As the orange died down a large cloud in the shape of a mushroom was seen above it. We were told to wait several hours due to deathly rays, of utmost toxicity.” On October 11, the London Daily Mail published “Berlin Silent 60 Hours, Still No Phones,” and a year later on August 11, 1945, the London Daily Telegraph published “Nazis’ Atom Bomb Plans: Britain Ready a Year Ago” (August 1944). In March 1945, Los Alamos in the U.S. only had 15-30 kilograms of plutonium and reported there wouldn’t be enough for an atom bomb until November of that year. However, when Germany surrendered in May 1945, a Nazi submarine entered Norfolk, VA harbor with nine gold-lined cylinders labeled “U-235” and infrared proximity fuses. Suddenly, we were able to test the Manhattan Project in July and bomb Hiroshima on August 6 and Nagasaki on August 9. How did we obtain so quickly enough plutonium for two atomic bombs? Probably Kammler under Himmler’s direction saw to it, and perhaps that information is what the American special unit retrieved from Himmler’s secret vault in his castle. The team and the documents then simply “disappeared from history,” according to the documentary “Himmler’s Castle,” mentioned in my book.]
“Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely.” – statement by Lord Acton in a letter to Bishop Creighton, April 5, 1887, A.D.
In the early 1760s in England, Benjamin Franklin was asked why the colonists were so prosperous, and he replied, “That is simple. It is only because in the Colonies we issue our own money. It is called colonial scrip, and we issue it in the proper proportion to the demand of trade and industry.” The Bank of England didn’t care for this, and in 1764, the Currency Act prohibited the plantation colonies from issuing legal tender. Many believe that the Stamp Act, Tea Act and other measures sparked the revolutionary movement, but Franklin reportedly stated: “The Colonies would gladly have borne the little tax on tea and other matters had it not been that England took away from the Colonists their money, which created unemployment and dissatisfaction.”
In a letter to John Adams in 1813, Thomas Jefferson wrote that “…the issue today is the same as it has been throughout all history, whether man shall be allowed to govern himself or be ruled by a small elite,” and he was right. One way to control not only individuals but also nations is to get them in debt, and there was reportedly talk among some bankers that perhaps a divided United States would be less strong, and therefore more dependent upon them. Today, debt is one of the key ways in which the Power Elite (PE) can control the U.S. and other nations.
In 1861, President Lincoln went to New York to ask for loans to prosecute the war against the Confederacy, but when the bankers offered him loans at 24-36% interest, Lincoln instead decided to have the government print its own “greenbacks” rather than go into debt. The bankers were not pleased. On November 21, 1864, Lincoln wrote to William Elkin: “I see in the near future a crisis approaching that unnerves me and causes me to tremble for the safety of my country. As a result of the war, corporations have been enthroned and an era of corruption in high places will follow, and the money power of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until all wealth is aggregated in a few hands, and the Republic is destroyed. I feel at this moment more anxiety for the safety of my country than ever before, even in the midst of war.” Lincoln’s secretary denied that the President wrote this letter, but it could be considered consistent with Lincoln’s attitude toward the bankers who offered him loans at exorbitant rates of interest. A few months later, in mid-April 1865, Lincoln was assassinated.
President Lincoln was right, and over the next 50 years, financiers grew in power. There was even a cartoon by Robert Minor in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch in 1911 depicting J.P. Morgan, John D. Rockefeller, Andrew Carnegie and other financiers welcoming Karl Marx’s “Socialism.” But how, one might ask, could these men of wealth like Socialism? It’s because monopoly capitalism actually turns out to be a form of corporate Socialism (and even Fascism in extreme cases), where beholden politicians enact laws providing for regulations that adversely effect the corporate leaders’ competitors. As regulations expert Brink Lindsey said in a 1992 Cato Institute report: “Thus, the only purpose served by these regulatory structures is to benefit particular special interests at the expense of their competitors and of the general public…. In effect, businesses can extort higher prices from the public by enlisting the government to act against competitors.”
To demonstrate the Fascist (or Corporate Socialist) aspect of the PE’s control mechanism, today there are so-called “spontaneous” revolutions across the Middle East and an in Northern Africa among Muslim nations as part of the PE’s plan. In June 2011, at “Ideacity” (advertised as Canada’s “Premiere meeting of the minds,” liberal Marxist Muslim Tarek Fatah said, “The religion of Islam is being used as a tool by a Fascist force…. Instead of bringing victory over the Fascist forces of the Muslim Brotherhood, we now recognize that their infiltration is right up to the American White House, but we can’t say that. Today we are fighting another idea of Islamo-fascism that has shut our mouths, and we can’t speak because we’re too scared that someone may turn around and call us a racist. And mind you, everyday as I speak, a few dozen Muslims would have been killed by now by these Jihadis.”
