines tell them. Now our people don’t believe anything but “the Arab world hates our freedom.” Most modern Americans will never know what went wrong with their “great experiment in democracy.”
While the Marxist-communitarian argument has not provided a shread of evidence to prove their utopian vision, and their synthesis does not match their own projected conclusions of world justice, we are convinced their argument does in fact substantiate our conclusion, that the entire philisophical dialectical argument is nothing but a brilliant ruse.
We used to call it “a cheap parlor trick” until a reader wrote us wondering how we could call it “cheap” when it’s been so successful, and he was right.
The dialectical arguments for human rights, social equity, and world peace and justice are a perfectly designed diversion in the defeated British Empire’s Hegelian-Fabian-Metaphysical-Theosophical Monopoly game. It’s the most successful con job in the history of the modern world. (For a well presented Christian overview of the con, see American Babylon Part Five: The Triumph of the Merchants by Peter Goodgame.)
The communitarian synthesis is the final silent move in a well-designed, quietly implemented plot to re-make the world into colonies. To us it doesn’t matter if there is some form of ancient religion that propels the plotters, nor does it really matter if it turns out they’re aliens (as some suggest).
The bottom line is the Hegelian dialectic sets up the scene for state intervention, confiscation, and redistribution in the United States. Communitarian development plans are functioning in every corner of the the world, and there is no legal avenue to withdraw from them.
The Hegelian dialectic cannot be a conspiracy theory, because it is well-documented, and the concept of Conspiracy Theories is a cruel joke. We’ve all been duped by global elitists who plan to exercise complete totalitarian control over the people and property of every nation.
8. Four examples of the power of the semantics in the dialectic
ONE
A. Adam Smith’s laissez faire capitalism emphasizing selfishness (false)
B. Communism and socialism emphasizing controlling capitalist selfishness (false)
C. Communitarian morality emphasizing balancing capitalist selfishness (false)
TWO
A. Government of the People (true)
B. Government of the State (false)
C. Government of the Community (false)
THREE
A. American’s Individual Freedom (1775- ) power inherent in the people (true)
The U.S. Constitution, The U.S. Bill of Rights, and 50 individual U.S. State Constitutions
in constant conflict/resolution with
B. Marx’s Theory of World Communism (1847- ) power inherent in the state (false)
The ideology of Engels and Marx, enforced by European powers, international banks, the Mossad, Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Castro, etc
naturally balances/evolves into
C. The Communitarian Third Way (2002- ) power inherent in the global community (false)
Jacobin Civil Society: legally authorized by United Nations’ Local Agenda 21 players and their Earth Charter– represented by the Communitarian Network, the International Socialist Party, British Fabians & The New Democratic Leadership Council, British Labour, the neo-cons, the International Court of Justice, NATO, Jewish and Christian Zionists, feminists, the Christian Right, Chinese communists, the Russian KGB, the Mossad, the CIA, M-15, the European Union, the World Bank, The Bilderbergs, the CFR, the Royal Society, Rhodes Scholars, the G-8, the WTO, AID, IMF, Community Policing, cultural anthropologists, Rural and Neighborhood Planning, thousands of non-governmental organizations, conservationists, Gaia worshipers, think-tanks, the Radical Middle, the terrorist environmental movement, the violent peace movement, 33rd degree freemasons, progressives, change agents and community “builders,” et. al.
FOUR
A. United States of America: Individual Rights of the Common Born Man. (national law)
The U.S is founded upon the concept of man’s “natural rights.” Man’s natural rights, (as can only come from one’s Creator) are recognised for all naturalized, individual U.S. state citizens. The U.S. states created a new system of federal government, one that works submissively for the free states, under Supreme Laws that arose from a free society. It was established under one-of-a-kind, original, legally binding documents.
B. Communism: The Common Good of the Party, Sacrificing Individuals. (unprovable theory)
The Marxist theory of extreme, central government control is the first step to teaching people to live collectively. Communism trains people to be more moral citizens. Once a population is subdued by the absolute power of the local committees, the theory says that totaliatrian controls can and will be modified to allow mankind to blossom into full utopian bliss. It was established under Frederick Engel’s and Karl Marx’s publication of the “Communist Manifesto” in 1848, an unoriginal, non-legally binding document.
