Letter to Editor – Iran jails US journalist Roxana Saberi as spy April 18, 2009

Letter to Editor – Iran jails US journalist Roxana Saberi as spy

April 18, 2009, 10:30 PM PST

In ref. to the article in the Sunday Observer “Iran jails US journalist Roxana Saberi as spy”, the charge by Iran of espionage is not unbelievable. The following passages are excerpted from the memoirs of the Director of Pakistan's ISI. In his 1996 book “Profiles of Intelligence”, Brig. Tirmazi stated:

' - As soon as the PNA movement gathered momentum, a large number of foreigners, particularly Americans descended on Pakistan in the garb of freelance journalists, reporters, observers, and photographers to cover the events. These men and women loaded with cameras, tape recorders and money seemed to have done their home-work well and were also being fed locally by invisible sources. They all seemed to know the names, addresses, and telephone numbers of every one who was any one in politics. It would be interesting to note that, (thanks to our days of slavery, we still have not overcome the 'white skin' phobia) most of our politicians were not only always available to these manipulators but would actually feel elated on getting a call from them and would pour out whatever they had in their minds. Every day, we in the ISI received a flood of telegrams that these journalists would send home and it was surprising to know who all they were speaking to and what information and political analysis they received.

- All that was being sent out by these so-called foreign journalists, who were actually CIA operators, was being beamed back on Pakistan as psychological warfare and propaganda aimed at building up a scenario of ZAB's fall.

- A number of diplomats were not only actively involved but also directed the operations against ZAB. Jan M. Gibney, Political Officer, US Consulate General, Lahore, duly assisted by a couple of Pakistanis, was extremely active and would frequently visit a number of politicians. It was Gibney who had telephoned and conveyed to Howard B. Schaffer, Chief of Political Affairs, US Embassy, Islamabad, that notorious sentence, "The party is over. Merchandise has gone." ZAB had retorted by saying, "Party is not yet over. Elephant has long ears......" '

This is the reality of superpower espionage, covert-warfare ( http://tinyurl.com/67mf59 ), and all know it. Except perhaps the UK Observer.

Thank you.

Zahir Ebrahim

United States of America.



###

Print



Letter to Editor – Iran jails US journalist Roxana Saberi as spy April 18, 2009

Financial Terrorism April 2009 – Financial News Analysis in Context

Financial Terrorism April 2009 – Financial News Analysis in Context

Last Updated Friday, April 24, 2009

Project Humanbeingsfirst.org

Continued in Terrorism May 2009

Previous report: Financial Terrorism March 2009

Previous report: Financial Terrorism January–February 2009

Previous report: Financial Terrorism November–December 2008

Financial & State Terrorism April 2009

Credit As A Public Utility: The Solution to the Economic Crisis – Richard C. Cook DVD Just Released

Watch Richard C. Cook's outstanding six-part presentation pt1, pt2, pt3, pt4, pt5, pt6 based on his new book: We Hold These Truths: The Hope of Monetary Reform.

As I have repeatedly pointed out to Richard, as also to Ellen Brown (see below) over the past year, hope is not what's missing, nor are solution-spaces lacking. We have a superfluity of both! It is the “HOW” to achieve any one of these monetary reforms that is genuinely in the interest of the peoples, and not the interest of the powerful usurious banksters merely disguised in the sloganeering of “banking reform”, which is the problem. And this problem is magnified a million fold today given the tortuous reality of the enormous impetus towards 'one-world' government, which to me, already appears to be fait accompli. After watching Richard Cook explain the mechanics of the economic crisis and his preferred solution, please read “Monetary Reform: Who will bell the cat?” for the real intractable problem definition for which Richard hasn't really outlined any solution! The same is true of Ellen Brown's proposal for monetary reform: “Response to Ellen Brown's 'How to Resolve the Credit Crisis' January 13, 2009”.

If platitudes were a sufficient solution, Jesus throwing out the money-changers from the Temple in Jerusalem would have ended all Money Trusts for good, as also the Ten Commandments brought by Prophet Moses have ended all wars for all times since there wouldn't have been any usurious bankers to profit from them!

Power only respects power, not platitudes. So show me that negotiating power first that can hold the jugular of the banksters, and then I will worry about which solution to pick! The wisdom from the Chinese fortune cookies while often making for excellent after-dinner conversation, also seem oddly apropos here, especially this one: “it is a bit too late to start digging a well after one is thirsty!” As was also noted in the Financial Terrorism Report of March 2009:

'It is not for nothing that many a superlative statesman has timelessly opined: the price of liberty is eternal vigilance. If you stay asleep all your life chasing your “American Dream”, you move not a muscle when others are being bombed to smithereens, you care not when others are being bonded through economic conscription, and finally, when your own house is on fire, you suddenly wake up to frantically look for water to douse it while the arsonists have already taken over all the fire brigades in town. Well, you know the efficacy of that. It is called fait accompli.'

The Tower of Basel: Secretive Plans for the Issuing of a Global Currency by Ellen Brown April 18, 2009

Ellen Brown reports in her latest essay on Global Research, that the globalists' swift move towards issuing global currency under the aegis of their private global central banks is gaining rapid momentum. Echoing Carroll Quigley, she locates the apex of the bankers' control nexus at BIS – The Bank for International Settlements, http://bis.org. It's member central banks from different countries coordinated by BIS are listed here: http://www.bis.org/cbanks.htm - count them! BIS describes its purpose as: “The BIS is a forum for discussion, policy analysis and information-sharing among central banks and within the international financial and supervisory community.”

