See other Resistance Articles
Title: Depopulating the Masses While They Aren't Looking
Source:
Island Earth
URL Source: http://hemptruth.150m.com/articles/population_reduction.htm
Published: Jul 06, 2002
Author: The Postman
Post Date: 2008-04-23 10:02:07 by JiminyC
Keywords: None
Views: 219
Comments: 2
Introduction Today, I'm going to address a topic that many of you are already familiar with - that being population reduction. I'd like to bring everyone up-to-speed on what exactly has transpired over the past century with regards to our population programs and to some extent, what is in-store for the future. Certainly, I won't go into any detail as we have only a limited amount of time but I will attempt here to convey the general ideas. As members of the elite, we are all well aware of the lessons history has taught us. One event in particular has left its indelible mark upon us and that event was the French Revolution. From that event we learned just how deadly the masses could be to the ruling class. Afterwards, it was vowed that what took place then would never take place again. What was called for was population reduction on a grand scale. In many parts of the world, population reduction has been carried out by us in the form of famines, plagues and even wars but these approaches are generally feasible only so long as they can be carried out beyond the purview of industrialized "democratic" societies. This consideration of exposure has always been uppermost in our minds as we planned population reduction programs. Even the character of a war - be it a civil war in which we are disposing of people on both sides of a skirmish - or a "police action" such as that which took place in Iraq or Kosovo - determines the risks of exposure that are involved. In "police actions", everything must be done to ensure that the policing force never comes into direct contact with the "enemy" lest they be given a lesson in the politics of depopulation as I am now in the midst of giving here today. As our ultimate goals required that population reduction take place uniformly around the globe, it was necessary not only to devise a population reduction strategy for third-world nations but for industrialized nations as well. Whereas we could easily get away with famine or a civil war in a country like Ethiopia, population reduction in Europe or America has required a much different sort of strategy. What was called for was a way for us to depopulate the masses in these industrialized nations while they weren't aware of what was going on. That way, we could operate at a leisurely pace without fear of exposure. This would be achieved by significantly decreasing the birthrate of the masses and by significantly increasing their mortality rate. Reducing The Unborn How exactly did we effect a decrease in the birthrate of the masses? This has been accomplished through various means. First of all, we provided funding for birth control clinics and we developed new birth control measures. Much work in this area was pioneered by such notables as Margaret Sanger and Clarence Gamble of Procter and Gamble fame. Aside from the mainstream birth control approaches, we have also heavily funded surgical sterilization. Much funding has gone into abortion clinics and into maintaining the status quo regarding the legality of abortions - the latter requiring much of our effort in limiting advances made on the part of the pro-life movement which has strengthened in recent years. Funding has also gone into the development of iatrogenic procedures applied during abortions which "accidentally" result in permanent sterilization. As all of these approaches require action on an individual basis and are thus too time intensive, much research has been funded in the development of programs that provide a rise in infertility rates on a more global-wide basis. The most promising programs to-date have been those designed to control the diet and nutrition of the masses - many of which have been in-place for decades. We'll talk more about those in a moment. In addition to these approaches, the masses today don't have time to multiply - they're too busy working to pay their tiny little mortgages on their tiny little houses to have any time left over for new additions to their litters. Likewise, their incomes are also limited by various means so that they never quite feel at luxury to multiply. Anything we can do has been done. So much for the unborn undesirables. Reducing the Living Now about those undesirables who are already living. Their removal from our backyards entailed a bit more work. For starters, we made life almost impossible for various uncared-for segments of the population by promoting unhealthful practices wherever possible. We introduced new genetically-engineered diseases such as AIDS that target certain defenseless segments of the population and we then limited any social programs that threatened to bring them relief. We've fought hard against any attempts to improve the nation's healthcare system as any such improvements have typically threatened to benefit the poor. We've promoted pharmaceutical drugs with numerous unadvertised side-effects. Such side effects often include interfering with a person's nutrition. We've promoted the use of alcohol and "hard drugs" by the elimination of safer alternatives such as cannabis. We've seized control of medical research institutions through use of non-profit foundations in order to maintain rather than eliminate diseases such as cancer and heart disease. We've suppressed all alternative medicines and the history of their use. We de-emphasized the significance of good nutrition in disease prevention. We've ensured that new mothers are motivated to feed their newborn infants bottled milk formulas which are depleted of important essential nutrients - especially fats, which I will talk more about in a moment. We've effectively removed many important vitamins and other nutrients from staple foods, such as grains, by refining them and then selling the extracted vitamins to health food stores at wildly-inflated prices - effectively