Thursday, 17 May 2012

A summary of 21st century politics

A summary of the powers behind 21st century world politics

David Howard LL.B (Hons), Dip. Counselling


People around the developed world are beginning to notice more and more the old divisions between the parties seem to be closing, with fewer and fewer differences, and unlike the old opposing policies it seems whoever they vote in nowadays they seem to agree on the main policies, with the only variations in the details. I have been investigating this and it appears to be an open network of organisations of ex and present political and business leaders holding regular policy meetings, and then either using them publicly or privately to try and guide the world to follow their view of how things should be.

The top of the official pile here is the United Nations itself, making rules by unelected bureacrats which gradually are being given legal force in all member countries whether or not the residents are aware of it or not. The European Union is the open side of this collective form of government, with growing powers and most rules again made not by the European Parliament, a mainly second chamber with very limited powers but the long term civil servant level group the European Commission, making many of their decisions in private and handed the authority by the parliament by a consensual delegation. They have even reached the level of replacing the governments of Greece and Italy directly with unelected bureacrats in 2012 in case anyone didn't realise their scope.

My own delving back to history took the main roots back clearly as far as a meeting in 1967 with various top level high flyers and environmentalists, including James Lovelock, one of the first of a huge influx of many in his mould. The theme from day one was finding ways to apparently protect the planet from human influence, but in fact the solutions were always about rationing energy and free movement, along with huge rises in taxation and redistribution of wealth to the third world. The other, potentially sensible side was reducing the world population, ostensibly by 80% back to what was called a sustainable level. Of course, educating and encouraging smaller families worldwide was the only practical way of doing it, but restricting energy and food would do the same thing as well, using a term such as managed euthanising. I will get into those details later.

The bottom line is that all these shared policies are not a coincidence, anyone who has signed up to this collective policy, based on a 1991 little known UN legal document named Agenda 21 for sustainability, will not be using Liberal, Labour or Conservative policy but UN policy regardless. The coincidences become more of a plan once you learn the sources. Besides needing a little translation from the jargon Agenda 21 is written as an environmental document, and has actually invented the term sustainability as part of a standard public relations propaganda campaign of choosing old or new words and creating new meanings for them. Sustainable actually means whatever you use can be replaced, but that is as far as the dictionary allows it, Agenda 21 once converted to standard English goes way beyond that and more.


How it works

In any political system you have those who lead and those who follow. The leaders know their facts and figures and use their positions and related charisma to operate the usual form of propaganda, that actually written in great detail by Josef Goebbels, and taken over by the Soviets and American business (as public relations) to persuade enough lower politicians and the mass of the general public to vote them in. This is called 'problem-reaction-solution', where they identify a policy they know would never be voted for or accepted then create an imaginary situation where the people would be so terrified they'd call for an urgent immediate solution which just happened to be exactly what they wanted anyway. To quote Benjamin Franklin,

  • Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety

But the example of using the fear of terrorism to increase restrictions and surveillance worldwide, which no one would ever have wanted or needed had they not had the fear of something which in fact happens less than every year or more in nearly every country who has brought in such measures. But once the bombs had been detonated in public places the public per country were only too happy to accept spot checks, cameras everywhere, and official surveillance of private conversations and the like. Regardless of whether the terrorism in these cases was as bad as they claimed, the operation worked perfectly. So if you wanted a world government, tax, and redistribution of wealth (mainly to those who create the rules as always), no one would vote for it besides a few fringe elements, but if you think of the perfect problem that needs world action then either aliens (even they couldn't conjure those up) or the environment would work. So, to quote the Club of Rome's 1991 publicly available report 'The First Global Revolution' ,

The common enemy of humanity is man.
In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up
with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming,
water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill. All these
dangers are caused by human intervention, and it is only through
changed attitudes and behavior that they can be overcome.
The real enemy then, is humanity itself."