But the real purpose of BIS cannot be understood without comprehending the purpose of private central banking. BIS is merely the instrumentation arm, the mechanics by which governance is exuded. It still only implements the overarching policies which are composed elsewhere, not at BIS, but deployed through BIS as the central “information-sharing among central banks and within the international financial and supervisory community” just like they say on their website. In reality, imagine BIS to be another hierarchy above the Federal Reserve System. Both, like all the other European central banks, in reality, are run by “errand boys” for their masters. As Carroll Quigley had put it in 1966:

'It must not be felt that these heads of the world's chief central banks were themselves substantive powers in world finance. They were not. Rather, they were the technicians and agents of the dominant investment bankers of their own countries, who had raised them up and were perfectly capable of throwing them down. The substantive financial powers of the world were in the hands of these investment bankers (also called “international” or “merchant” bankers) who remained largely behind the scenes in their own unincorporated private banks. These formed a system of international cooperation and national dominance which was more private, more powerful, and more secret than that of their agents in the central banks. This dominance of investment bankers was based on their control over the flows of credit and investment funds in their own countries and throughout the world.' -- Carroll Quigley, Tragedy and Hope, 1966, Chapter 20, page 326

Eustace Mullins expanded upon that description in much more sanguinary terms in 1985:

' “The merchants of death”, as they were popularly known in those days, were never more than errand boys for their true masters, “the bankers of death”, or, as they were also known, “the Brotherhood of Death”.' -- Eustace Mullins, World Order, 1985, Chapter 1: 'The Rothschilds', page 35 of PDF

To make sure that Carroll Quigley and Eustace Mullins are not dismissed as mere academic or 'tin-hatted' conspiracy nuts, since few people read history or visit the library anymore for any serious reading as a pastime, it is worthwhile reproducing the following passage from President Woodrow Wilson's collection of campaign speeches from 1912. Just as he was about to become the President of the United States, was about to pass the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 by the end of his first year in office in the name of “banking reform”, and shortly thereafter was to embroil the United States in World War 1 after the sloganeering “he kept us out of the war” during the re-election campaign of 1916, Wilson's apparent academic idealism inadvertently betrayed the truth in the early days even though he was being deftly managed by the next tier of “errand boys” of “financial capitalism”, principally Edward Mandell House and Bernard Baruch:

'Since I have entered politics, I have chiefly had men's views confided to me privately. Some of the biggest men in the United States, in the field of commerce and manufacture, are afraid of somebody, are of afraid of something. They know that there is a power somewhere so organized, so subtle, so watchful, so interlocked, so complete, so pervasive, that they had better not speak above their breadth when they speak in condemnation of it.' -- The New Freedom, Woodrow Wilson, 1913, Chapter 1, pages 17-18

Therefore, Professor Carroll Quigley, mentor to President Bill Clinton and teacher to several generations of U.S. State Department's diplomatic corps, has gained empirical currency for his fleshing out Woodrow Wilson's skeletal narrative, as in the statements below. Although, Dr. Quigley too speaks with a forked tongue when he deems it necessary, and his voluminous A History of the World in Our Time must be parsed forensically rather than gospelly by continually putting his disclosures to the test of empiricism, as for instance was done by W. Cleon Skousen in his commentary on Tragedy and Hope.

'The powers of financial capitalism had (a) far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent meetings and conferences. The apex of the systems was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland; a private bank owned and controlled by the world's central banks which were themselves private corporations. Each central bank, in the hands of men like Montagu Norman of the Bank of England, Benjamin Strong of the New York Federal Reserve Bank, Charles Rist of the Bank of France, and Hjalmar Schacht of the Reichsbank, sought to dominate its government by its ability to control Treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country, and to influence cooperative politicians by subsequent economic rewards in the business world.' -- Carroll Quigley, Tragedy and Hope, 1966, Chapter 20, page 324

Thusly, in order to properly identify the “power somewhere so organized, so subtle, so watchful, so interlocked, so complete, so pervasive” which sits atop all these national and global structures of “financial capitalism” – the occulted trillionaire international banksters who are never even listed in the Forbes' 'world's richest' listing year after year, in 2008 for instance, Steve Forbes pitched Warren Buffet, worth $62 billion, as the 'world's richest man' – one has to first acutely understand usurious private central banking and its enslaving impact today. How does it really control an entire nation (and the world) by merely controlling the issuance of its money and the expansion-contraction of its availability? How does a pompous statement like “Give me control of a nation's money supply, and I care not who makes its laws” really manifest itself in practice? That would lead to the question cui bono, and that would certainly explain why its godheads might prefer to stay out of the newsmedia limelight and who they are. Just looking at their immense wealth would then confirm it – a wealth so enormous that they could easily employ all the Forbes' billionaires to wash their dishes!

All that real knowledge about who runs the world is a tall order not filled by even an expensive IVY League education, never mind the 7 O Clock News and the history channels. You will also not learn of it from the so called dissent-space chiefs like Noam Chomsky and Howard Zinn. That's quite understandable because both consent and dissent are very skillfully manufactured in modernity. Project Humanbeingsfirst has done much due diligence in compiling the Monetary Reform Bibliography as a self-study aid. Even a modicum of effort in pursuing its references would answer the question to the reader's own rational satisfaction who really controls BIS and the many layers of glorified errand boys who so eagerly front as the “merchants of death” for the “powers of financial capitalism”. Also see 'The Rothschild Archive': http://rothschildarchive.org, and Project Humanbeingsfirst recent editorial Some Dare Call it Conspiracy! Are you among them? April 19, 2009 for more information.