placing them beyond the reach of those who need them most - the poor. Foods are often vitamin fortified, but at ridiculously low levels and not with the vitamins that are most desperately needed. We were actually behind the creation of the vitamin Recommended Daily Allowances, or RDAs which have resulted in an overall reduction in vitamin levels. Via this reduction in vitamin levels, an overabundance of refined carbohydrates such as sugar, the hydrogenation process, genetic-engineering, eradication of valuable oil seed crops such as hemp not to mention the use of economics and much propaganda, we've greatly reduced the effectiveness - if not the availability - of good fats, also known as essential fatty acids. We've done everything possible to insure that those who are health-conscious are unable to distinguish these good fats from the bad ones thus causing them to inadvertently eliminate the good fats from their diets. Note, for example, that there is no portion of the USDA "food pyramid" devoted just to good fats - consequently, the food pyramid has served as a highly-effective means of encouraging people to minimize good fats in their diets. Unfortunately, in recent years there has been a resurgence in the use of supplements containing essential fatty acids by the more informed segments of the population though market pricing is helping to keep such supplements out of the hands of the poor once again. Since the turn of the century, the consumption of foods containing these good fats has plummeted while at the same time, the consumption of hydrogenated oils has skyrocketed. As consumption of hydrogenated oils greatly impairs the function of those good fats that are still available to the body, both of these trends combined have resulted in the population's overall diminished health. Thus far, the masses have not connected the six-fold increase in cancer death rates - since the turn of the century - to these trends. One significant reason for this is because pollution - in it's many forms - is automatically assumed by many to be the sole cause of cancer. Everyone is led to believe that cancer results from the addition to the body of some foreign agent. Few ever consider that it might just be the result of the absence of an essential nutritional agent instead. Of course, pollution plays a part in cancer formation, but not in the levels typically present in air, water or foods. Most persons who acquire cancer have never come into contact with significant levels of carcinogenic or cancer-causing pollution. Usually, only those persons with suppressed immune systems - a result of poor nutrition - ever develop cancer at all... Concealing this is but one reason why we need pollution, or at least the appearance thereof. It is one reason why we hype pollution. I'll address another reason why pollution is necessary to our cause in just a moment ... In addition, we've done various other things like promote the frying of foods rather than baking - again, to increase consumption of hydrogenated oils. We've reduced nutritional choices in the supermarket based on a person's income so that the poor have little choice but to purchase hydrogenated margarine and vegetable oils instead of the much more healthful choices of butter and olive oil - an example of applied economics. Refined carbohydrates such as sugar, corn syrup etc. - which greatly interferes with the metabolizing of good fats - are heavily promoted. Overall, as a result of our de-emphasizing and reducing access to nutrition in this country, the healthcare industry today is dependent on a host of ailments that would hardly exist otherwise. This dependency of the healthcare industry on the aftermath of our programs effectively allies them to our cause - whether they like it or not. Literally hundreds of ailments are now being treated symptomatically with drugs that not only don't treat the underlying nutritional deficiency but whose side-effects in many cases are much worse than the symptoms they were intended to treat! What a terrible shame. ... And those are just the people who can afford medical insurance! I mentioned earlier the eradication of valuable oil seed crops such as hemp. I should point out here the overwhelming significance of hemp in regards to our goals. Though few people in the States realize it, hemp seed is, in many ways, unmatched for its nutritional value. As it turns out, hemp had been used historically as a food source by various populations around the world for centuries and the plant had attained quite a reputation for enabling populations to actually survive famines - including, unfortunately, those caused by us. Our drug crop eradication programs were developed specifically to meet this one particular challenge. One such program that we have undertaken in recent years is the development of fungal agents that can be sprayed on hemp crops to not just destroy them but to keep such crops from being planted in the same soil in the near future. Later, I'll mention yet another important reason why hemp was considered a major threat to our goals - involving the nation's fisheries. The Sink Drain Model Though we continue to simultaneously weaken all of the masses at once, we most aggressively target those segments of the population that lie outside of the mainstream. Why? Simply because they are weaker. They've already been abandoned by the mainstream so there is no one who will come forward to help them - even if their plight were to become known by others. Fortunately, that rarely happens because we manage to keep the classes pretty much separated. On rare occasions when the classes do mix, their class and cultural differences are usually enough to keep them from transferring highly critical information. That's one reason why we need racism and crime - to keep society segregated into small, weak, isolated pockets. Other, similar techniques are used to further isolate targeted segments of the population. Church congregations, for example, are often encouraged not to associate with members of society outside their church and in addition, they are often