This pretty well speaks for itself. They wanted a policy and here was the solution, for one of the very rare times fully stated as an illusion and not a true problem. So open and honest, all available online, and never reported by the media. The same could be said for the creation of the European Common Market (as it was then) as the alleged problem there was the threat of another war between its members, although the reports which have emerged since, including comments by Edward Heath, that it was never about a market but a gradual move to full political and economic union, which has steadily occurred per new treaty ever since. The common position here is the leaders all know the truth, but speak as if they do not so they can maintain any illusion they want in public. So currently for example engineering companies like Siemens know perfectly well that wind turbines use at least as much power as they produce, from the active electricity required to turn the blades to the wind and the brakes to stop them spinning too fast to the power stations on constant standby to take over the majority of times they aren't producing. But as it's both a waste of time trying to beat the system with science and associated taxes and penalties for not doing so, and the subsidised profits available for taking it on board mean it's a lot easier for them all to join the bandwagon. Using the simplest physics, without a focussing lens sunlight is far too diffuse to generate anything more than a small fraction for a household, and proved if any government reduces the subsidies neither wind nor solar would exist outside small local applications as without them it is just a vast outgoing which is probably never going to pay itself back otherwise. The same goes for the majority of scientists who create and claim to rely on climate modelling. The fact the figures 20 years after the original ones bears no relation to the temperature or sea level rises since, mainly because besides never having to compare the effects of added CO2 in living memory or before when such technology wouldn't have been capable of it at all, the climate is the most complicated non-linear system we know of, which is exactly why its machinations created chaos theory. It is chaotic as small changes can produce wide and complex results, which are not the same twice, and therefore virtually unpredictable besides the very basics. But you need to study it first to know it, and 90% of voters at the very least have not at any significant level. David Rockefeller himself set up the Club of Rome in 1968 at his Bellagio estate, and in his 2003 memoirs affirmed any question of his personal role:

"Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as 'internationalists' and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure — one world, if you will. If that is the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it."

There are almost identical statements all around the place, each corroborating and confirming the other, yet still despite making open admissions the media have left the gap between the source and the people. Without the media how can the people know, and unless the people know it will carry on. Therefore you can only conclude the media are part of the system, there is no other explanation to avoid what is some of the most radical news of the century.

Henry Kissinger said, "Today, Americans would be outraged if UN troups entered Los angeles to restore order; tomorrow, they will be grateful. This is expecially true if they were told there was an outside threat from beyond, whether real or promulgated, that threatened our very existance. It is then that all people of the world will plead with world leaders to deliver them from this
evil. The one thing everyman 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," Address to the Bilderberg Group at Evian, France, May 21, 1992 (Page 83-84 The Bilderberg Group by Daniel Estulin)

So a system and pattern is forming, fringe benefits such as promotions, massive grants and making government policy are easily enough to take the genuine consensus of any group of professionals onside, the consensus being the balance of having enough members of the plan to take the rest with them as a passive and helpless minority. I have a diagram of a network of mutual financial and political support fitting everyone from the Club of Rome and related members to the politicians, charities, professionals and energy companies, all of which take huge otherwise unavailable benefits through a collective collusion. But unless the media both learn the truth (which by their very nature are party to) and share as well (which in the main they will not) it then the people will remain in ignorance ruled by whichever illusions their lords and masters have chosen to totally manipulate them (the citizens are operating the same consensus mechanism through credibility, if the majority believe the illusion they'll always vote for the solution) they will remain ignorant, exploited and repressed. But once the cover is blown, then this generation at least will be very unlikely to be caught again. Lose their trust and they'll gain their freedom.

Although most of their aims are fairly obvious and connected, the purposes for them of other aspects such as wealth redistribution remain obscure to outsiders but are still clear aspects, but besides the personal gains already mentioned, my main site presents clear and ongoing plans for a world government, created through the need for a world carbon tax which is not possible without a world government (of course, how can we reduce CO2 if everyone doesn't work together?), and a world carbon currency, one which is not based on assets but on rations, each credit only lasting a year so impossible to build up any personal wealth or security. None is a conspiracy theory as it's all documented and recorded, and simply never reported so how can anyone oppose something they're not aware of. I'm not even saying a world government is a bad thing per se, just that if you are voting you must be aware of what you are actually voting for.