But first, something more urgent: The Latest in Women's Liberation Movement

Emancipating enslaved women 'for more freedom of movement' is most urgent!

And now we return to some more banal news from the 'untermenschen' front: The Afghani mom under the blanket

and murdered Afghani babies for whom there are no benefactors, no protectors, only silent apathetic bystanders.

Killing children of a lesser god by the surrogates of the god's chosen peoples

End The Fed - but with caution! Much GOLD Caution!

The Obama Deception – Movie by Alex Jones

Today, The Obama Deception is all pervasive, and the Obama team has even dropped the 'war on terror' rhetoric – as re-confirmed by the ongoing DRONE ATTACKS in Pakistan and Afghanistan, the Weapons of Choice in Fighting Qaeda to manufacture more “Barbarians at the gate”:

DAWN Barbarians at the gate By Kamran Shafi Tuesday, 07 Apr, 2009

The Day After – American Agenda for Pakistan” is so palpably visible that only fools and shills among the Westerners, and native-informants among the victims, will continue to bleat Alice's 'War On Terror' instead of getting the prime-movers behind the 'merchants of death' and their multitudes of death squads!

The latest 'Pakistani Negro' to echo the 'wmd in Iraq' equivalent mantra of 'existential threat in Pakistan' which poses a 'mortal threat' to the world' rehearsed only yesterday, April 23, 2009, by the new 'Queen' of 'Alice in Wonderland', the U.S. Secretary of State, is Dr. Ayesha Siddiqa. Writing in her column “Fighting the hordes” in just this morning's DAWN, Friday, April 24, 2009, the distinguished 'secular humanist' posited the following constrained formulation: “There are two important questions here: one, are the Taliban a temporary phenomenon and, two, does society have the capacity to fight them off?” And then proceeded to answer them: “Unfortunately, it seems that the Taliban might win due to the combined capacity shortcomings of the security apparatus, the government and society at large. ... We can fight this only if we muster the required will, develop a clear understanding of what lies ahead and then evolve a coherent implementation strategy.”

The darling of the West Dr. Ayesha Siddiqa whose book 'Military Inc.' I have diligently read (twice), pretends there is absolutely no “American Agenda for Pakistan”, never mind that there is even a 'Grand Chessboard – American Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives'! So forget about ever exposing the accelerated impetus towards 'one-world' government which devilishly employs the fabricated 'war on terror' against the manufactured 'Islamofascists' as the key mobilizing pretext! The concept of 'manufactured enemies' is apparently alien to an expert with a Ph.D. in War Studies from King’s College, University of London, UK, and who served as the Director of Naval Research heading Pakistan Navy’s research wing (see Dr. Siddiqa's brilliant resume, also cached here)! Thus she joins the other darling of the West, 'secular humanist' Dr. Pervez Hoodbhoy who needs no introduction, in keeping really great company with Dr. Daniel Pipes – all pushing the common sacred-cow axiom of 'Islamism', that, it is Not a Clash of Civilizations, It's a Clash between the Civilized World and Barbarians”! (Also see 'Recruiting Soldiers Against Radical Islam')

I hope I am mistaken about both Dr. Siddiqa and Dr. Hoodbhoy and that they are not merely the dialectical variation of the pathetic propagandist and failed academic Dr. Daniel Pipes, whom, I am sure, they would both happily denounce – and yet, they also retain his core-axiom of 'Islamism' intact. It is interesting to me how they are both welcomed in the West with open arms. Any narrative they pen gets published, almost anywhere. Dr. Pervez Hoodbhoy even has an article in the CFR's Foreign Affairs in December 2004 (also see his “Pakistan – The Threat From Within”, and contrast it to this plebeian's “Saving Pakistan from Synthetic 'Terror Central'”). Dr. Ayesha Siddiqa wrote her book through sponsorship by the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars and had it unveiled at CFR's sister organization in the UK, the RIIA, also called Chatham House (also see her “Between Military and Militants”). It is not possible that they do not know who and what these foundations so eager to support their work, represent.

I have to observe with great sadness that the prima facie evidence suggests that Dr. Siddiqa and Dr. Hoodbhoy, like all the rest of the two-bit Pakistani academics gracing the distinguished halls of the IVYs to the foundations along the Hudson and the Potomac, shill as much for empire as did Benazir Bhutto. The late Harvard-Oxford orator and two-time(ing) Prime Minister of Pakistan, woefully, in her speech at the CFR in New York on August 15, 2007, had anointed her beloved nation as “the very petri dish of international terrorism.” It truly pains me to suggest this of my two 'colleagues' with whom, delightedly I might add, I share some other points in common. I had supported Dr. Ayesha when her book launching was banned in Pakistan, had spoken to her once when I was in Pakistan, have given her my feedback on the egregious omissions in her otherwise stellar narrative on 'Milbus' wherein, she has outright absolved the role of the United States in aiding and abetting that very 'Milbus' ab initio to fabricate a servile client-state with a 'unity of command' available to them whenever they desire it for “imperial mobilization” (see Re-Imagining Pakistan's Defenses - Open Letter to a Pakistani General).

