Old World Order

We resist two groups - the Old World Order and the group that stands behind them.

For the time being, we shall say nothing more about the organisation that hides behind the curtain. The Old World Order are dupes, but they are unaware of it. Their game is the oldest one of all - power. How to get it and how to maintain it.

These are the key points about the OWO:

1) The OWO is a global network of dynastic families.

2) Their mission is to maintain the power and wealth of their dynasties in perpetuity.

3) Others are admitted to the charmed circle only if they can assist the interests of the OWO.

4) The OWO do not care about the welfare of ordinary citizens. Ordinary people simply do not show up on their radar as long as they go about their humdrum lives in the expected way.

5) The OWO have no plans to build concentration camps, or slave encampments or anything else. Such measures would consume vast resources, create unnecessary trouble and serve no useful function. The OWO can sedate the people by use of TV, Hollywood, computer games, porn, music, alcohol, recreational drugs, sport etc. All of these diversions ensure that the people will never rise up. While mindless mass entertainment exists, the OWO need no concentration camps to control the people.

6) The Bush family is the quintessence of the OWO. Father and son belonged to Yale's Skull and Bones secret society and both became presidents. Another son is a former Governor of Florida and a potential future president. How can one family in a so-called democracy have achieved this degree of power?

7) The Bush family illustrates the workings of the OWO perfectly: very rich, very powerful, very connected, and likely to bestride the American political scene for generations.

8) The OWO do not obsessively control every aspect of life. What they do is take active steps to massively increase the likelihood that they and theirs will have vastly better chances in life than anyone else. George Bush, with his limited abilities, would have achieved nothing significant in life were his name not Bush. Yet because that is his name, he is an American president. The OWO always put family above talent. This is practically enshrined as an American principle, and enjoys huge popular support, yet its inevitable consequence is that it creates unmeritocratic family dynasties that endure for millennia - you can be certain the Bush family will be such a dynasty.

9) Most people are familiar with America's great dynastic families: they are associated with oil, banking, entertainment, media, military, the intelligence services and politics.

10) The OWO are international. American dynastic patriarchs have much more in common with Russian oligarchs than they do with ordinary Americans.

11) The Old World Order's models are the Roman Empire at the time of Augustus Caesar, and the English monarchy at the time of Henry VIII.

12) The OWO are advocates of dynastic rule. Look at America: George Bush, father and son - both American presidents; the Kennedys - could have been in power for decades had they not broken the rules of the OWO and paid the price; the Clintons - husband was president and wife still could be. Daughter might be in the future. Dynastic presidencies have become de rigueur in modern America. How did this come about? By accident or design?

13) The Roman Emperors advocated "Panem et circenses" - bread and circuses. As long as citizens have fast food and cheap entertainment to pacify them, they will not cause serious trouble. Revolutions occur when the ordinary people are starving and have nothing to distract them from their suffering. Can a revolution be launched in the absence of these factors?

14) The Romans had a patrician class (the wealthy and powerful) and a plebeian class (the ordinary people). Isn't it the same in America? The super rich, the Ivy League brigade, spoiled heiresses, the political, media, military, business, banking and legal elites. They are the American patrician class. Everyone else is a plebeian.

15) Roman gladiators were worshipped by the plebeians. What do the Americans have? - super-celebrities from Hollywood, TV, rock 'n' roll and sport, worshipped by legions of American plebeians.

16) In Ancient Rome, artists and intellectuals were a joke. They were usually Greek slaves. Look at artists and intellectuals in America. They are not at the forefront of the national consciousness. The OWO despise intelligence amongst plebeians and do their utmost to ensure that plebeians are poorly educated. They advocate and encourage 'dumbing down'.

17) The Roman Empire was founded on slavery. So was America. The ordinary American people are still slaves. The only difference is that the oppression they suffer is not overt.

18) Look at the British Royal family. The Queen refers to the British people as her 'subjects'. She can't be removed as head of state. Her crown, her status, her wealth and power will be transmitted to her son. No one else is eligible. Merit in Britain is effectively illegal since the head of state is never at any stage subjected to any meritocratic criterion. Britain remains one of the most class divided societies in the world.