Spotting the clues

Like a magician, once you know the ways tricks are done they are no longer taken in by them. The only difference here is the audience know it's an illusion but just don't know how it's done. This way people need to be shown the ways and then see them and say 'Now I know what that phrase really means, who coined it and why, and it means if someone in power uses it then they can't be working for us'. Therefore if Barack Obama or anyone else mentions something like clean energy (this includes nuclear, the most poisonous and toxic material known to man) you know they are part of that group. The old multi party system where people really did have a choice, and most politicians did want to help has all but died in the 21st century. Instead the international organised UN led cabal is in charge, and the people have all been spun the same lines the banks are too big to fail and we'd all be poor if we left the EU etc etc ad nauseam, and as unlike those who check for themselves they believe every word of it and vote accordingly. The fact keeping interest rates low for instance is actually for the banks and government's personal benefits, as only they really pay the base rate while the people pay whatever the banks want to charge regardless, traders can borrow short term and make huge bets and the small profit made in a day or two will be massively increased on a few million or more of someone else's money. The added bonus of low interest rates is it both devalues currency and as a result sends investors to commodities, artificially forcing up prices from gold to food to oil. So basically everyone suffers except those manipulating the market.

There's no need for it to happen at all now in any way, not now the internet is here as the media is everyone who chooses to use it. Everyone can now be an insider, the magic circle is blown and anyone who wants to see how they do it can. Using Goebbels' rules, and simple methods of hypnosis using repetition until a meaningless word or phrase becomes part of the language, as if asked most people would discover it's impossible to explain what it means, they have cult-style programmed the mass of the population to use their ow invented (and utterly empty) words and phrases of 'green jobs', 'sustainability', 'clean energy', 'carbon footprint' and any other carefully thought up neologism that either changes the meaning of existing words (eg sustainability) or makes up entirely new ones (carbon footprint) but makes people imagine they do mean something absolutely vital to change a problem that never existed and they know it. And so do I. The climate and wind turbines can both be measured adequately to test, and freely available online. But if Al Gore and James Hansen tell you to expect metres of sea level rise (note, in the future, which no one can predict outside a linear system) people accept it. The actual sea level rise was 8 inches for a few centuries and heading for about the same already, as driven by half heat expansion and half melting land ice, so you would need a fairly substantial rise in temperature for more. At least 2C, probably 3 according to the UN. So as temperatures are rising under 0.5C a century of course a greater sea level rise would be impossible. Unlike future modelling present measuring is relatively direct, and any other figures they throw at you will either need to be consistent with the greater (deduction) or be wrong.

Follow the money

This can tie up the most concrete data which anyone can easily follow, and if a politician for example makes a law which takes money from taxes to make a 525% guaranteed profit renting land for wind farms then if their families and pension funds all rush to do so then the fact they made the law they are personally benefitting from then in any other circumstances it would be considered insider trading and market manipulation, which in many areas are against the law. Of course a good tyrant or dictator is above the law, either by owning the police and armed forces so they can do what they like, or in the west they simply change the law to make what they want to do legal for them. Therefore although Enron were convicted of fraud for inventing energy credits based on nothing and trading fresh air for years before someone picked it up, they simply legalised it as carbon trading, as Ken Lay of Enron briefed President Clinton and VP Gore before it hit the fan. Al Gore pays vast carbon credits, but to his own company and became a billionaire as a result. All the banks such as Rothschild's are only too pleased to be able to cash in on trading an asset they don't own, can't see or touch, and can't deliver as it makes their business a lot easier, especially when half the countries put a floor price on it guaranteeing the value can't drop below a certain amount. That sure makes trading a lot more predictable, more so as it's not actually optional (like wind and solar, as who would use them if not paid to?) but compulsory in most countries who use it so the citizens are forced to pay for them by law.
Such principles, such as the grant and promotion trail and vast excess profits through restricting fossil fuel production, as it means oil is suddenly forced way up above market price through again what is standard market manipulation, using fixed demand for an essential commodity and raising the price so people spend less on luxuries to pay to survive. Not illegal but thoroughly immoral, and incredibly profitable, as by selling the identical amounts of fuel they get a few times as much money for the same assets as the supply has been restricted. The Environmental Protection Agency in America alone has refused so much oil drilling and exploration they have doubled the prices there and typical of operations worldwide. The BBC have admitted telling the staff a few years ago not to go heavy on the balance on global warming as the science is settled, and then the director of the pension fund invested huge amounts in a company called the Institutional Investors Group on Climate Change, which is managed by Peter Dunscombe, who also works for the BBC pension fund.
Yes, climate change is a profit making business. Who'd have thought it? So of course, Mr Dunscombe wouldn't want the world's largest media corporation to wreck their own pension investments and his own main source of income. Those examples come thick and fast wherever you look in the current situation. This is just a few examples of how the whole system operates, and I have many pages of details linked to this general summary.