And Pervez Hoodbhoy is almost a friend (we blow hot and cold), and of course are co-alumnus with the same common mentor (Noam Chomsky), and share the same common critique of Pakistan's glorified Higher Education Commission and its wasteful spending of billions of borrowed rupees from the World Bank on absolute garbage (and I speak from first-hand knowledge of having read its six 'PC-1' while consulting at HEC briefly, see my letter to its chairman, Dr. Atta-ur-Rahman). Dr. Hoodbhoy's last word to me after my repeated entreaties to him to debate me: “you and I obviously remain at loggerheads on matters surreal. Nevertheless, I hope you will lend a hand in getting this printed to foster discussion on matters existential, of dire and immediate threat to our survival, whether it is the enemy you see, or the one I charge with monumental crimes against humanity. Do you wish to appear with me in a television debate on a channel of our choice? Between us, let's explore the space and rationally and accurately identify the pertinent and most 'highest order bit' enemy of mankind in order to begin doing something about it in efficacious self-defense. Thanks. Zahir”, was: “Zahir, Thanks for the offer. But life is short, and I am sure you have better things to do than spend time and energy on futile argumentation. Pervez”!

I truly don't get why these very learned and accomplished scholars should have joined the 'dark side' against their own peoples, to actually become vulgar propagandists for the same demonic hectoring hegemons who dared to goosestep the Herrenvolk across international frontiers” (Robert Jackson, Nuremberg) leading to millions dead, and more to come! Yes – Hitler too, confident that he would never be called to account, had boasted in arrogance in Bavaria: “[I will] give a propagandist reason for starting the war [and don't] mind whether it was plausible or not. The victor will not be asked afterward whether he told the truth or not. In starting and waging a war it is not the right that matters, but victory.” (See William Shirer, Rise and Fall of the Third Reich).

I will humbly eat crow by the hat-full if I am mistaken, misled, and myself deceived – for as Socrates had famously admonished (in Edith Hamilton's rendition): “Agree with me if I seem to you to speak the truth; or, if not, withstand me might and main that I may not deceive you as well as myself in my desire, and like the bee leave my sting in you before I die. And now let us proceed.” And of course, he was proffered the Hemlock for his sins!

On the other side of the spectrum from the 'secular humanists', we have the many good and kindly peoples, drowning in a surfeit of faith from ear to ear, simply “waiting for Allah” thinking it is the “Last Days of Gog and Magog” that no mortals may withstand. For, it is argued before them, an “indestructible power” the almighty creator hath himself calculatingly fashioned to fulfill his own (murderous) prophesies in order to finally rain divine justice upon the Earth – right after he hath rained phosphorous bombs upon children, women, men, the elderly, and destroyed their innocent civilizations at the very hands of his own “indestructible” hectoring hegemons to bring all that planned divine justice to fruition! What an idiotic and cruel god whose imagination only extends from genesis to genocide in order to fashion creation. And while that is merely immanent, far more grotesque is the idiotic imbecilic mass of followers who malign their own Almighty Creator whom they daily aver to believe in, Who repeatedly describes Itself in the very Book Muslims hold most sacred as “the Beneficent, the Merciful”! How can both be true simultaneously – unless it is a Zeus like fickle-minded god who enjoys games of cruel self-indulgence at the expense of his creation? Therefore, the former must stand rejected by the sheer force of argument, unless some people choose to believe in Zeus for their spiritual ascendance!

Can learned people not think with some rational logic, even when they be spiritually inclined (the two are not mutually exclusive despite what the Renaissance philosophers would have one believe to Trojan horse 'secular humanism'), that any earthly devil couldn't wish for a better neutralization of possible impediments from the masses to its own “imperial mobilization” agendas?

Give people their opiate in their right hand, while enslaving them with the left! Give them what they believe is divinely ordained – the majority will remain occupied in their pious and pecuniary pursuits believing it is all the 'will' of their god(s)!

And more apropos to modernity, inculcate a trust in so called “experts” so that one may be convinced to suspend one's own commonsense and rational judgment. Witness the events of 911 where the catastrophic mode of failure of the tall buildings preclude all and sundry from even thinking that it could have been an “inside job”! Why? because the “experts” say 19 turbanless clean-shaved jihadis did it (See 911 A Fait Accompli – Pay Attention to Political Science! April 13, 2009)!

Woe be to them all who manufacture pretexts and justifications to not side with the truth, who lead people astray to make it appear that the helpless screaming victims is god's own work as destined which none may alter, who remain busy in pious interlocution in their mosques, churches, temples while cataclysmic 'Shock and Awe' is continually visited upon innocent civilian populations. There is none on planet earth who can claim they haven't witnessed the preying of the vultures and vampires for which, surely, the Creator too must curse its own creation for their apathy despite plentiful guidance to every peoples! What will thee, Oh people of the cloth, take to thine grave – a barrel full of gold and a ledger full of piety while God's creation was burned and starved at the hands of the hectoring hegemons right before thy twirling rosaries? Many an atheist show far greater moral acumen and disquiet in their actions when they genuinely rush to the aid of suffering humanity – for indeed, a moral compass appears to be built into us human beings, we who can reason, and we who can reflect, all killed by the eschatological gibberish fashioned by priests shilling for the enemies of mankind! While the misanthropes remain busy building corrupting institutions and instruments of co-option to create 'one-world' government, the sheeples are kept busy chasing absurdities.