19) Look at British politicians. Tony Blair, from a highly privileged background, was a recent prime minister, and now his children are being groomed to follow in his footsteps. The leader of the British Conservative Party is one of the richest men in the nation. He is an old Etonian and was a member of the super elite Bullingdon Club at Oxford University. His closest colleagues all come from similarly privileged backgrounds. The Mayor of London and the shadow Chancellor both attended the Bullingdon Club with Cameron.

20) As of October 2008, America has had forty-three presidents and two of them have been the father and son team of the Bush's. What are the odds?

21) Three of the forty-three presidents have been members of the tiny, elite secret society Skull and Bones. What are the odds? John Kerry, the Democratic candidate in 2004, was a member of Skull and Bones. In other words, no matter if you voted Democrat or Republican in 2004, you would still get a Skull and Bones man in the White House. And you think you have a choice? Choice is an illusion in so-called democracies. Democracy is an instrument used to control the people and make them vote for their OWO oppressors. You are much less likely to oppose someone for whom you have voted. You have bought into their mind control system. What good is a vote if you can only vote for the two people they decide to put in front of you? In order for them to be permanently in charge, they simply need to ensure that they control the process by which the presidential candidates are chosen. Then, when you vote, you are invariably voting for one of their people, not one of yours.

22) No doubt there are more Bush's, more Kennedys, more Skull and Bones members being lined up for future high political office.

23) If you're not one of the patricians, you're a nobody. People could choose to stand up and do something about it but they don't because they have been stupefied by the rhetoric and propaganda of the patrician class, they have got their bread and circuses that keep them endlessly distracted, they have their gladiator heroes to worship, their army of imperial conquest to support, their conspiracy theorists to mock, and their 'freedom and democracy' to trumpet.

24) The symbolic head of the Old World Order is the Queen of England. When she parades through the streets, legions of people wave flags and cheer. They are ecstatic about being her subjects - her acknowledged inferiors in every way. That shows you the power of the tyrants. Now imagine a hereditary monarchy with executive power. That's what the Old World Order seek. They dream of dynastic marriages. Imagine a future where the Prince of America marries the Princess of China. That's what's coming if the Old World Order achieves its full ambition.

More about this here.

                       

End of Sovereignty

 The End of Sovereignty – Restoring the Ancien Régime

Just as the financial collapse was carefully managed, so was the post-collapse scenario, with its suicidal bailout programs. National budgets were already stretched; they certainly did not have reserves available to salvage the insolvent banks. Thus the bailout commitments amounted to nothing more than the taking on of astronomical new debts by governments. In order to service the bailout commitments, the money would need to be borrowed from the same financial system that was being bailed out!

It’s not that the banks were too big to fail, rather the banksters were too powerful to fail: they made politicians an offer they couldn’t refuse. In the USA, Congress was told that without bailouts there would be martial law the next morning. In Ireland, the Ministers were told there would be financial chaos and rioting in the streets. In fact, as Iceland demonstrated, the sensible way to deal with the insolvent banks was with an orderly process of receivership.

The effect of the coerced bailouts was to transfer insolvency from the banks to the national treasuries. Banking debts were transformed into sovereign debts and budget deficits. Now, quite predictably, it is the nations that are seeking bailouts, and those bailouts come with conditions attached. Instead of the banks going into receivership, the nations are going into receivership.

In his book, Confessions of an Economic Hit Man, John Perkins explains how the third world has been coerced over the past several decades – through pressure and trickery of various kinds – into perpetual debt bondage. By design, the debts can never be repaid. Instead, the debts must be periodically refinanced, and each round of refinancing buries the nation deeper in debt – and compels the nation to submit to even more drastic IMF diktats. With the orchestrated financial collapse, and the ‘too big to fail’ scam, the banksters have now crossed the Rubicon: the hit-man agenda is now operating here in the first world.

In the EU, the first round of nations to go down will be the so-called PIGS – Portugal, Ireland, Greece, and Spain. The fiction, that the PIGS can deal with the bailouts, is based on the assumption that the era of limitless growth will resume. As the banksters themselves know full well, that just isn’t going to happen. Eventually the PIGS will be forced to default, and then the rest of the EU will go down as well, all part of a controlled-demolition project.

