A.M. Freyed
Infowars.com
June 6, 2012

Lord Jacob Rothschild … displays surprising consideration for the Occupy movements. “I have a lot of sympathy with people who protested about some of the excesses in the world of finance,” he told the Report. –Jerusalem Post (6/1/12)

George Soros did not fund Occupy Wall Street … [However] Soros has donated at least US$3.5-million to an organization called the Tides Center in recent years, earmarking the funds for specific purposes. Tides has given grants to Adbusters, an anti-capitalist group in Canada whose inventive marketing campaign sparked the first demonstrations [of Occupy Wall Street] last month … Tides declined to comment. – Reuters (10/13/11)

Where Have You Gone, Ferdinand Pecora? … Remember those big-shot bankers being grilled on TV in January? [2010] That was the first hearing … This is actually round 2. We’re having it because we forgot about round 1. Let’s hope the second commission is as successful as the first one. – Salon (5/5/12)

Parliament adopts ambitious approach on financial transaction tax … The proposed financial transaction tax should be better designed to capture more traders and make evasion unprofitable, said the European Parliament in its opinion adopted on Wednesday. – European Parliament News (5/23/12)

UN calls for global financial transaction tax … A global financial transaction tax could raise up to $250bn (£156bn) a year that governments should use to fight poverty, reduce inequality and protect human rights, a group of United Nations-appointed experts said yesterday … The UN … called for the European Union to take a lead by introducing a tax across the eurozone. UK Telegraph (5/15/12)

The world is in the grip of a vast fakery.

A vicious cartel of central banking families is trying to consolidate an official world government and is willing to use every devious trick to do so.

There is, in fact, increasingly clear evidence of elite connivance in the most prominent of modern false flags – Occupy Wall Street. All prominent advocates for OWS are likely either duplicitous or dupes. What other conclusion is there to draw?

Despite denials, Soros is obviously funding OWS trickery (see above). And now one of the biggest Rothschilds has come out and endorsed the damn thing.

That’s how they work, of course. It is an open conspiracy. Responsibility is gingerly tipped in order to pre-empt suspicion.

This “limited hangout” worked well in the 20th century but is falling apart in the 21st because the Internet itself provides us with a key to the elites’ larger, secretive patterns. The bones of the conspiracy are daily exhumed and exhibited.

It is an encouraging certainty that this global elite – funded by the mind-boggling control 150 central banks or so – is under sustained and effective attack from the Internet. The result is that this bloodline (or whatever it is) has “doubled down” with a spate of false flags and other gambits designed to create chaos and then generate … a “new world order.”

WikiLeaks and Julian Assange were likely a false flag, designed to attract people’s attention and generate credibility while promoting misleading or trivial information. Anonymous was penetrated and seems to be a false flag operated with the same intentions. Occupy Wall Street is also likely a false flag, as we can see when we trace the funding stream.

It is easy to tell the false flags of the elite. Their instrumentalities always attack the private sector while purveying government – the larger the better – as the solution.

Even Assange – though he pretends to be libertarian – is actually enamored of the same “transparency in government” that other statist apologists like to propose … including such public banking advocates as Bill Still and Ellen Brown.

Lift the curtain to find a sustained attack against Internet small-r republicanism and its anarchic tendencies. The idea, always, is to decry the problem while soft-peddling authoritarian solutions.

The last time this sort of full-on program was launched was likely in the 1960s with the advent of counter-culturalism. There is considerable evidence these days (thanks to exposure on the ‘Net) that the leading lights of, say, the hippy movement were voluntarily or involuntarily doing the will of the elites of the time.

The countercultural episode of the 1960s was at once virulently anti-authoritarian and yet, at the same time, socialistic and pro-government. There was no understanding of Money Power itself – or at least larger trends were not verbalized.

Instead, as now, corporations and banks were vilified while those truly in charge of the world were never discussed. Central banking received a pass, as it does today among many dedicated OWS participants and patrons.

The OWS movement begins with the “one percent” that are held to be responsible for the problems of modernity including serial wars and incipient depression. But this is questionable. Politicians, bankers, even generals are “gofers.” They are the hired help.

Look to the .00001 percent to find the “controllers” – the real people of power. To these people a billion dollars is pocket change. Count them in the hundreds, not thousands – and certainly not millions. They are the ones purveying false-flag movements via promotional facilities such as Tavistock.

The ultimate animating idea behind such false flag movements is to create pressure for more regulation of Wall Street and secondarily to generate a global transaction on financial instruments. Taken together, this double-pronged attack will surely spell the beginning of the end of whatever is left of financial entrepreneurism in the world.

What the world needs is more freedom and the monetary competition that presidential candidate Ron Paul suggests. What it HAS is monopoly central banking – ever a disaster – first creating tremendous monetary euphorias and then terrible, depressive busts. Further enshrine its mechanisms (already too-deeply rooted) via regulation and taxes, and one guarantees ruin until the end of time.

There are, alternatively, other facilities such as the popular and emergent “public banking” movement that are apparently intended to keep finance within the purview of the government.

The powers-that-be control the world via mercantilism, the use of government to promote private agendas. They care little whether money creation is quasi-private or entirely public – just so long as money itself continues to be constructed via fiat and is maintained by monopoly.

It is no surprise that the top moneymen in the world are seen to be in support of such “anti status-quo” movements as OWS. The hoped-for results of such apparent false flags is more regulation of the nearly extinguished private sector and the erection of immensely intrusive worldwide taxes to be administered ultimately by the UN.

This is the agenda that someone like a Rothschild endorses. And the “sympathy” he feels.

For additional links see www.AmericanFreed.com.


Related Articles


Comments