After social scientists earnestly engaged in the capitalist-collective debate for over a 100 years in a worldwide “philosophical” struggle, it has finally been resolved in a “new age” political theory. Americans saw what happened to Senator McCarthy and the results of the Cox Congressional Investigtations* of communists. Americans who questioned communist programs and agencies were termed “red-baiters,” and completely discredited. U.S. laws against communist conspirators remained on the books, but since 1953 few Americans have participated in the “debates.” In 1993, U.S. Individual Liberty and International Communism were balanced by social scientists; they established:
C. The Third Way: Elitist Social Justice by Sacrificing Individual Rights. (unprovable theory)
Human Rights is the new preferred term used by all politically correct goverment bodies. It is the result of the communitarian’s balancing act between man’s natural rights and the collective good. The modern communitarian philosophy used by Americans today was founded by Dr. Amitai Etzioni, a Zionist-Fabian scholar who emmigrated from Israel to the U.S. in 1958. Active in the World Order projects since the early 60’s, Etzioni’s rise to American power is a lesson in itself. As an adviser to Presidents Carter, Reagan, Clinton, and Bush Jr., Etzioni’s involvements include new Character Education, Americorps, Faith-based initiatives, community governments, community cops, limiting individual’s privacy, and total elimination of individual’s right to bear arms. His lectures on his “more moral” dialogues are the basis for all new communitarian laws.
* – “In 1952, Congress commissioned the Cox Committee to investigate U.S. foundations. In 1953 it was the Reece Committee.” Rene A. Wormser was its general counsel. He published “Foundations: Their Power and Influence.” [Sevierville TN: Covenant House Books, 1993. 412 pages. First published in 1958 by Devin-Adair Company, New York.]
9. Four different impressions of the modern Hegelian dialectic theory
The Scientific Side:
Hegel’s Dialectic as Interpreted by Gavin Schmitt: “To Hegel, understanding what something is not helps to better understand what something is (and conversely, the more we know what something is, the more we know what it is not). The concept or object (which we call a “realization of the concept”) is “affirmed” by its opposite….Often times Hegel’s method is explained as “thesis, antithesis, and synthesis.” This was, in fact, the way it was explained to me in my introductory classes and the way it appears in many philosophic dictionaries. If we start with a certain idea or object, this idea or object is the thesis. Any idea or object we compare contrary to the thesis is the antithesis. The outcome is the synthesis, a better understanding of the thesis and occasionally a “higher” step in the world of ideas (as we will see in a moment when I discuss history).”
The American Side:
Helping you connect the global to the local: UNDERSTANDING HOW THE HEGELIAN DIALECTIC IS TRANSFORMING THE WORLD TO BRING IN THE NEW WORLD ORDER by the Women’s International Media Group, Inc. Researcher-writer Joan Veon’s view: “In the last four years while covering the United Nations, I have come face to face, on a regular basis with communism, fascism, and socialism. I found, as a result of my own ignorance, that I could not identify them and therefore not identify the true meaning of what was being put forth in all of the documents I was reading. While I understood the goal of world government to be behind everything the United Nations was doing, I did not know how — what modus operandi — they would use to convert people from a capitalistic system where the individual is the master and molder of his own destiny undergirded by personal property rights reinforced his claim to that destiny, to one of complete control where man did what the State directed, when the State directed, and in the process gave up his freedoms and private property so the State could better direct its use. I then found that the “modus operandi” being used for this transition was called the “Hegelian Dialectic” which is comprised of three parts: the thesis, antithesis, and synthesis. ”
COLD WAR MYTH: AN EXERCISE IN THE USE OF THE DIALECTIC by Charlotte Iserbyt,November 23, 2002, at NewsWithViews.com.
The Israeli Side:
The Talmud is considered to be a “dialectic”. “Rabbi Adin Steinsaltz has written a multivolume work, The Talmud: The Steinsaltz Edition (Random House), which includes a A Reference Guide, in which he says: “… The ultimate purpose of the Talmud is … to seek out truth. … The Talmudic dialectic can be compared to an inquiry in pure science, particularly in the sphere … of mathematics. …”.
The Catholic Side:
Pope John Paul II endorses the New World Order and Communitarianism. The Vatican calls St. Peter’s 2nd conversion and baptism (at 1429) a communitarian event.
GO TO PART TWO:
The Historical Evolution of Communitarian Thinking
For further study sources and validations of our thesis from the Marxists and the Jesuits, go to: Dialectic: Appendix A
http://nord.twu.net/acl/dialectic.html
Marxism was the foundation for the Fabian Socialist agenda when they merged with the British Labour Party in 1904, and the entire labor movement has been convinced their principles are based in Marxism. Modern labor unions have no idea what they are factually based in,
NOW GO CHASE THE BNP–THATS’ THE REAL BOGEY MAN ISN’T IT?
SIMPLE’S…………What will be their solution to the rampant crime that they have allowed to happen- they removed the police from the streets knowing the outcome….and Booze ridden teens…etc etc..nothing has happened by accident—it’s the problems they created……………Solutions…………….?
Fabian motto…”When we strike we strike hard!!!
You’ve been warned!