encouraged to read from only one book - the Bible. Many thanks to Bishop Charles Henry Brent and others for helping us to create the ecumenical movement. In the end, the targeted segments are effectively isolated - cornered like wild animals by hunters. This approach makes sense for numerous reasons. We have to target someone - it may as well be those segments of the population that cannot currently defend themselves. Secondly, the weaker segments of the population are the ones that don't contribute - many of them are no longer employed in our corporations and thus, they no longer consume either. Most importantly, it takes time to reduce a population's numbers and therefore, as the populations within the weaker segments are reduced over time, some members of the stronger mainstream will have been weakened enough to replace those who have been "depopulated" in the weaker segments. This effectively makes the poorer areas on a map like the drain at the bottom of a sink. Such areas are where the poverty-stricken masses are consumed. A large part of what makes this work is that those in the mainstream middle-class - who may suspect in the back of their minds that something is going on - are apathetic, partly because they are too involved in class struggles of their own, not to mention other problems, but also because they simply believe that they aren't the ones being targeted for depopulation. Technically, they're correct in that they aren't currently being targeted - but little do they realize that a mere shake of the financial "tree" or a diagnosis of cancer in one-third of their families, for example, is more than adequate to repopulate the targeted segments for continued depopulation! In a kind of poetic justice, just as those of the middle class aren't there to help the poor as they slide ever closer to the drain, neither will anyone be there to help those of the middle class when they themselves later become the poor. That, ladies and gentlemen, is what economics is all about. The War on Independence All of our efforts mentioned thus-far would be extremely effective at raising the mortality rate of the masses except for one nagging problem - many members of the masses are not yet dependent on us for their food. As one might suspect, most of these people live in rural areas. Though they are often among the poorest of the masses, their subsistence on foods that they grow themselves has made it difficult for us to target them or others who are dependent on them. One thing our ancestors learned a long time ago was that such populations could not be significantly reduced so long as they remained this independent. Something had to be done. What we've done is to make sure that small-time independent farmers have been economically devastated. In their place, we've encouraged the market dominance by the larger, more easily controlled farming concerns. Farming subsidies and assistance programs are designed with the ultimate intent being to devastate farmers over the long term. We took control of seed banks so that heirloom seeds, which have served independent farmers for generations, are slowly being phased out of existence. In their place we promote seeds which have been genetically modified to reduce their nutritional value and ultimately, we hope to force farmers away from the practice of saving seeds for the next year's planting altogether. This will give us ultimate control of food crops. To a large extent, this attack on personal independence has contributed greatly to the movement of populations to the cities over the past century. In more recent years we have begun shutting down hospitals and other public services in rural areas, thereby making it more difficult for populations to spread further into these depopulated areas. One reason that this particular strategy has been successful is due to the fact that the masses live in constant fear of cancer and other such diseases which, as I mentioned earlier, we have done all that we can to make common-place. Regardless of whether they are independent or not, members of the masses are thus highly encouraged to stay put in the cities for fear of living too far from medical centers. Real estate in the countryside is often only available at an absolute premium making it difficult for many people to live a rural lifestyle. In addition, much land which would otherwise be well suited to supporting rural communities has come under ownership of the Federal government by way of various means thanks to the U.S. Forestry Service, the Environmental Protection Agency and other such federal agencies under our thumb. Now if we could only stop cities from expanding outward! Fortunately, our urban forestry initiatives promise to eventually resolve this one particular problem. In addition to farming, we've focused much attention also on the nation's fisheries. As 75% of the U.S. population lives along the coastlines of either the ocean itself or of the Great Lakes, this was seen early-on as a crucial step to attaining our goals. By effecting an overall decrease in landings of edible species found along shorelines, many independent fishermen have been forced to seek their livelihoods elsewhere - usually in the cities, where, of course we maintain effective control over food sources. This overall decrease in landings of near-shore edible fish species has thus far been achieved by various means, each of which falls into one of two categories - either we have targeted a reduction in an edible species directly or we've targeted a reduction somewhere in that species' food chain. As an example of the former category, anadromous fish species - those that must migrate to fresh water in order to spawn - have been in-decline for decades as a result of the creation of dams and other such obstructions that prevent them from swimming upstream and thus spawning. Another example is our encouraging the formation of red and brown tides that kill sea grass beds which are often used by food fish - not to mention their prey - as nurseries. Finally, using similar tactics, we have also destroyed significant shell beds