When a nation succumbs to debt bondage, it ceases to be a sovereign nation, governed by some kind of internal political process. Instead it comes under the control of IMF diktats. As we have seen in the third world, and is happening now in Europe, these diktats are all about austerity and privatisation. Government functions are eliminated or privatised, and national assets are sold off. Little by little – again a controlled demolition – the nation state is dismantled. In the end, the primary functions left to government are police suppression of its own population, and the collection of taxes to be handed over to the banksters.

In fact, the dismantling of the nation state began long before the financial collapse of 2008. In the USA and Britain, it began in 1980, with Reagan and Thatcher. In Europe, it began in 1988, with the Maastricht Treaty. Globalisation accelerated the dismantling process, with the exporting of jobs and industry, privatisation programs, ‘free trade’ agreements, and the establishment of the regulation-busting World Trade Organisation (WTO). Events since 2008 have enabled the rapid acceleration of a process that was already well underway.

With the collapse, the bailouts, and the total failure to pursue any kind of effective recovery program, the signals are very clear: the system will be allowed to collapse totally, thus clearing the ground for a pre-architected ‘solution’. As the nation state is being dismantled, a new regime of global governance is being established to replace it. As we can see with the WTO, IMF, World Bank, and the other pieces of the embryonic world government, the new global system will make no pretensions about popular representation or democratic process. Rule will be by means of autocratic global bureaucracies, which will take their orders, directly or indirectly, from the bankster clique.

In his book, The Globalization of Poverty, Michel Chossudovsky explains how globalisation, and the actions of the IMF, created massive poverty throughout the third world over the past several decades. As we can see, with the dramatic emphasis on austerity following the collapse and bailouts, this poverty-creation project has now crossed the Rubicon. In this new world system there will be no prosperous middle class. Indeed, the new regime will very much resemble the old days of royalty and serfdom (the ancien régime). The banksters are the new royal family, with the whole world as their dominion. The technocrats who run the global bureaucracies, and the mandarins who pose as politicians in the residual nations, are the privileged upper class. The rest of us, the overwhelming majority, will find ourselves in the role of impoverished serfs – if we are lucky enough to be one of the survivors of the collapse process.

    Today Americans would be outraged if UN troops entered Los Angeles to restore order; tomorrow they will be grateful. This is especially true if they were told there was an outside threat from beyond, whether real or promulgated, that threatened our very existence. It is then that all peoples of the world will plead with world leaders to deliver them from this evil. The one thing every man fears is the unknown. When presented with this scenario, individual rights will be willingly relinquished for the guarantee of their well being granted to them by their world government. – Henry Kissinger speaking at Evian, France, May 21, 1992 Bilderbergers meeting

Banksters

 The Elite Plan for a New World Social Order

by Richard K Moore

When the Industrial Revolution began in Britain, in the late 1700s, there was lots of money to be made by investing in factories and mills, by opening up new markets, and by gaining control of sources of raw materials. The folks who had the most money to invest, however, were not so much in Britain but more in Holland. Holland had been the leading Western power in the 1600s, and its bankers were the leading capitalists. In pursuit of profit, Dutch capital flowed to the British stock market, and thus the Dutch funded the rise of Britain, who subsequently eclipsed Holland both economically and geopolitically.

In this way British industrialism came to be dominated by wealthy investors, and capitalism became the dominant economic system. This led to a major social transformation. Britain had been essentially an aristocratic society, dominated by landholding families. As capitalism became dominant economically, capitalists became dominant politically. Tax structures and import-export policies were gradually changed to favour investors over landowners.

It was no longer economically viable to simply maintain an estate in the countryside: one needed to develop it, turn it to more productive use. Victorian dramas are filled with stories of aristocratic families who fall on hard times, and are forced to sell off their properties. For dramatic purposes, this decline is typically attributed to a failure in some character, a weak eldest son perhaps. But in fact the decline of aristocracy was part of a larger social transformation brought on by the rise of capitalism.