NOW YOU KNOW—RECALL THE BLAIR MANTRA NICKED FROM CLINTON–THE THIRD WAY
. The Third Way: Elitist Social Justice by Sacrificing Individual Rights. (unprovable theory)
Human Rights is the new preferred term used by all politically correct goverment bodies. It is the result of the communitarian’s balancing act between man’s natural rights and the collective good. The modern communitarian philosophy used by Americans today was founded by Dr. Amitai Etzioni, a Zionist-Fabian scholar who emmigrated from Israel to the U.S. in 1958. Active in the World Order projects since the early 60’s, Etzioni’s rise to American power is a lesson in itself. As an adviser to Presidents Carter, Reagan, Clinton, and Bush Jr., Etzioni’s involvements include new Character Education, Americorps, Faith-based initiatives, community governments, community cops, limiting individual’s privacy, and total elimination of individual’s right to bear arms. His lectures on his “more moral” dialogues are the basis for all new communitarian laws.
SEE WHERE WE’RE HEADED?
AS IF FABIAN FASCISM ISN’T AN EXTREMIST MOB!!
How the BNP moved into the political mainstream
The reluctance of the three main parties to tackle sensitive issues that matter to many voters is driving people into the arms of extremists
By David LindsayFIRST POSTED FEBRUARY 23, 2009Last week, the BNP were cock-a-hoop at taking a seat on Sevenoaks district council. It was, their candidate said, a breakthrough, even if it was one prompted by vigorous canvassing on a classic BNP issue – allocation of council houses to asylum seekers. There are though, growing signs that the BNP’s message is gaining ground.
But how is it that a party that wants its 12,000 members to be sufficiently “Norse” and whose constitution uses the word “folkish”, is edging closer and closer to the political mainstream? Why are so many people voting for the BNP?
In the centre of Durham, one recent Saturday, I walked past a Trotskyist stall, manned by undergraduates, and a BNP one, run by men in early middle age, all with accents from no further than five miles outside Durham. While the Trots were ignored, the BNP was swamped.
Many in the North-East are concerned about a loss of sovereignty
How come? There are no asylum seekers in County Durham, and visible ethnic minorities account for only one per cent of the population. At the last census, the district of Easington was found to be the least ethnically diverse area in Britain.
No, the reason why the BNP inspire such interest is because neither Labour, the Tories, or the Lib Dems are talking about the issues that worry people here.
The BNP is prospering because the mainstream parties are ignoring people’s concernsMany in the North-East, and, indeed, around the country, are concerned about a loss of sovereignty, whether to the European Union, to the United States, or to global capital. And about the practical consequences of this loss, from the Common Fisheries Policy, to the Iraq War, to the credit crunch.
They are concerned about a new working class whose members understand no English except words of command, know little or nothing about workers’ rights here, can be moved around the country at will, and deported if they step out of line. Deference to Islam is another complaint.
A lot of people really are worried by these things. I am. So why aren’t the three main parties? Proper Labourites, or Conservatives, or Liberals would be.
Otherwise, people are talking about the erosion of the traditional family and its values, not least on the airwaves; about lap-dancing clubs; about the deregulation of drinking and gambling; about how the Police and the Crown Prosecution Service have effectively
Email this article Printer-friendly version RSS Feeds
Add to:
Digg | Delicious | Reddit | StumbleUpon | Slashdot | Facebook | Google
ADVERTISEMENT
CommentsHide comments
An excellent article. One other aspect that occurs to me is the sense of futility associated with a vote for any of the mainstream parties. The people are all the same; mostly career or wanabe politicians distinguished only by different coloured rosettes. Few, if any, have actually achieved anything substantial themselves in life before entering politics. Having had some contact with both my MP and MEPs, I am completely disillusioned by them. Mostly patronising windbags. These people serve no useful purpose other than to feed the BBC and Fleet Street with soundbites. I’d describe myself as a libertarian, but can see how people might vote for the BNP from a sense of frustration. The BNP, by suggesting that it will actually do something radical and address issues of widespread concern, has a USP.
Posted by AsboChav at 6:56pm on February 23, 2009
Our MPs and MEPs are just enjoying their extra allowances , John Lewis accounts, a handsome pension, plus a fine salary, and the certain knowledge with the help of the worst Speaker in history, that it will continue unhindered. As for the BNP we should be under no illusion, we would end up in a Nazi state if they god forbid ever got power. They wear suits, don’t rant and rave and incite, but they are still just plain fascists, and with their parnters the Loony Left, can never be trusted.