that were relied upon by local fishermen for their livelihood. An example of the latter category involves a fish known as the menhaden that is a common prey to many edible near-shore fish species. One way in which we have targeted the menhaden at the expense of it's predators has been by simply competing with it's predators by landing large numbers of menhaden ourselves. This is accomplished by way of a fleet of specialized menhaden fishing vessels that are today mostly owned and operated by a company known as Omega Protein, their largest plant being located at Reedville Virginia - the site of Haynie's original processing operation. For those of you who aren't aware, Omega Protein is mostly owned and operated by President George Bush's old company, Zapata Offshore. Anyway, the menhaden is an oily, foul-smelling and bony fish that isn't caught as an edible species per se, but rather for the industrial uses of it's oil - one of which just so happens to be its use as a nutritional supplement sold in health food stores! Remember my mentioning essential fatty acids earlier? Although menhaden oil isn't considered to be an ideal source of these essential fatty acids, we've managed to market it to the point that it is headed for dominance of the therapeutic fish oil business nonetheless. In addition, menhaden products also dominate the supplying of animal feed businesses as well. The reason this is significant is because the amount of healthful essential fatty acids stored in an animal's tissues is dependent on the amount found in their food source - as I eluded to earlier. By being able to control the amount of essential fatty acids in the diets of chickens and hogs for example, we control the amounts that humans are able to get via their diets ... Get the picture? In addition to supporting our menhaden reduction programs, all of this provides us with additional leverage over the nutrition of the masses as well. This sort of parallelism of goals is a commonly sought after attribute of many of our programs. Now back to catching fish ... How effectively have we been able to compete against the menhaden's predators? All indications are that we have done quite well though it has required considerable effort and expense on our part. To give you some idea, we've not only made tremendous use of spotter aircraft in locating menhaden schools - we've even gone so far as to employ satellite technology! All this incredible effort and expense despite the fact that Omega Protein today maintains a monopoly on menhaden fishing! Fortunately no one questions how it is that a company that specializes in processing menhaden fish can justify the expense of satellite reconnaissance nor has anyone ever questioned by what means such an arrangement came about or why it is that an energy company such as Zapata Offshore would become interested in operating a fish meal processing company in the first place! Certainly, we must be doing something right! Now for a slight detour. Clearly, for us to compete against menhaden's predators by landing extremely large quantities of menhaden, one thing was required above all else - markets for menhaden products. We certainly couldn't justify catching massive quantities of menhaden without established markets, now could we? As mentioned earlier, menhaden oil is used in human nutrition and various other industrial uses such as the making of paints and dyes. The menhaden oil and fish meal are both used in various animal feeds; poultry, swine and ruminant, dog, cat and bird feeds and feeds for several aquaculture species. Today, Omega Protein controls 80 percent of the market selling fish meal for cattle and pigs alone. As another example of the parallelism, it just so happens that many of these markets would have been greatly threatened by the continuing availability of hemp. Prior to 1900, hemp was already considered one of the world's principle animal feeds. Hemp absolutely had to go... Other ways in which we've attempted to keep menhaden populations in-check includes our effecting a reduction in the menhaden's food chain or otherwise interfering with the menhaden's life cycle. Fortunately no one early on ever questioned the need of the national fisheries to incorporate genetics research into their programs. As such, we took full advantage of this opportunity - in many cases, funded by the taxpayer - to help us to pursue a long-term decline in the nation's near-shore fishery resources. Some of our approaches at reducing menhaden populations - aside from our over fishing of them, that is - have, in more recent years, resulted in numerous large fish kills along coastal waters. Contrary to accepted dogma, these fish kills were intentional - not freak accidents, the result of incompetence nor even nature's doing as they have often been portrayed by the media. We caused them - at least the major ones! As I've no doubt made clear by now, this was done to limit the independence of small fishermen thus forcing them - not to mention those who are dependent on them - into dependence on our food supply channels. That however is only the interim benefit derived from our doing this. What's important to keep in mind here is that by maintaining populations of key species such as menhaden and anchovy at minimal levels, we remain in constant preparedness for executing that which one day will be the "new world" order. Sorry, I couldn't help myself. Indeed, as a result of all of our hard work, within just a few short months of our executing our orders, near-shore marine ecosystems will - for the masses at least - cease to exist as a potential cornucopia and soon thereafter, thanks to other events beyond their control, the pests will be no more. Now, back to our story... Obviously, these numerous large fish kills, that we were the cause of, have to be explained somehow. To this end we have simply employed pollution - our most beloved environmental scapegoat. As always, our genuine environmentalist friends - not to be confused with those of us who often just play the part ... ... continue to lend us a helping hand in concealing our covert