The business of the capitalist is the management of capital, and this management is generally handled through the mediation of banks and brokerage houses. It should not be surprising that investment bankers came to occupy the top of the hierarchy of capitalist wealth and power. And in fact, there are a handful of banking families, including the Rothschilds and the Rockefellers, who have come to dominate economic and political affairs in the Western world.

Unlike aristocrats, capitalists are not tied to a place, or to the maintenance of a place. Capital is disloyal and mobile – it flows to where the most growth can be found, as it flowed from Holland to Britain, then from Britain to the USA, and most recently from everywhere to China. Just as a copper mine might be exploited and then abandoned, so under capitalism a whole nation can be exploited and then abandoned, as we see in the rusting industrial areas of America and Britain.

This detachment from place leads to a different kind of geopolitics under capitalism, as compared to aristocracy. A king goes to war when he sees an advantage to his nation in doing so. Historians can ‘explain’ the wars of pre-capitalist days, in terms of the aggrandisement of monarchs and nations.

A capitalist stirs up a war in order to make profits, and in fact our elite banking families have financed both sides of most military conflicts since at least World War 1. Hence historians have a hard time ‘explaining’ World War 1 in terms of national motivations and objectives.

In pre-capitalist days warfare was like chess, each side trying to win. Under capitalism warfare is more like a casino, where the players battle it out as long as they can get credit for more chips, and the real winner always turns out to be the house – the bankers who finance the war and decide who will be the last man standing. Not only are wars the most profitable of all capitalist ventures, but by choosing the winners, and managing the reconstruction, the elite banking families are able, over time, to tune the geopolitical configuration to suit their own interests.

Nations and populations are but pawns in their games. Millions die in wars, infrastructures are destroyed, and while the world mourns, the bankers are counting their winnings and making plans for their postwar reconstruction investments.

Blowing in the Wind

Blowing in the Wind

Richard Heinberg

Economic contraction and social claustrophobia

The social dimensions of the end of growth are coming into clearer focus with each passing month—from last year’s Occupy uprisings, to the recent NATO demonstrations in Chicago, to mass demonstrations in Spain, and on and on. Also clearer is the desperate strategy of the powerful, which consists primarily of the militarization of the police and the criminalization of dissent.

Yet what else besides unrest and revolt is to be expected from soaring youth unemployment rates, falling living standards, and still-increasing levels of economic inequality?

By now it is also becoming clearer that the social impacts of contraction serve as a reinforcing feedback to the economy, worsening the debt crisis. A revealing phrase is being used to describe Europe’s financial mess: “the street has taken control.” As people express fears about the future of the euro by taking their money out of banks, the banks weaken and demand more backstops from governments, which have to run even bigger deficits in order to provide bailouts. Further, as people lose faith that government can address economic problems, they stop paying taxes—as is happening in Greece—thus making government even less effective.

Lack of social cohesion is itself a cost to the economy. It’s hard to make a formal economy work at top speed if it is being sabotaged, or if a significant proportion of its output has to go toward keeping people from deserting it in favor of a growing informal economy of black markets, subsistence, and barter.

War is a timeworn solution to economic problems. Surplus young males are kept off the streets; idle manufacturing capacity is engaged; dissent can be ruthlessly swept aside. But in our current global circumstances war is itself becoming increasingly costly, and the US (which is typically at the center of any international conflict du jour) is extremely war-weary. Apart from threats and counter-threats over Iran’s nuclear program, there are few signs yet that strategies of desperation are about to be deployed on a broad scale. But with economic tensions nearing the breaking point geopolitical rivalries could escalate very quickly.

To most commentators, the current economic dilemma appears to have emerged solely from problems within the global financial system. But, as I argued in The End of Growth, there are deeper and—in the long run—much more important factors at work. The economy requires ever-widening streams of resources in order to grow, and many key resources are becoming more expensive to produce. This is particularly true with regard to energy resources, especially oil.

So are higher oil prices on the way? Not necessarily. As the economy tanks, that will cut demand for oil and the price will fall below the new-supply break-even level; when that happens, companies will cancel or delay new projects (as they did in late 2008 when the per-barrel price fell to $40). But if, for the moment, the economic news looks good, demand will grow and oil prices must inevitably return to levels that justify new supply. And those price levels are just high enough to begin undermining economic growth, as a spate of recent economic research has shown.