At the intersection of political science and religion, whereby the latter is used in the most sophisticated and devilish of ways to server the former, such as to both subvert and incapacitate political activism in its most efficacious dimension while simultaneously promulgating “imperial mobilization” by fashioning the perpetual enemy of Islamofascism”, or to devilishly fashion 'freedom fighters' with “god is on your side”, or to return the Jews to Zion by killing off god and selling the 'ubermensch' concept of the Jewish peoples themselves being their own Messiah (see Letter to Editor: Dalit Voice's 'Which god?' February 08, 2009), 'religion' is today as much a part of the Machiavellian instrument of hegemony, as it was in antiquity when the rather banal 'divine sanction' was invoked for imperial legitimacy! Muslims today, being among the most intellectually challenged peoples on the face of the earth, are even encouraged to once again dream of 'khilafat', as that strain conveniently adds to the phobia of the “Triumphalism of Islam” (see Bernard Lewis, Crisis of Islam – Holy War and Unholy Terror, 2001).

Between the opiate of the ethereal 'Soma' and the fatigue of the treadmill of the 'American Dream', the plebeians are led to the slaughter – all throughout the ages, since time immemorial. Latter day modernity is no different, only more Machiavellian! With a deception so technetronic, and mind manipulation so ubiquitous, that it should not surprise anyone if they see their god's names spelled in the sky and 'Jesus' descend on the 'wings of angels' at the respective GPS coordinates of each peoples' holy predictions! Coming soon to the pious neighborhoods of the (Abrahamic) world. Thousands of visitors have been nightly entertained in Disneyland by holographic image projection's progressive development for at least two decades, and it must surely be ready by now for introducing new convoluted twists to “imperial mobilization”!

And Pakistan is next! A “Kosovo” is being orchestrated in Pakistan and matters have maddeningly been brought right on the verge of fait accompli. All for the meager want of a handful of courageous men and women of national prominence to simply have called 'a spade a spade'! Unlike Palestine, Pakistan was destroyed, first and foremost, by her own treasonous mercenary peoples! The United States to follow suit, for the exact same reason!



Print



###

04/24/2009 23:59:10 4179

Financial Terrorism April 2009 Financial News Analysis in Context

Editorial: Some Dare Call it Conspiracy! Are you among them? April 19, 2009

Editorial: Some Dare Call it Conspiracy!

Are You Among Them?

April 19, 2009

Zahir Ebrahim

Project Humanbeingsfirst.org

Conspiracy: in law, agreement of two or more persons to commit a criminal or otherwise unlawful act. At common law, the crime of conspiracy was committed with the making of the agreement, but present-day statutes require an overt step by a conspirator to further the conspiracy. Other controversial aspects of conspiracy laws include the modification of the rules of evidence and the potential for a dragnet. A statement of a conspirator in furtherance of the conspiracy is admissible against all conspirators, even if the statement includes damaging references to another conspirator, and often even if it violates the rules against hearsay evidence. The conspiracy can be proved by circumstantial evidence. Any conspirator is guilty of any substantive crime committed by any other conspirator in furtherance of the enterprise. It is a federal crime to conspire to commit any activity prohibited by federal statute, whether or not Congress imposed criminal sanctions on the activity itself. -- Columbia Encyclopedia

Ah – but what if the “criminals” were to write the laws and the statutes themselves? Then, the conniving and conspiring isn't legally defined as a crime, nor the “criminals” called criminals. In fact, most are called bankers (emperors previously), and their instruments today, foundations (fleets previously)! Isn't that just peachy?

If only Al Capone, “an Italian-American gangster who led a crime syndicate dedicated to smuggling and bootlegging of liquor and other illegal activities during the Prohibition Era of the 1920s and 1930s” (Wikipedia), had learnt that sooner.

A very learned man defined this conspiratorial state of affairs way back in antiquity, around 410 AD, very succinctly as follows:

- “When the King asked him what he meant by infesting the sea, the pirate defiantly replied: 'the same as you do when you infest the whole world; but because I do it with a little ship I am called a robber, and because you do it with a great fleet, you are an emperor.' -- Augustine of Hippo, in The City of God against the Pagans, page 148

And a much simpler man in far more convoluted times also rather straightforwardly expounded upon the same matters because the plebeians du jour weren't quite willing to accept any oligarchic emperorship directly, legal or not. Divine sanction for rulers had been eliminated in the West since the Renaissance, and new conquerors had to play along with plebeian norms because “Nowadays when the voting papers of the masses are the deciding factor; the decision lies in the hands of the numerically strongest group; that is to say the first group, the crowd of simpletons and the credulous.” (Mein Kampf). Thus, more complex scheming by the wolves seeking world emperorship had to be orchestrated upon the sheepish “crowd of simpletons and the credulous.”

And so, in 1971 AD, he observed:

- “Most of us have had the experience, either as parents or youngsters, of trying to discover the "hidden picture" within another picture in a children's magazine. Usually you are shown a landscape with trees, bushes, flowers and other bits of nature. The caption reads something like this: "Concealed somewhere in this picture is a donkey pulling a cart with a boy in it. Can you find them?" Try as you might, usually you could not find the hidden picture until you turned to a page farther back in the magazine which would reveal how cleverly the artist had hidden it from us. If we study the landscape we realize that the whole picture was painted in such a way as to conceal the real picture within, and once we see the "real picture," it stands out like the proverbial painful digit.