activities by promoting pollution as the culprit behind the destruction resulting from such activities. Many thanks to our environmentalist friends for their full involuntary cooperation. Realizing that our resources are quite limited, we have over time come to rely more and more on such assistance from the public sector where applicable. It's all way too easy, isn't it? Overall, a general decline in the nation's fisheries has resulted from these and many other such activities. Fortunately, operatives in the fisheries can merely fain incompetence and the masses can be easily fooled once again. Little do they realize that the elite were instrumental in the founding of the national fisheries service, not to mention the entire conservation movement during the latter half of the nineteenth century. The fools! To think that we gave them the Darwin Awards so that they could laugh at those "beneath" them! Pardon me - the irony is just a bit too much. I have to say that each of them deserves their own copy of this year's award, all framed and official, but of course that would cut into our profits! Many thanks to the efforts of our people at the Smithsonian, most notably, Spencer F. Baird who, in 1871 brought to the attention of Congress the "desperate" condition of the nation's fisheries! Through their dedicated efforts was born the conservation movement, upon which we've had quite a tremendous ride. Let me just say that the Bureau of Fisheries was created in response to the perceived threat that marine resources - that is, the nation's fisheries - were in drastic decline. In reality, the men who studied the problem had no way of knowing whether the nation's fisheries as a whole, were in decline or not, nor obviously did they care. All they did was to make it appear to Congress that the nation's fisheries were in decline, resulting in passage of the legislation that created the Bureau of Fisheries. In the end, the nation's fisheries have indeed declined but not because they were in need of our intervention but rather, because they received it. Over the past century or so the industrialization of America has caused a mass migration of populations into the cities. At this point it should be fully evident as to why this is desirable. If only for our own peace of mind, we need the ultimate capability to control the masses. I should point out here that to very this day, most Americans still believe that the root cause of the Civil War was the abolishment of slavery for the sole sake of the slaves. Most everyone in this room is well aware that this is a complete fabrication but for the sake of those who aren't clear as to what the actual motivation was, let me just say that whereas once, the United States was an agrarian nation of independent farmers, today, it is no longer. Need I say more? The Criminal Injustice System Now, moving on ... The criminal justice system is obviously an integral part of our population reduction strategy. By imprisoning those who commit non-violent acts, we are able to increase their mortality rate significantly in a number of ways. We encourage prison overcrowding which leads to a high rate of deaths - both from infighting and from diseases such as tuberculosis. As mentioned earlier, diet and nutrition play an extremely important role in our population reduction strategy as well. This is convenient because in prisons, as in the armed forces, mental institutions etc., we are able to enforce dietary standards according to our goals - mostly through economic means. By imprisoning those who have committed drug-related acts, in addition to effecting an increase in their mortality rate, we are also able to greatly affect the mortality rate of remaining family members. This is so because it is often the bread winner of the household that is incarcerated. This results in great economic hardship for their spouse and children and it often leads to imprisonment and health deterioration of other family members later on. Another advantage of criminalizing non-violent behavior such as drug use is that we are able to increase prison capacity significantly without removing too many truly-dangerous criminals from society thus enabling those criminals to aid us in further reducing "outside" populations. Mandatory minimum sentencing has helped a great deal to accomplish this. By now, it should be apparent why we do all that we can to discourage drug treatment programs - especially ambulatory drug treatment programs. Another very important reason why we criminalize drug use is simply to stop the use of cannabis. Cannabis or marijuana is unique in that it is one of the very few drugs that we actually do want to stop the use of but because anyone can easily grow it - even indoors - this has thus far been a tremendous challenge. The other drugs can be used to further our goals. Marijuana not only cannot be used to further our goals, as stated earlier, it's use, and indeed, it's very existence is contrary to our goals! Exposé Insurance Need we worry that the masses will become wise to our little "game"? Should we concern ourselves that they might somehow become enlightened and that our hard-won advances will be laid-out to spoil? Sure we should - what we have undertaken here is far beyond treason by any stretch of the imagination and we should never forget that no matter from what angle we view reality, one thing is absolutely clear - we of the elite are far outnumbered by the masses ... and those in this country unfortunately continue to be armed, albeit with popguns, especially in the state of Texas. Any enlightenment of the masses surely won't be as a result of their education. Some of you may not realize just how long we've been playing our little "game". It's roots can be traced back long before the American and French Revolutions were fought but those events in addition to others such as Thomas Malthus' writing of his famous essay on population in 1798 provided a major impetus to our goals. With the help of many of our "friends in high places" we managed to stake-out our claims to power everywhere possible and major