Beating the system

Knowledge is power. Repetition, using their own principles of PR against them is the key. Just as they invent meaningless phrases and have children mindlessly parroting carbon footprints whenever their parents turn a light on we can learn the good stuff and repeat that, as I say, until the Club of Rome and Ottmar Edenhoffer become as familiar as Princess Diana. That is the task required, and not by any means a tough one. Replace the disinformation with information. Take the truth out of the shadows and into the open. People will learn, spread, and when enough know the reality it won't be possible to maintain the illusion. Ron Paul, Nigel Farage, Peter Lilley, Robert Halfon, these politicians prove by dismissing the current nonsense they are the small minority not in on it. President Obama has not made a single speech I've listened to without mentioning 'clean energy' regardless of the topic involved. He could make a speech wishing his VP a happy birthday and still have to get it in. Basically once you've learnt the phrases only an insider would use, if someone uses it don't trust them. As these buzzwords really only exist at all to manipulate, no politician uses them unless they're trying to do so. When Fukushima melted down I was waiting for President Obama to pay them a personal visit to see how clean the radiation really was, but he never did it. But he still talks a good talk.

There is a single model which is near enough to allow everyone to understand the current system, which is the mafia. A highly organised and connected criminal organisation, above and outside the law, and maintaining their power through the combined sticks and carrots of bribery and threats. That's all you need to know, as they can only operate in a country where the authorities are involved, or they'd wipe them out. In 2011 the mafia became the largest industry in Italy with 7% of the GDP, something absolutely impossible if not part of the system rather than outside it. A clean government will always keep a clean house. I will finally list a few items which are screaming exposures of the system I want everyone singing like the national anthem. UN Agenda 21 for sustainability, which is operated locally through the ICLEI. That means when your council stop emptying the weekly rubbish and the government restrict new reservoirs they're operating it directly. It's published online, as are all the Club of Rome reports, and not by the media who could, but the conspiracy theory that really exists is why would they shun such a fantastic story with perfectly verifiable sources? Ottmar Edenhofer, the IPCC head of economics admitted it all in a 2010 interview, saying

" must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world's wealth by climate policy. One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy anymore..."

Now this is pretty direct and unequivocal, and most people hearing this direct from the organ grinder, the main man himself, would be hard pushed not to take it pretty seriously and literally. That is if anyone besides the German newspaper who interviewed him had shared it with anyone. But it's online and he's said it, and I'm telling you as no one else has. It's no longer a theory or an informed guess, we have been told many times (see my main site ) and again using the power of constant repetition make these quotes as familiar as Princess Diana or the X Factor. Then their days of power will be over. There will simply be no illusion left to maintain. I hope this summary shows how the interconnected network work together like a smoothly running machine, and I have left no gaps in the picture (all details are supplied as above), and simply hand it all over for everyone to make up their own minds, based on the facts presented. There is no speculation here, everything is taken from published and tested reports, and once you see the big picture how it all fits together, any new information is clear as to where it goes or has come from. Everyone needs to know, and when enough do it will no longer be possible to continue.