We believe the picture painters of the mass media are artfully creating landscapes for us which deliberately hide the real picture. In this book we will show you how to discover the "hidden picture" in the landscapes presented to us daily through newspapers, radio and television. Once you can see through the camouflage, you will see the donkey, the cart and the boy who have been there all along. Millions of Americans are concerned and frustrated over mishappenings in our nation. They feel that something is wrong, drastically wrong, but because of the picture painters they can't quite put their fingers on it.

Maybe you are one of those persons. Something is bugging you, but you aren't sure what. We keep electing new Presidents who seemingly promise faithfully to halt the world-wide Communist advance, put the blocks to extravagant government spending, douse the fires of inflation, put the economy on an even keel, reverse the trend which is turning the country into a moral sewer, and toss the criminals into the hoosegow where they belong. Yet, despite high hopes and glittering campaign promises, these problems continue to worsen no matter who is in office. Each new administration, whether it be Republican or Democrat, continues the same basic policies of the previous administration which it had so thoroughly denounced during the election campaign. It is considered poor form to mention this, but it is true nonetheless. Is there a plausible reason to explain why this happens? We are not supposed to think so. We are supposed to think it is all accidental and coincidental and that therefore there is nothing we can do about it.

FDR once said "In politics, nothing happens by accident. If it happens, you can bet it was planned that way." He was in a good position to know. We believe that many of the major world events that are shaping our destinies occur because somebody or somebodies have planned them that way. If we were merely dealing with the law of averages, half of the events affecting our nation's well-being should be good for America. If we were dealing with mere incompetence, our leaders should occasionally make a mistake in our favor. We shall attempt to prove that we are not really dealing with coincidence or stupidity, but with planning and brilliance. This small book deals with that planning and brilliance and how it has shaped the foreign and domestic policies of the last six administrations. We hope it will explain matters which have up to now seemed inexplicable; that it will bring into sharp focus images which have been obscured by the landscape painters of the mass media.

Those who believe that major world events result from planning are laughed at for believing in the "conspiracy theory of history." Of course, no one in this modern day and age really believes in the conspiracy theory of history -except those who have taken the time to study the subject. When you think about it, there are really only two theories of history. Either things happen by accident neither planned nor caused by anybody, or they happen because they are planned and somebody causes them to happen. In reality, it is the "accidental theory of history" preached in the unhallowed Halls of Ivy which should be ridiculed. Otherwise, why does every recent administration make the same mistakes as the previous ones? Why do they repeat the errors of the past which produce inflation, depressions and war? Why does our State Department "stumble" from one Communist-aiding "blunder" to another? If you believe it is all an accident or the result of mysterious and unexplainable tides of history, you will be regarded as an "intellectual" who understands that we live in a complex world. If you believe that something like 32,496 consecutive coincidences over the past forty years stretches the law of averages a bit, you are a kook!

Why is it that virtually all "reputable" scholars and mass media columnists and commentators reject the cause and effect or conspiratorial theory of history? Primarily, most scholars follow the crowd in the academic world just as most women follow fashions. To buck the tide means social and professional ostracism. The same is true of the mass media. While professors and pontificators profess to be tolerant and broadminded, in practice it's strictly a one way street-with all traffic flowing left. A Maoist can be tolerated by Liberals of Ivory Towerland or by the Establishment's media pundits, but to be a conservative, and a conservative who propounds a conspiratorial view, is absolutely verboten. Better you should be a drunk at a national WCTU convention!

Secondly, these people have over the years acquired a strong vested emotional interest in their own errors. Their intellects and egos are totally committed to the accidental theory. Most people are highly reluctant to admit that they have been conned or have shown poor judgment. To inspect the evidence of the existence of a conspiracy guiding our political destiny from behind the scenes would force many of these people to repudiate a lifetime of accumulated opinions. It takes a person with strong character indeed to face the facts and admit he has been wrong even if it was because he was uninformed.

Such was the case with the author of this book. It was only because he set out to prove the conservative anti-Communists wrong that he happened to end up writing this book. His initial reaction to the conservative point of view was one of suspicion and hostility; and it was only after many months of intensive research that he had to admit that he had been "conned."

Politicians and "intellectuals" are attracted to the concept that events are propelled by some mysterious tide of history or happen by accident. By this reasoning they hope to escape the blame when things go wrong.

Most intellectuals, pseudo and otherwise, deal with the conspiratorial theory of history simply by ignoring it. They never attempt to refute the evidence. It can't be refuted. If and when the silent treatment doesn't work, these "objective" scholars and mass media opinion molders resort to personal attacks, ridicule and satire. The personal attacks tend to divert attention from the facts which an author or speaker is trying to expose. The idea is to force the person exposing the conspiracy to stop the exposure and spend his time and effort defending himself.

However, the most effective weapons used against the conspiratorial theory of history are ridicule and satire. These extremely potent weapons can be cleverly used to avoid any honest attempt at refuting the facts. After all, nobody likes to be made fun of. Rather than be ridiculed most people will keep quiet; and, this subject certainly does lend itself to ridicule and satire. One technique which can be used is to expand the conspiracy to the extent it becomes absurd. For instance, our man from the Halls of Poison Ivy might say in a scoffingly arrogant tone, "I suppose you believe every liberal professor gets a telegram each morning from conspiracy headquarters containing his orders for the day's brainwashing of his students?"

