JFK BLOWS THE WHISTLE ON SECRET SOCIETIES
Kennedy spoke from the heart, as does Obama. Both were put into power by forces behind the scenes, forces in control of the chief executive, or so they assumed.
From the desk of Englishman, James Higham on the fall of America, a truly excellent prediction of what the Obama vote means for America and the world. I will excerpt it here:
“Oh, say can you see by the dawn’s early light
What so proudly we hailed at the twilight’s last gleaming? ”
<…>Blair came to power mouthing sentences without predicates, verbs or specifics: “Now is the time to do,” “Britain forward, not back,” and “If you value it, vote for it,” and Obama has learnt from it: “Yes we can,” “Change we can believe in,” “If you believe that, I have a bridge I want to sell you in Alaska.”
Oh, there is no doubt that the orchestrated insult to the intelligence will now be in full cry. The markets will rally, stocks will rise, the power will cease to bring the people to their knees for some time and give some respite. Obama will have victories and in spite of himself, he will find consensus. He’ll be hailed as the Messiah America and the world have been hoping for. He is naive and therefore can be guided. Or coerced. The perfect president.
We are just through the opening song in a bad horror movie. Pages and pages of quotes from key figures in the last decades should have given us pause for thought, should have woken us from our slumber. Over here, we voted in two Bilderbergers to wreak havoc in Britain and now bitterly regret our folly.
Thus it is also in the U.S.A:
Oh my goodness – this is their rhetoric down to a T.
Do you think Iraq was not a scene in a grand play, the grandest play of all, when GHW Bush’s own certificates for servicemen stated it clearly [see pic below]? Why do you think the recent incompetence of the Fed and the CBs could contrast so starkly with their earlier savvy modernism? Why have banks gone to the wall, only to be rescued? Why have businesses gone to the wall and not come back? Have you not noticed how the finance is now legally centralized, even as the EU tightens its wasteful grip and the U.S.A. quietly passes its effective sovereignty to the NAU on March 23rd, 2009? Why was nothing done about immigration? Why was Islam given its toehold in western “democracies”? How do jihadis get through? Where is the promised Great Wall of Mexico?
Why are these things so? Many have written on the subject:
Some people call it socialism, some collectivism. I prefer to call it ‘democratic centralism.’
The important point to remember about this group is not its ideology but its organization. It is a dynamic, aggressive, elite corps, forcing its way through every opening, to make a breach for a collectivist one-party state. It operates secretly, silently, continuously to transform our Government without our suspecting the change is underway.
This secret revolutionary corps understands well the power to influence the people by an elegant form of brainwashing. We see this, for example, in the innocent use of words like ‘democracy’ in place of ‘representative government.’ ” [Senator William Jenner of Indiana – Feb. 23, 1954]
That quote refers to a collectivist one party state. Wild McCarthyist rhetoric? The rantings of a loony? Then how do you account for this paragraph in the Telegraph article this morning?
Democratic gains of up to nine seats in the Senate would give Democrats the 20-seat majority they need to withstand Republican filibusters and herald a new period of untrammeled one-party rule in Washington.
This is the reality of what America has just voted in, for itself:
May 18, 1972 – Roy M. Ash, Director of the Office of Management and Budget, declares that: “…within two decades the institutional framework for a world economic community will be in place…and aspects of individual sovereignty will be given over to a supernational authority.”
The notion has been running through the corridors of power for some considerable time:
October 28, 1939 – In an address by John Foster Dulles [later U.S. Secretary of State], he proposes that America lead the transition to a new order of less independent, semi-sovereign states bound together by a league or federal union.
Harry S Truman, June 28th, 1945?
“It will be just as easy for nations to get along in a republic of the world as it is for us to get along in a republic of the United States.”
Rear Admiral Chester Ward, former Judge Advocate General of the U.S. Navy, in 1975, referred to his CFR supporting:
“…submergence of U.S. sovereignty and national independence into an all powerful one-world government…”
It never ends:
1975 – In Congress, 32 Senators and 92 Representatives sign “A Declaration of Interdependence,” which states that “we must join with others to bring forth a new world order…Narrow notions of national sovereignty must not be permitted to curtail that obligation.”
Congresswoman Marjorie Holt refuses to sign the Declaration saying:
“It calls for the surrender of our national sovereignty to international organizations. It declares that our economy should be regulated by international authorities. It proposes that we enter a ‘new world order’ that would redistribute the wealth created by the American people.”