To show how the interests of the PE (financiers, corporate leaders, etc.) and Marx’s Socialist philosophy can run parallel to each other, note that the PE strongly supported NAFTA, the European Economic Community, and other regional economic entities. In January 1913, Joseph Stalin in Vienna said: “National autonomy does not solve the problem…. The only real solution is regional autonomy…. It does not divide people according to nations, it does not strengthen national partitions; on the contrary, it only serves to break down these partitions and unite the population in such a manner as to open the way for divisions of a different kind, division according to class.”
This was similar to Lenin’s “disunion for the purpose of union” theory, and national loyalties would become subservient to regional arrangements, which would facilitate Marx’s “class struggle” with the eventual theme of “workers of the world unite” to establish the “dictatorship of the proletariat.” In Richard Pipes’ A Concise History of the Russian Revolution (1995), he wrote: “The same reasoning that had led the Bolsheviks to condemn to death the Romanovs would later be applied in Russia and elsewhere to millions of nameless beings who happened to stand in the way of one or another designs for a new ‘world order’… the legitimacy of the early Communist slogan, ‘We will drive mankind to happiness by force!’” Isn’t this what is occurring today?
While the philosophies of the PE and Marxist Socialism both view nationalism as a chief obstacle and both desire the final triumph of some type of Socialism, the PE obviously don’t want ultimately a dictatorship of the proletariat. Rather, they desire what I would call a techno-feudal society, where the proletariat would be labor serfs or machine serfs and the elite would remain in control. Indirect support for this idea can be found in a March 3, 1998 “Opinion” of The Philadelphia Inquirer, which stated: “If there is going to be a shortage of bright, well-educated people, corporations will pay a premium to get them—even import them from overseas. They will then use these geniuses to design production systems that can be run by idiots, whom they will pay as little as possible to make up the difference.”
To show how Marxism, elite control, and regionalism all come together, the following statement by former Trilateral Commission (elites) director Zbigniew Brzezinski are instructive. In his Between Two Ages (1970), he stated: “Marxism is simultaneously a victory of the external, active man over the inner, passive man and a victory of reason over belief… [and] the fiction of the [national] sovereignty… is clearly no longer compatible with reality… [but] a [world community] cannot be achieved by fusing existing states into one larger entity…. It makes much more sense to attempt to associate existing states through a variety of indirect ties and already developing limitations on national sovereignty…. In the technotronic society the trend seems to be toward… effectively exploiting the latest communication techniques to manipulate emotions and control reason…. Human beings become increasingly manipulable and malleable... accepting as routine managerial processes current innovations such as planning-programming-budgeting systems (PPBS).”
And at the State of the World Forum (Sept. 27-Oct. 1, 1995) chaired by former Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev, Brzezinski declared: “We cannot leap into world government through one quick step. A consensual global system requires a process…. The precondition for eventual and genuine globalization is progressive regionalization because by that we move toward larger, more stable, more cooperative units.” Today, the so-called “spontaneous” revolutions in the Middle East are part of the PE’s plan to create a regional entity there that can be linked to the European Union and other regional arrangements.
Further evidence of the use of regionalism as a means of undermining sovereignty can be found in Robin Wright’s August 25, 1992, article in The Los Angeles Times titled, “The Outer Limits?” in which the State Department’s chief geographer, William Wood, was quoted as stating: “What we’re dealing with is the re-creation of countries.” In the same article geographer George Demko (director of Dartmouth’s Rockefeller Center) said: “As we’re challenging the traditional ideas of state sovereignty, globalizing economies and communications, and breaking up the last empires, the geography of the world is unhooking old connections and hooking up new ones. Along with borders, the dynamics and functions of states will change, too…. Many states won’t have armies, only police.”
As the PE uses the “regionalizing” of NAFTA, etc., which undermines national sovereignty, what we are seeing seems to be American history in reverse! At the beginning of our nation, Southern plantation owners had slaves for economic reasons, and primarily people from the North wanted to liberate those slaves. Today, it is primarily multinational corporate executives and international bankers in the North who look over their “global plantations” and support NAFTA, GATT, etc., including products made by slave labor (e.g., in China), thereby undercutting American workers. And these elites are opposed in greatest proportion by conservatives in the South. This is a real role reversal in our nation’s history!