Some conspiratorialists do indeed overdraw the picture by expanding the conspiracy (from the small clique which it is) to include every local knee-jerk liberal activist and government bureaucrat. Or, because of racial or religious bigotry, they will take small fragments of legitimate evidence and expand them into a conclusion that will support their particular prejudice, i.e., the conspiracy is totally "Jewish," "Catholic," or "Masonic." These people do not help to expose the conspiracy, but, sadly play into the hands of those who want the public to believe that all conspiratorialists are screwballs.

"Intellectuals" are fond of mouthing clichés like "The conspiracy theory is often tempting. However, it is overly simplistic." To ascribe absolutely everything that happens to the machinations of a small group of power hungry conspirators is overly simplistic. But, in our opinion nothing is more simplistic than doggedly holding onto the accidental view of major world events.

In most cases Liberals simply accuse all those who discuss the conspiracy of being paranoid. "Ah, you right wingers," they say, "rustling every bush, kicking over every rock, looking for imaginary boogeymen." Then comes the coup de grace-labeling the conspiratorial theory as the "devil theory of history." The Liberals love that one. Even though it is an empty phrase, it sounds so sophisticated!

With the leaders of the academic and communications world assuming this sneering attitude towards the conspiratorial (or cause and effect) theory of history, it is not surprising that millions of innocent and well-meaning people, in a natural desire not to appear naive, assume the attitudes and repeat the clichés of the opinion makers.

These persons, in their attempt to appear sophisticated, assume their mentors' air of smug superiority even though they themselves have not spent five minutes in study on the subject of international conspiracy. -- Chapter 1

And are you among them? Are you like those who say: “Don't confuse us with facts; our minds are made up,”? If so, Gary Allen had you in mind when he wrote the preceding brilliant passages in None Dare Call it Conspiracy.

The poor fellow had searched in vain then, in 1971, “scouring the length and breadth of America in search of hundreds of thousands of intellectually honest men and women who are willing to investigate facts and come to logical conclusions-no matter how unpleasant those conclusions may be”, just like the “philosopher Diogenes scoured the length and breadth of ancient Greece searching for an honest man”.

I too seek, but surely not in vain, many a million honest plebeians worldwide who would overturn this fait accompli, by no longer claiming as their opiatic excuses, hope, god is running the world - so how can I challenge its mighty plan”, etceteras. The faces of the same earthly devils revealed by Carroll Quigley in 1966 and expanded upon by Gary Allen in 1971 – who echoed W. Cleon Skousen before him (1970), and presaged Eustace Mullins after him (1985) – all laughing their way to their banks as you go hungry and homeless, have become plainly manifest to all and sundry in 2009!

Some Dare Call it Conspiracy. A criminal conspiracy to take over the world!

Some Dare Call it Conspiracy. A conspiracy more pre-ponderous a prime-mover for all crimes against humanity in the past 250 years than Alexander to Hitler combined.

Some Dare Call it Conspiracy. A conspiracy in which the conspirators “have had 250 years or so of family involvement in the finance business, ... provide advice on both sides of the balance sheet, and ... do it globally.”

Some Dare Call it Conspiracy. A conspiracy which could yet be busted in a fair court of law because some laws and statutes against “criminal syndicalism” still remain on the dusty old Constitutional and Criminal Law books which have escaped co-option. Eustace Mullins argued in 1985 that the following legalism could be used to hamper and decommission the prime-instruments of the conspirators in the United States and throughout the world:

- “Despite its present hegemony, the World Order of parasitism realizes that it is always subject to being dislodged, which, in effect, would mean its destruction. Therefore, it is necessary to control not only the channels of communication of the host, but his very thought processes as well; to maintain constant vigilance that the host does not develop any concept of the danger of his situation, or any power to throw off the parasite. Therefore, the parasite carefully instructs the host that he exists only because of the “benign” presence of the parasite – that he owes everything to the presence of the parasite, his religion, his social order, his monetary system, and his educational system. The parasite deliberately inculcates in the host the fear that if the parasite happens to be dislodged, the host will lose all these things, and be left with nothing.

Although the World Order has control of the legal system and the courts, it remains vulnerable to any enforcement of the pre-existing body of law which the host had formulated to protect his society. This body of law forbids everything that the parasite is doing, and forces the parasite to maintain a precarious existence outside of the law. It the law were to be enforced at any time, the parasite would be dislodged. The existing body of law clearly forbids the operation of criminal syndicates, which is precisely what the hegemony of parasitism and its World Order is. Criminal syndicalism denies the equal protection of the law to citizens. Only by acting against criminal syndicalism can the state protect its citizens.

Corpus Juris Secundum 16: Constitutional Law 213 (10) states : “The Constitutional guaranty of freedom of speech does not include the right to advocate, or conspire to effect, the violent destruction or overthrow of the government or the criminal destruction of property. 214 : The Constitutional guaranty of the right of assembly was never intended as a license for illegality or invitation for fraud – the right of freedom of assembly may be abused by using assembly to incite violence and crime, and the people through their legislatures may protect themselves against the abuse.”

The assembly of any World Order organization, such as the Council on Foreign Relations or any foundation, is subject to the laws against fraud (their charters claim they are engaged in philanthropy), and enforcement of the laws against criminal syndicalism would end the institutions through which the World Order illegally rules the people of the United States, the illegal conspiracies and the introduction of alien laws into our system by the foundations instructions to Congress.