accomplishments really began to take place with the advent of a very important tool in 1865. No, not the Gatling Gun - rather, the emergence of the tax-exempt charitable foundation, one of the earlier ones being the Peabody Education Fund, formed by George Peabody, founder of the J.P. Morgan banking firm. I know we likely have some Peabody descendents here whom ought to feel rather proud ... Anyway, foundations such as the Peabody Fund, and later in 1882, the Slater Fund, were initial attempts to influence public education in the United States although they were more directed at the black populations rather than the general public. As many here already know, these two funds, along with the Southern Education Board, were later incorporated into Rockefeller's General Education Board in 1902. Of course Carnegie also played a vital role as well. Many thanks to both the Carnegie and Rockefeller families for their contributions in shaping public education! Various such foundations have been utilized along the way to achieve major goals - for instance, foundations are often used to fund medical research or, more accurately stated, redirect medical research. In one of our most prized sleight-of-hand tricks ever conceived, we learned over time that there exists no better way to enact control over an organization's steering wheel than to simply fund the organization and that's exactly what we've done time and time again - and with great success I might add. Not to further belittle members of the masses but they somehow still believe that funding a good cause necessarily means that it's the good cause that gets funded. I see you get my point, now back to my original one which is that we've taken every conceivable precaution that we could over time to help guarantee that we not get caught red-handed, so to speak. Population reduction is a rather serious business - one cannot set out to do what we have done without immense care and planning. Of utmost concern early-on was that control be taken of the education process so that ultimately, members of the masses would be incapable of acquiring the tools needed to piece together history in-particular. Only the most prestigious private schools and universities would be allowed to teach their students to think for themselves - all others would only be allowed to hand out the officially accepted truth for purposes of rote memorization. A denial here, an accidental fire destroying public records there, a whole lot of propaganda and before long, history as it actually occurred was soon to be replaced by what we like to refer to as history as we say it occurred. So, how was history so effectively rewritten? By organizing! The American Historical Association for example, was founded in 1884 by members from our group such as Andrew Dickson White and Moses Coit Tyler. Historical associations and societies were created for no other reason than to centralize control. Such control was easily exerted over member organizations through the use of certification procedures and the like. In most cases, such societies didn't already exist and therefore no effort at all was necessary in taking control - an association was simply created from scratch and control over it was assumed from the very start. Being the first on the scene does have it's advantages. It's important to understand that general history wasn't all that we were interested in rewriting. To effectively increase the mortality rate of the masses, we had to control pretty much all aspects of health care and medical research as well and therefore it became necessary also to rewrite medical history to some extent. The same can be said for other particular kinds of history but I won't delve into them at this time. I will say that for reasons that in some cases will be obvious, this same approach taken to commandeer history was also taken to do the same in regards to various disciplines and services such as legal, psychology, agriculture, religion, education, medical, public health to name but a few. I don't have to tell you how effective and amazing the transformation has been in helping to keep things under wraps. As a result of our efforts at rewriting history, acceptance of anything other than the version of history as we say it occurred is virtually impossible today as we now have a monopoly on the truth. Whereas the truth used to be the truth and nothing but the truth, today, the truth is what we say it is because those who make up the masses have an innate need to belong and an accompanying fear of being different. To each of them, truth is no longer defined solely according to what is reality but also by what is considered acceptable to their peers. Anyone attempting to paint history as it actually occurred will pay dearly in peer acceptance. We make use of other techniques as well to keep things under wraps. By our promoting absurd theories in the media that have absolutely no basis in fact at all, such as reptilian UFO theories and other such nonsense, ... the overall result is that all theories - including those that are viable and actually based in fact - tend to be rejected by society as well. In effect, we group the good, or valid theory in this case, with the bad or invalid theory and society conveniently disposes of both types for us, never quite realizing that they've just thrown the baby out with the bath water! You'll recall that the prohibition of marijuana was a classic example of the application of this technique, although not so much to keep a lid on things but rather to ultimately deny the masses access to hemp or, more specifically, to hemp's highly-nutritious seeds. Clearly, the tools of psychology have served us quite well. That Dreadful New Media Let's hope that the tools of psychology continue to serve us well because, as many of you know, we are now in the midst of one of our greatest challenges ever - controlling the flow of information on that dreadful new media, the internet. As I just mentioned, one way we have sought to address this challenge is by stigmatizing anyone who even so much as whispers the word conspiracy