Posted by sidney sands at 11:09am on February 24, 2009
I’ve been writing about this for years. The ruling elite are totally out of touch along with the media, and ignore the one big subject that concerns everyone of whatever nationality, immigration. Any attempt to discuss multiculturalism and whether it really is such a good thing is met with allegations of racism, any criticism of the way Muslims are constantly pampered to is met with allegations of Islamophobia, as criticisms of Israel are labelled anti-Semitism, and there’s a blank refusal to debate which enhances the BNP because they will address these issues. Hazel Blears saw the writing on the wall and is the only Labour politician to even mention it so far. The rest tow the PC line like good little chatterati clones. The only argument I have with this article is the writer’s inclusion of cannabis, as in ‘the Police and Crown Prosecution service have effectively legalised cannabis’; if they had it would be a move in their favour, and would make government much more popular since the majority of people have no problem with it being legalised since it’s freely available anyway.
Posted by Peter Simmons at 11:10am on February 24, 2009
Although I personally would never vote for the BNP – as has been mentioned already, we should be under no illusions as to what their election would mean – on reading this article I can see why many people would vote for them. It is true that the main political parties generally ignore or only tentatively touch upon issues such as immigration, and if anything is said “out of place”, as we now deem it, there is a furore. Perhaps one of the reasons the BNP can make such arguments is because people expect it of them, but never take heed or think them valid until times of trouble, such as a recession. We almost take it for granted that they will punt such messages, and although I disagree ultimately with their fundamental principles, I cannot help but see their point of view. I think many people would be in a similar position, and share this opinion; and perhaps this is what the main political parties have to be wary of.
Posted by Katy Docherty at 11:17pm on February 24, 2009
Very good article. I am a Jew, and would feel very uncomfortable if the BNP ever got into power, but I agree with them that the ruling elites in the US, Britain, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and other democracies are ignoring the real issues that touch the people, as stated in this article.
Posted by John Valentine at 5:47pm on February 25, 2009
I am going to register to vote for the first time in my life, for the express purpose of voting BNP. I hate what this country has turned in to and right now the only solution seems to be the British National Party.
Posted by L R at 7:03am on February 26, 2009
Whilst i wouldn’t vote BNP they are surely moving into more mainstream politics. This is an inevitable and in some ways welcome movement. Lets not forget that the Labour party and associated unions were once infested with hard core communists. So the idea of the BNP evolving onto a more mainstream manifesto is natural. At the moment they are asking the questions that many people want answered, and the 2 big parties appear to be deaf to all.
Posted by Gary O’Brien at 3:13pm on February 26, 2009
This is extremly interesting. Living in the USA I can certainly appreciate this point of view. We are being swamped by illegal aliens crossing on the Mexican border. Mexican, Columbian and various assortments of gangs and yes, terrorists, practically walk across the border. Phoenix Arizona has become the kidnaping capital of THE WORLD!! They are kidnaping, murdering and bringing in tons and tons of drugs. We had a case where a group of illegal aliens sued a border rancher because he was stopping them from crossing his land with the threat of weapons and turning them over to the US border patrol. Through the years they have broken into his home, killed his animals and made a mess of his property. THE ILLEGALS WON!!! Our politicians are doing the same thing yours are. Ignoring us. We need workers because we have aborted millions of Americans since Roe V Wade thus they pander to ILLEGALS. Illegals get free hospital care, food stamps, housing etc etc ad nauseum. Democrats and Republicans are almost the same party. In some cases you can’t tell which is which. Pat Buchanan is the closest to the BNP philosphy. We need an ANP
Posted by Donald Harris at 7:06am on February 27, 2009
Even the comments above show the virulent tendencies that no longer need hide in the shadows, purely because of the absolute refusal/inability of the main parties to engage, debate and persuade. Instead they utter platitudes which are as anodyne as they are completely interchangeable. There’s a saying in OZ, “yer not wrong” which does NOT mean that you are right, just that you have a point. If none of our soi disant “representatives” in parliament are listening, and would they, then sooner rather than later the voters most disgruntled are going elsewhere, even to their own disgust out of sheer desperation. Now there is the added ingredient of economic collapse, removing the bread & circuses that have, thus far, kept the majority quiescent. As Lennon sang, a quarter century ago, “..keep you drugged with religion, sex & TV..”. Weimar will look like a picnic.
WE SHOULD ALL PRAY THE LOT ARE KICKED OUT–OR WE HAVE A MILITARY COUP!!
PLEASE GOD!!
ONE PERCENT—DREAM ON IDIOT!!
LIES MAKE UP STATS…USE YOUR BLOODY EYES!
ONE PERCENT- WE’D HARDLY NOTICE ANYTHING OTHER THAN AN INDIGENOUS PERSON…………….
LINK AND COMPLETE ARTICLE…
http://www.thefirstpost.co.uk/46597,opinion,how-the-bnp-moved-into-the-political-mainstream