We have already shown that the Rockefeller Foundation and other key organizations of the World Order are “Syndicates”, which are engaged in the practice of criminal syndicalism. But what is a “syndicate”? The Oxford English Dictionary notes that the word stems from “syndic”. A syndic is defined as “an officer of government, a chief magistrate, a deputy”. In 1601 R. Johnson wrote in Kingd and commonwespeciall men, called Syndiques, who have the managing of the whole commonwealth.” Thus the Rockefeller Foundation and its associated groups are carrying out their delegated function of managing the entire commonwealth, but not for the benefit of the people, or of any government except the secret super-government, the World Order, which they serve. The OED further defines a syndic as “a censor of the actions of another. To accuse.” Here too, the syndicate functions according to its definition – the syndicate censors all thought and media, primarily to protect its own power. It also brings accusations – as many American citizens have found to their sorrow. Not even Sir Walter Raleigh was immune. When he interfered with the international money trade, he was accused of “treason” and beheaded.

The OED defines a “syndicate” as follows : “3. A combination of capitalists and financiers entered into for the purpose of prosecuting a scheme requiring large sources of capital, especially one having the object of obtaining control of the market in a particular commodity. To control, manage or effect by a syndicate.” Note the key words in this definition – a combination – prosecuting – obtaining control. The scheme does not require “large capital” – it requires “large sources of capital”, the bank of England or the Federal Reserve System.

Corpus Juris Secundum 22A says of Criminal Syndicalism, “In a prosecution for being a member of an organization which teaches and abets criminal syndicalism, evidences of crimes committed by past or present members of the organization in their capacity as members is admissible to show its character.” People v. LaRue 216 P 627 C.A. 276. Thus testimony about John Foster Dulles financing the Nazi Government of Germany, his telegram starting the Korean War, and other evidence can be used to indict any member of the Rockefeller Foundation in any state or locality in which the Rockefeller Foundation has ever been active in any way. Since these organizations are all closely interlocked, and there is so much available evidence of their illegal operations, it will be relatively simple to obtain criminal convictions against them for their criminal syndicalist operations.

Corpus Juris Secundum 22, Criminal Law 185 (10); Conspiracy and Monopolies : “Where the statute makes mere membership in an organization formed to promote syndicalism a crime, without an overt act, this offense is indictable in any county into which a member may go during the continuance of his membership, and this is true although such member comes into a county involuntarily. People v. Johansen, 226 P 634, 66 C.A. 343.”

Corpus Juris Secundum 22, Criminal Law sec. 182 (3) states, “A prosecution for conspiracy to commit an offense against the U.S, may also be tried in any district wherein any overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy is performed. U.S. v. Cohen C.A.N.J. 197 F 2d 26.” Thus a publication by the Council on Foreign Relations promoting the stripping of sovereignty of the United States of America, mailed into any county of the U.S.; the county authorities can bring the Council on Foreign Relations, or any member therein, to trial in that county,and any action by any member of the Council on Foreign Relations in the past is admissible as evidence, such as starting World War Il, subsidizing the Nazi Government, or subsidizing the USSR.

Criminal syndicalism can also be prosecuted according to Corpus Juris Secundum 46, Insurrection and Sedition : sec. 461 c. “Sabotage and syndicalism aiming to abolish the present political and social system, including direct action or sabotage.” Thus any program of a foundation which seeks to abolish the present political or social system of the United States can be prosecuted. Of course every foundation program seeks to accomplish just that, and is indictable.

Not only individuals, but any corporation supporting criminal syndicalism can be prosecuted, according to Corpus Juris Secundum 46 462b. Criminal Syndicalism. “Statutes against criminal syndicalism apply to corporations as well as to individuals organizing or belonging to criminal syndicalist society; evidence of the character and activities of other organizations with which the organization in which the accused is a member is affiliated is admissible.”

Not only can the members of the World Order be arrested and tried anywhere, since they function worldwide in their conspiratorial activities to undermine and overthrow all governments and nations, but because their organizations are so tightly interlocked, any evidence about any one of them can be introduced in prosecuting any member of other organizations in any part of the U.S. or the world. Their attempts to undermine the political and social orders of all peoples make them subject to legal retribution. The People of the U.S. must begin at once to enforce the statutes outlawing criminal syndicalist activities, and bring the criminals to justice.

Being well aware of their danger, the World Order is working frantically to achieve even greater dictatorial powers over the nations of the world. They constantly intensify all problems through the foundations, so that political and economic crises prevent the peoples of the world from organizing against them. The World Order must paralyze its opponents. They terrorize the world with propaganda about approaching international nuclear war, although atomic bombs have been used only once, in 1945, when the Rockefeller Foundation director Karl T. Compton ordered Truman to drop the atomic bomb on Japan. -- Eustace Mullins, World Order, pages 276-280

Yes. Some Dare Call it Conspiracy. A conspiracy which orchestrated 911 to create the pretext of 'war on terror', and which can be traced back to the prime-movers by following the money trail.

But None Dare Call it Conspiracy among the conspirators themselves! Their mouth-pieces however now openly advocate “world government”, as the only solution to manage all the global crises from the global 'war on terror' to the global financial collapse, to global warming!

And verily, many Dare Call it Conspiracy based on all this self-evident empiricism! Are you among them, NOT EVEN TODAY?



###



Print



Editorial: Some Dare Call it Conspiracy! Are you among them? April 19, 2009 by Zahir Ebrahim

Latest Books

Print Archives


The Plebeian antidote to Hectoring Hegemons

Home is Humanbeingsfirst.org

Please leave your comments for any document here.