So whether the latest financial news is giddy or dismal, whether oil prices are up or down, in either case the game of growing the economy by increasing the production of affordable transport fuel is now officially over. Previously, we enjoyed both a growing economy and low fuel prices, with the latter feeding the former; now we see “cheap” oil only when the economy is in a tailspin of demand destruction.

Dodgey Banking

Standard Chartered Accused Of Iran Transactions
 By The New York State Department Of Financial Services

British bank Standard Chartered has been accused of exposing the US to terrorists, drug kingpins and weapon dealers by hiding £161bn of transactions with the Iranian government.

Standard Chartered stands accused of being a “rogue institution” by the New York State Department of Financial Services, who accused them of leaving the US “vulnerable to terrorists, weapons dealers, drug kingpins and corrupt regimes”.

The bank, one of the five largest in the UK by market value, kept around 60,000 transactions secret from US regulators over nearly 10 years, the New York State Department of Financial Services claimed in a report.

The report alleges that in 2006, in response to the head of the bank’s American operations warning about “reputational damage” from dealing with Iranian clients, an unnamed director is said to have replied: “You f****** Americans. Who are you to tell us, the rest of the world, that we’re not going to deal with Iranians.”

According to the New York bank regulator Standard Chartered hid $250bn (£161bn) of transactions with Iran, which are prohibited due to sanctions, over the period between 2001-2010.

Standard Chartered now faces having its licence to bank in the US removed.

Shares in the bank have fallen sharply in response to the claims.

Its chief executive, Peter Sands, is known for opposing new regulations to curb the excesses of the financial sector, and had been suggested as a possible successor to Sir Mervyn King as governor of the Bank of England.

The bank, which employs nearly 90,000 people worldwide, has been called to appear before regulators to explain the apparent violations and defend its licence to trade on the New York Stock Exchange.

Standard Chartered said it strongly rejected the regulator's portrayal of facts. "The group is conducting a review of its historical US sanctions compliance and is discussing that review with US enforcement agencies and regulators.

"The group cannot predict when this review and these discussions will be completed or what the outcome will be."

The allegations come after a US Senate committee sensationally accused British banking giant HSBC of facilitating money laundering for drug king pins, rogue states and terrorists.

The US Senate Homeland Security Sub Committee on Investigations accused HSBC of, among other suspect activities, providing services to some lenders in Saudi Arabia and Bangladesh believed to have helped fund al-Qaeda and other terrorist groups.

huffingtonpost

Freedom

Things are definitely beginning to change quickly now. The foundation of the dark ones world is now crumbling from aged decay. Finally the ultimate controller of the darkness is under investigation, the big companies who control and run this country are being called on the carpet for their crimes. While they don’t seem to be going to jail for these crimes, at least they are being recognized. The citizens of this country also seem to be saying enough is enough and challenging the banks for their crimes, thank goodness. It seems as if daily a wee bit more of the dark is exposed or knocked down allowing us to view the truth at last, and this is just the beginning. I think when all is said and done we will be shocked by what is revealed.

If anyone had doubts that things were happening and change was headed our way, I think it will be obvious now that the light is shining brighter. I hope now the masses will take the ultimate challenge and leap off into the unknown with trust in their hearts that the new world is where we are headed and all will be well if they make the journey. Some will remain steadfast to the old ways and will remain behind and I wish them well. For those taking the leap I say have courage and listen to your heart. Your spirit and higher self is showing you the way. Surrender to your higher self and the universe and say “okay, I’ll do it your way, for surely you know best and I trust you will provide for me.”

For so long now we have been separated from ourselves, we have been enticed into letting Government tend to our needs and provide for us, and we have forgotten that we are more than capable of living our lives on our own. We have lost our deep connection to the earth and nature as well and without this connection we are vulnerable and unaware. Our senses have become dull and rusted and we no longer use them to navigate through our lives on a steady basis. We don’t have the time to stay connected, as we are busy trying to survive in our lives, working long hours for a pay check that our Government pulls from our pockets. In the new world this slavery will end and we will be free and have the time to reconnect with life.

Visionkeeper