Historically, we were also warned about the coming period of despotism under an elite or “supreme power” in America and the world. In Alexis de Tocqueville’s Democracy in America (1840), he said that the following would be “the novel features under which despotism may appear in the world”: man would exist “only in himself and for himself alone; and if his kindred still remain to him, he may be said at any rate to have lost his country. Above this race of men stands an immense and tutelary power, which it takes upon itself alone to secure their gratifications and to watch over their fate. That power is absolute, minute, regular, provident, and mild…. It provides for their security, foresees and supplies their necessities, facilitates their pleasures, manages their principal concerns, directs their industry…. After having thus successively taken each member of the community in its powerful grasp and fashioned him at will, the supreme power then extends its arm over the whole community. It covers the surface of society with a network of small complicated rules, minute and uniform. The will of man is not shattered, but softened, bent, and guided; men are seldom forced by it to act, but they are constantly restrained from acting. Such a power does not destroy, but it prevents existence; it does not tyrannize, but it compresses, enervates, extinguishes and stupefies a people, till each nation is reduced to nothing better than a flock of timid and industrious animals, of which the government is the shepherd.”
One way in which people are being “bent and guided” is via the role models being presented by the elite. For example, at the Miss America pageant for 1995, winner Shawntel Smith (whose program was “School-to-Work”) sang Woman in the Moon, which included the lyrics: “I was raised in a ‘No you don’t world overrun with rules… Well, not in my song. You and I are changing… [to a[ new rhythm. You can never mold the woman in the moon.” And she followed this by singing Listen to the Colors of the Wind at the Macy’s Thanksgiving Day Parade (Nov. 23, 1995); the song refers to such beliefs as the rocks have spirits, which New Agers believe.
Another means of “bending and guiding” the masses is via TV commercials. Research by Michael Rothschild, a business professor at the University of Wisconsin at Madison, and Yong Hyun showed a correlation between volunteers’ EEGs and their ability to remember information in TV commercials. According to Keay Davidson of the San Francisco Examiner in 1988, Rothschild “says his work indicates one of the best ways to grab a viewer’s attention is via movement—for instance, the car screeching around the corner.” This places viewers in a reactive rather than analytical mode wherein they are primarily absorbing information. Once they are in a reactive mode, psychological associations can be created. That is why there are fewer ads today giving detailed reasons to buy a product. Instead, through sounds, colors, movements, etc. products are associated with something pleasant and attractive psychologically to entice and condition the viewers.
And if the populace does not submit to the “supreme power’s” bending and guiding, choosing instead to resist being treated as human chattel, then there is always “Operation Garden Plot.” Although the U.S. military is never supposed to be used against our civilian population, in 1984 “U.S. Air Force Civil Disturbance Plan 55-2” (nicknamed “Garden Plot” by the Army) was developed as a plan for the employment of military (Air Force, Army, etc.) resources against civil disobedience and disturbances ad designated by the President. In the international arena, those who refused to comply with the PE’s “supreme power” might be turned over to an international criminal court.
Some time ago, U.S. Senators Kerry, Reid, Boxer and others sponsored legislation, the opening sentence of which stated: “Calling for the United States to support efforts of the United Nations to conclude an international agreement to establish an international criminal court.” However, the elite would do well to recall that one of the indictments against King George III in our Declaration of Independence of July 4, 1776, A.D. was: “He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our Constitution, and unacknowledged by our Laws….”
After President George H.W. Bush announced the beginning of the “New World Order,” about twenty years ago, he stated on February 1, 1992: “It is the sacred principles enshrined in the UN Charter to which we will henceforth pledge our allegiance.” The key word here is “henceforth,” which means one will be doing something which one hasn’t been doing previously. Thus, the “sacred principles enshrined in the UN Charter” could not be the same as the principles in our own Declaration of Independence or Constitution to which we already have been “pledging allegiance.” Americans simply smiled and accepted Bush’s proclamations, thus proceeding down the road to Somalia, Bosnia, Afghanistan and Iraq. In the January 14, 1993 confirmation hearing for Secretary of State Warren Christopher, he and then-Senator Joe Biden looked favorably upon the possibility that NATO would become the peacekeeping enforcer for the UN. Now, Senator Biden is Vice-President, and the U.S. under NATO auspices is intervening in Libya, even though that is helping Libyan members of al-Qaeda, with whom we are supposedly globally at war.
Instead of allowing the continued erosion of our national sovereignty under the PE’s plan to gain global “absolute power” over us, we should pray to the Lord for Repentance, Revival, Reformation and Restoration as “one nation under God.” We must turn from our wicked ways, seek God’s face and obey His Commandments, and pray that He will hear and forgive our sins and heal our land.