in earshot of others. In addition, we've promoted the view that information on the internet is unregulated and therefore, not at all believable - which of course is true, but only for some of the information, not all of it. We've promoted the internet as unwholesome to children. We've even played our trump card - terrorism - claiming that terrorists learn the tricks of their trade by what they read on the internet - all to little effect thus far. To effect real change unfortunately, we need to do more than merely change mindsets - we must change laws. As maintaining the prohibition of marijuana is so pivotal to attaining our ultimate goals, we hope to set a precedent soon by passage of a bill in Congress that will make it a felony for website owners to link to other websites that contain illicit drug-related material - in particular, material that either endorses or instructs in the manufacture of drugs - our intended target being marijuana, of course. Our definition of drug-related will be interpreted quite broadly - I assure you. A bill was considered that would simply make it illegal to provide such material on one's website but we concluded that the effect would not be the same as our making it illegal also to merely link to such a site as the latter approach accomplishes what the former cannot - it results in a level of nervousness - ok, call it terror - that prevents a lot of website owners from even considering such a link to a site that may, at some point in the future, contain this sort of material ... My apologies - I hadn't intended discussing the internet at all here so let's move on if we may ... U.S. Politics - One-Party Short of a Democracy Next, I'd like to talk about politics. I surely won't touch on much here that most of you aren't already aware of but some points here ought be made nonetheless. Politics continues to be an effectively-utilized tool by us as the masses continue to believe that voting can actually make a difference. Today, politics effectively serves no other purpose than to give the perception that the masses maintain some control. Any actual control had by the masses exists only at the state and local levels and then only in rare instances. What we have here in this country, at least at the federal level, is effectively a one-party system. As we already have our goals mapped-out a decade in advance, the entire façade of politics is really no more than a big chess game in which we control both sides of the board and in the process of maintaining the appearance that the masses have control, we have our goals superimposed on those that are of interest to the public. Though our moves have been planned well in-advance, like the weather service, we sometimes don't know for sure where the "storm" will hit until it actually does. No offense to our folks in the weather service - they haven't yet made good on their promises with all their new toys yet, but I'm sure that they will eventually. Tying into the New World Order What I've addressed thus far is population reduction and to a limited degree, how it was brought about, but I've mostly only touched on population reduction programs from the viewpoint of a western industrialized country such as the United States. As most of you know, similar measures are being carried-out world wide, as they need be in order for our ultimate goals to be achieved. These measures, to a large extent, have only been made possible as a result of the initial formation of what is known - even by members of the masses - as the New World Order, the phrase popularized by ex-President, George Bush. What exactly is this New World Order? What did President Bush mean by this phrase? To keep within our agenda, I will adopt a somewhat simplistic definition of what is meant by New World Order. The New World Order could best be described as simply being the collusion between the world's governing elite against the masses - period. Why is this called a New World Order? It is called this because such collusion in-effect means the dissolution of national boundaries and their replacement by logical boundaries of power that effectively separate we, the elite, from them, the masses. In reality, sovereign nation states are defined by their national borders - everyone within the boundaries of a state sharing common goals and ideologies and I might add, loyalty to the state. Traditionally, such nation states have gone to war either over territorial disputes or when their nationalistic goals or ideologies clashed. Ultimately, under an openly-established New World Order, wars will be fought only for the control and containment of the masses. Until the transformation into this New World Order is complete, existing national boundaries - though meaningless in terms of sovereignty in many cases - will continue to exist on maps, in textbooks and historical accounts only to help maintain the illusion for the masses that nothing has changed - so as not to wake the sleeping giant. Indeed, lending credence to their mistaken beliefs, wars will still be fought and brave members of the masses will continue to die in great Malthusian battles over these very national borders that, in a very real sense, exist only in their minds. Such wars, fought over national boundaries, not only help us to maintain our façade while reducing populations but like so many other tricks we've employed, they allow us to fund our global war machine as well. Another example of this is the war on "drugs" which has also been moderately successful at helping us to achieve this particular goal. As should be obvious, a two-state world, controlled by the less populous of the two states, is in need of a great deal of military might. In closing, I continue to be amazed that the masses of the industrialized nations of the world could be fooled to the very extent that they have been. To their credit, we have made things rather confusing for them. Imagine the look on American's faces were they to realize that we, the elite, built up both Nazi Germany and the Soviets prior to World War II! Priceless, absolutely priceless! Thank you all!