Where are these ideas springing from? Here is one source:
1966 – Professor Carroll Quigley, Bill Clinton’s mentor at Georgetown University, authors a massive volume entitled “Tragedy and Hope” in which he states:
“There does exist and has existed for a generation, an international network which operates, to some extent, in the way the radical right believes the Communists act. In fact, this network, which we may identify as the Round Table Groups, has no aversion to cooperating with the Communists, or any other groups, and frequently does so.
I know of the operations of this network because I have studied it for twenty years and was permitted for two years, in the early 1960s, to examine its papers and secret records. I have no aversion to it or to most of its aims and have, for much of my life, been close to it and to many of its instruments. I have objected, both in the past and recently, to a few of its policies, but in general my chief difference of opinion is that it wishes to remain unknown, and I believe its role in history is significant enough to be known.” <…>Kennedy spoke from the heart, as does Obama. Both were put into power by forces behind the scenes, forces in control of the chief executive, or so they assumed. In Kennedy’s case, there is a body of opinion which says he turned his rhetoric into a real belief in himself and his messianic mission. There are parallels here with Obama.
The socialist friends I have all have good hearts and really believe that it will relieve people’s suffering for society to be re-engineered and for wealth to be redistributed forcibly. They speak of “fairness” but advocate coercion to achieve their concept of it. They seem to have no notion of the importance of “incentive” in producing the wealth they will then redistribute. They are focused on “injustice” and “prejudice” and see socialism as the ony way to make things right. They speak in Kennedian language. <…>
Here is Pulitzer Award winning Professor Emeritus James McGregor Burns, in his innovation in leadership theory, which has been influential with all potential leaders of state, writing in “The Power to Lead” :
“The framers of the U.S. Constitution have simply been too shrewd for us. They have outwitted us. They designed separate institutions that cannot be unified by mechanical linkages, frail bridges, tinkering. If we are to ‘turn the founders upside down’ – we must directly confront the constitutional structure they erected.”
The extremes of right and left are no different. <…>
Some blogfriends said that America is a republic, not a democracy. I would suggest that America is an oligarchy and now it has a chief executive who has a mandate to alter the face of America, signing over vast amounts of sovereignty on March 23rd, 2009 to an NAU and no one can do anything about it because:
1. most Americans are in thrall to his charisma
2. he has the political power to ram proposals through both congress and the senate.
Worse than this is that he is naive in the exercise of that power and will be subject to advice – the wrong advice. Plus coercion.
America has just signed its death warrant as an independent nation, as Britain did some years back in Nu Labour. Now Brown has come out with his “new financial architecture” of the world and is being roundly praised for it by the Round Table. Have you looked at this in any detail? It will repay the time spent. It is now impossible for England to exist as an entity and impossible for Britain to exist either with the provisions of Lisbon and the sheer weight of intrusive EU legislation stymiing every move to relieve the suffering of the UK.
Our task is not to weaken support for the IMF and World Bank at a time when the need for surveillance and coordination across the world is more pressing, but to strengthen them by building the operational rules and architecture for the new global financial system.
Ditto for America in the nearest future. And who will defend the sovereignty of the ordinary American and uphold the constitution? Obama?
And for how long can blogs publicize what is going on? Australia has brought in internet censorship. How long until America and Britain follow suit?
Small voices will still cry out, in ever decreasing numbers, to the bitter end:
Then conquer we must, when our cause it is just,
And this be our motto: “In God is our trust.”
Read the whole of James’ post.
AURORA Adds: There’s little I can add to this, but as I stated on my previous election post, I believe the honeymoon will not end but go from strength to strength. This man is going to be buoyed up on a supernatural wave of power and influence, not seen before this moment. He will be seen to gain victories and champion causes. He may even support Israel in the beginning. More and more people will hail him as the Messiah. Watch for the unexpected, the extraordinary, the moving. Even some of you may begin to be swayed. The delusion will be strong.
Hat tip: Midnight Sun see full link below with comments
I too, have nothing to add to this brilliant research. It speaks for itself. Check each link and be sure to read the comments on Aurora’s site, some say it is good Americans have been stocking up on ammo and guns. Yes, but with such a force as this: It goes without saying that One would be prosecuted when defending oneself or family. Most of us would take that chance. How though does one defend against losing their sovereignty? A Ruby Ridge? A Waco? With such a force that would be brought together against those that value liberty..who could stand…With that said, most of us would rather stand and fight than lay down and do nothing.
This is a tough article today that many will say ‘conspiracy theory’..to which I say..follow the links..or do your own research. dig deeper and if you are still so bone headed about that which you do not want to hear..you are at the wrong blog..go visit the illusionists of the ultimate change you hope for.