Have you ever stopped to consider all the strange, odd, basically unexplainable events, behavior etc. that take place all of the time? You know what I mean - those things that, no matter how hard you think about them, they just don't quite add up. Things such as: AIDS and other odd diseases suddenly appearing out of thin air; pfiesteria, a once harmless organism mutating in a matter of decades to become the "cell from hell"; the Central Intelligence Agency misidentifying a pharmaceutical plant in the Sudan for a weapons manufacturing facility; the imprisoning of marijuana users for life because "drug use is harmful"; the refusal to fund needle exchange programs that save lives because doing so "sends the wrong message to kids"; the banning of tryptophan, an essential amino acid, because it is "dangerous"; ending the Gulf War without so much as capturing the Iraqi leader and then refusing to lift economic sanctions - resulting in the death of half a million civilians - so long as the Iraqi leader remains in power; cancer death rates multiplying six-fold since 1900 despite billions spent on research; the international ban on CFCs despite third-world dependence on them, the Columbine high school massacre committed by two high school students, etc. Don't these things strike anyone as just a bit odd?
What if a single hypothesis could explain these strange, seemingly unrelated events and more? This document - for the sake of exploring just such a hypothesis - depicts a hypothetical speech given before a gathering of the ruling elite. The hypothesis represented by the speech can be thought of as a sort of grand unification theory that attempts to tie the above events, and many others, to a common, underlying elitist agenda. It is mostly based on conclusions drawn from work thus-far invested in my timeline; therefore, look there and in the many referenced documents in order to find support for the hypothesis. I strongly encourage readers to read these recommended books and other sources that are listed in the timeline references or on my links page. Keep in-mind that as this document represents a hypothesis, it will undergo a continuous stream of modifications as I learn more and more. Please check back for updates.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: JiminyC (#0)
YES THEY DO! AND I AM MAD AS HELL...AND I'M NOT GOING TO TAKE IT ANYMORE!!!!!!!
Law Enforcement Against Prohibition "Corporation: An entity created for the legal protection of its human parasites, whose sole purpose is profit and self-perpetuation." © IndieTx Thanks for the link bump.
"The difference between an honorable man and a moral man is that an honorable man regrets a discreditable act even when it has worked and he is in no danger of being caught." ~ H. L. Mencken
Have you ever stopped to consider all the strange, odd, basically unexplainable events, behavior etc. that take place all of the time? You know what I mean - those things that, no matter how hard you think about them, they just don't quite add up. Things such as: AIDS and other odd diseases suddenly appearing out of thin air; pfiesteria, a once harmless organism mutating in a matter of decades to become the "cell from hell"; the Central Intelligence Agency misidentifying a pharmaceutical plant in the Sudan for a weapons manufacturing facility; the imprisoning of marijuana users for life because "drug use is harmful"; the refusal to fund needle exchange programs that save lives because doing so "sends the wrong message to kids"; the banning of tryptophan, an essential amino acid, because it is "dangerous"; ending the Gulf War without so much as capturing the Iraqi leader and then refusing to lift economic sanctions - resulting in the death of half a million civilians - so long as the Iraqi leader remains in power; cancer death rates multiplying six-fold since 1900 despite billions spent on research; the international ban on CFCs despite third-world dependence on them, the Columbine high school massacre committed by two high school students, etc. Don't these things strike anyone as just a bit odd?
"There is no 'legitimate' Corporation by virtue of it's very legal definition and purpose."
-- IndieTx
#2. To: IndieTX (#1)
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest