Tag Archives: disinformation

The “Eastern Saviours” Meme, Veterans Today, and Sniffing Out Alt-Media Disinformation

I recently had a comment exchange on the site with a user named Jerry, who brought to my attention some information that Veterans Today had put out in conjunction with “psychic” Ben Fulford (still holding my breath on that Ninja Army by the way, Ben). The implication of the video built upon the “BRICS Saviour” meme, going so far as to imply that the buildout of Agenda 21 infrastructure in the East was a positive development for Free Humanity. 

Jerry’s comment in full: 

I spend so much time on the Alt Media because it seems to be the best compared to so much of anything else. I have also experienced GOD (not God nor gods), so INtuition is my filter.

I have recently come across two sources of info, that seem related, concerning the “cause” of so many things on this planet.

I will see if I can find them and paste them here, I intend to spread them (links) around, but one came from Veterans Today, which I think that you bad-mouthed, so maybe you can tell me what you think of the link, and how it relates to your own view of their info (it seems they promote Fulford and his White Dragon folks) … the “second” subject, that to me is most important, because it so reminds me of The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion (which fake or not DO SHOW the intentions and methods used resulting in what we have today) …

https://plus.google.com/106206657604068245588/posts/11ZDGXeqABJ

I realize this thread is rather out of date, but maybe you will find it and answer, Thanks, j.

As traffic here at Stateless Homesteading is increasing month to month, I sometimes forget that I’ve picked up thousands of new readers who are surprised to learn that my work refutes the “White Dragon Society”/”BRICS World Order” narrative propagated in so much of alt-finance media. I post my response to Jerry here in full in the hopes that other readers may gain some perspective on exactly where I’m coming from when I say the rise of the East is an integral aspect of the “New Multipolar World Order” being erected around us at an ever-increasing pace, not an opposing force to Globalism.

My Response

Appreciate the comment, Jerry, and I’m glad you find this site at least somewhat valuable – always nice to talk with someone whose spiritual conceptions are similar to your own!

As for VT and the Gordon Duff “disinfo mill,” I don’t mean to give the impression of “bad mouthing” or attempting to discredit VT, if only because they do a fine job of that all by themselves:

“I don’t know know any imaginable way you can get information…First of all…Because, about 30%, based on what I believe…and you know what? Who says I’m right? According to my belief, and I have as good of, uh access to information as anyone in the world, probably, anyone I know of. About 30% of what’s written on Veterans Today, is patently false. About 40% of what I write, is at least purposely, partially false, because if I didn’t write false information I wouldn’t be alive. I simply have to do that. I write…anything I write I write between the lines.”

-Gordon Duff, VT
https://archive.org/details/GordonDuff.FalseInformationControversy

By Duff’s own admission, 70% of what he writes is a lie, and the other 30% is merely his personal opinion. The latter half I take little issue with – everyone has their own way of seeing things, myself included, though I try my best to leave my own color commentary until the end of my articles and let the primary sources speak for themselves.

…which leads me to my main point of discontent with Duff, Wantana, Fulford, et. al., which is that they have ZERO primary sources which I (or anyone else) can objectively analyze. It’s always “super secret insiders” or “channeled alien psychic woo-woo” or “magical White Dragons taking down the Khazarian mafia.” Never evidence. If Stateless Homesteading is founded on the ethos of “Open Source” research, then VT is its foil: Closed Source.

For example, the group that VT regularly refers to as the aforementioned “Khazarian Mafia” have members who are widely known to us (Kissinger, Rockefeller, Rothschild, Brzezinski, etc.) Yet their supposed “mortal enemies” in the White Dragon society (or Red Dragon society, or just Dragons… they change the name so often it’s hard to keep up) have not a SINGLE public figure whose name we’re allowed to know?

A few years ago, I casually entertained the notion of “super secret Eastern insiders” who were going to “take down the evil Western bankers.” Gold flows from West to East seemed to suggest this might be the case, so I went looking for evidence and primary sources to back up the contention. Many metals analysts (like Jim “The Golden Jackass” Willie, another talking head who offers no primary sources to back up his claims) had long held that the “White Dragons” controlled the PBOC; but when I looked, all I found was people like Zhou Xiaochuan, a Bank for International Settlements member who’s all aboard the IMF’s SDR basket nonsense:

http://www.bis.org/review/r090402c.pdf

Others, still, said the “White Dragons” were the founders of the New Development Bank(s), but here, too, a little digging only yielded evidence of Western puppets like Jin Liqun, former Vice President of the Asian Development Bank (a vassal of the World Bank and America’s Neomercantile playing piece in the South China Sea) and now President of the AIIB. Who, by the way, has been hard at work signing “Sustainable Development” pacts (Agenda 21) with the World Bank:

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/business/2015-07/17/content_21308703.htm

The video you posted, in part, was actually the genesis of my first article on this site; when Fulford and his merry band of “psychics” started propagating the notion that Agenda 21 and the Transhuman borg beehive society was A GOOD THING, my “INtuition” (as you so aptly put it) said otherwise. And so did the primary sources:

http://statelesshomesteading.com/china-21-anglo-american-sustainability-in-asia/

Since then, I’ve uncovered ample evidence (from both “Western” and “Eastern” sources) that suggests supranational coordination towards building a “New World Order” (for lack of a better term) and little to no evidence of “White Dragons” coming to save us all from ourselves. Re-stating my entire thesis here would make this comment even more long in the tooth than it already is, but I’d suggest this article as a starting point for where I’m coming from:

http://statelesshomesteading.com/dr-bricslove-or-how-alt-media-learned-to-stop-worrying-and-love-the-nwo/

If there’s anything I despise, it’s being lied to. I think that’s true of everyone in “conspiracy” culture, as being lied to by TPTB is why we’re all here in the first place. So when there’s people claiming to be movers and shakers in the “Truth” community who knowingly lie to their audience, I don’t think these people deserve our time or attention. Lying to your readers as an author is tantamount to lying to yourself – the worst kind of lie, the kind that makes you an untrustworthy person.

Duff’s assertion that he doesn’t know “any imaginable way you can get information” is patently silly – this site is LOADED with information in the form of primary documentation and verifiable source material, painstakingly assembled for readers to dig further into should they so choose. I would posit that Duff makes this ridiculous claim to dissuade people from looking at actual evidence, as if one takes a peek under those proverbial covers, they’ll quickly find VT caught with its pants down.

Thanks again for taking the time to comment, Jerry, and I hope our difference of opinion on this matter won’t put you off to my future writings; I sincerely hope this is the first comment exchange of many!

Kind Regards,
Rusticus

Dr. BRICSLove or: How Alt-Media Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the NWO

Since its inception, a common theme running throughout the entries here at Stateless Homesteading has been the notion that the “East vs. West” dialectic presented in both mainstream and off-mainstream media is not an organically-manifested conflict, nor does it represent the end of Globalization, but is instead a managerial shift from from a “unipolar” World Order to a “multipolar” New World Order.

Yet despite my best efforts in demonstrating, with primary sources and documented evidence, the “ties that bind” East and West in globalized efforts as varied as Agenda 21 or the gradual emergence of the SDR’s multi-currency basket as the preferred “One World Currency” of both China and the Anglo-American Establishment, the onslaught of propaganda proclaiming that the BRICS/AIIB construct is to spell “death to the Western banking empire” continues to grow.

Seemingly immune to the inaccuracy of the unsourced “predictions” being churned out by the “BRICS World Order” rumor mill, fantastic fairy-tales of White Hats and White Dragons fly unabated, despite the breakdown of the BRICS Saviour meme at its core. While these pundits prognosticate about the end of Agenda 21 in the East, official statements from both Jin Liqun (former Vice President of the Asian Development Bank, now AIIB President) and Xi Jinping completely contradict this narrative. So, too, do the notions espoused surrounding the Yuan/RMB attaining world reserve currency status stand in stark contrast to the macroeconomic reality we now face: A China whose currency has been accepted into the SDR basket (as predicted by myself and others). A PBOC that has begun issuing Chinese reserves denominated in SDRs. Anglo-American think tanks proposing not a gold-backed RMB as so many have foreseen, but a “pseudo” gold-backed SDR, and a Chinese Central Bank head all too willing to comply.

The real tragedy of this disconnect between fiction and reality, however, is not merely the perturbing dismissal of primary sources, but that in the abandonment of uncomfortable Truths for reassuring fiction, those alt-media aficionados who believe the Chinese-led Eastern coalition to be in opposition to Globalism find themselves in unwitting support of the next phase of the New World Order, euphemistically marketed as “multipolarism.”

While the above may seem a contradictory statement to those still mired in the “BRICS World Order” PR pumpage, the afterbirth of the Rhodes Roundtable known as Chatham House has done us all a great favor in the publication of its November 2015 policy paper, “International Economic Governance: Last Chance for the G20?

International Economic Governance: Last Chance for the G20?

Not that the “Royal” Institute for International Affairs has undergone some profound outpouring of empathy for human freedom and autonomy – though I doubt you were expecting that, Reader. They have, however, demonstrated succinctly that the rhetoric surrounding the rise of the East in Globalist circles is virtually identical to the “Asian exceptionalism” being propagated throughout alternative media today.

Save for one key distinction, of course: The Chatham House version of events in no way implies some cartoonish overnight disappearance of the structures of national and global governance, but instead, an assimilation of regional powerbrokers into a Globalized financial order. Not only does this article series seek to demonstrate that a “World Federalism” of distributed power blocs like the BRICS and AIIB is the “transformation” of Globalism being sought in the 21st Century, but to show, within the context of history, that this has been a linchpin in the gambit for global governance for at least half a century.

Goodbye Pax Americana, Hello New Multipolar World Order

A central element of the “BRICS Saviour” meme, in addition to the geopolitical and financial rise of Asia, is a corresponding end to American (and thus Dollar) hegemony. The funeral pyre of “The West” will inevitably serve as fertilizer for the Phoenix of Eastern multipolar institutions like the BRICS and AIIB, and here, many an alternative media blogger and Chatham House are in complete agreement:

Screenshot from 2016-05-16 12-33-22

In keeping with the G20-centric title of the paper, Chatham House decries not only the unipolar U.S.-led global coalition, but its chief “old World Order” working group, the G7; as an organization set up in 1973 and designed expressly to support the mechanics of floating currencies inherent with the petrodollar, the G7, like the unipolar American Empire it represents, must make way for the “new working group on the block.” And what better working group to lead the charge in a “multipolar world of more dispersed economic power” than the “inclusive” G20, of which China takes the reigns later this year?

G20 Logo

The logo for the 2016 G20 meeting in Hangzhou, China – complete with all-seeing eye symbolism. Cue Alan Parsons Project.

Doubtlessly, Chatham House has high hopes for President Xi’s coming G20 stewardship, with such grandiose aspirations as “improving global governance” and “implementing the UN’s 2030 development agenda” already pledged by the would-be Chairman:

From Chatham House publication "Towards a More Effective G20 in 2016," published in March of this year

From Chatham House publication “Towards a More Effective G20 in 2016,” released in March of this year

Yet despite Chatham House’s full acknowledgement and support of the new multipolar world now emerging, a critical element in furthering this agenda has yet to come into play: The IMF’s Christine Lagarde refers to it as the “Great Reset.” Many alt-media soothsayers use the same terminology, appending any number of personal delusions (from the end of Globalism to the playing out of Biblical Prophecy) to this pending event. It is known to the RIIA simply as a “Bretton Woods moment:”

Screenshot from 2016-05-16 12-36-36

Like the public relations onslaught from various “BRICS Saviour” authors, Chatham House expresses a certain amount of frustration in the lack of a fundamental restructuring of the global economy post-2008 – the lack of this “Great Reset”. The commonalities in narrative regarding the presence of such a monetary event on the horizon, however, aren’t damning in and of themselves – after all, the “deep changes in the world economy” referenced above are becoming increasingly known to even the layman. What is disconcerting is the synchronous manner in which Chatham House and various segments of alt-media view the world – and in part, how they view the New World:

Screenshot from 2016-05-16 12-37-34

This is where things get particularly interesting; Chatham House overtly decries the “US-dominated world economic order” represented by the IMF, World Bank, and various “Anglo-Saxon” economic institutions as “unfavorable” and an “imposition.” This unipolar old order, being inherently opposed to the new multipolar one being promoted therein, must be restrained in order for the agenda at large to progress – in both the eyes of Chatham House as well as the “Eastern exceptionalists” in our midst:

Screenshot from 2016-05-16 12-39-36

Much to the chagrin of many a BRICS PR agent, Chatham House appends the much-lauded buzz-word of the “New World (Economic) Order” not to the Pax Americana discussed previously, but to emerging markets, specifically China. This New Order, Chatham House proclaims, must no longer allow the United States to project its power through Globalist institutions. “King Dollar,” too, Chatham House deems to be an unnecessary unipolar burden, having outlived its usefulness.

The above passage has profound implications. From the mouth of the Anglo-American Establishment itself, it is emphatically declared that the American Empire is not now and never was the “New World Order,” but a mere stepping stone towards regional federationism, the “true” face of global governance! What’s worse, vast swaths of the “resistance” have somehow come to the fallacious conclusion that the death of American hegemony is the end of Globalism.

Nothing could be further from the truth.

Screenshot from 2016-05-16 12-40-16

Chatham House goes out of its way to establish that the sacrifice of the United States and its influence over international organizations pales in comparison to the survival of “the system” itself. The transformation to a multipolar system, they say, is an inevitability. After over half a century of being used by the Globalists as a blunt instrument of imperialism, usury, and terror, the proverbial pitbull of the old Order must be put down in favor of the multilateral puppy mill headquartered in the East.

For those disparate souls still ensnared by the belief that the “BRICS World Order” will somehow spell the end of Bretton Woods institutions like the IMF and World Bank entirely, this author is here to inform you that this is simply not the trajectory the world is on. As opposed to the machinations of Globalism and its governing structures vanishing with the flick of Eastasia’s magic wand, an altogether different sleight of hand is set to debut on the world stage: The handover of these Globalist institutions to the East.

Screenshot from 2016-05-16 12-42-18The message from Chatham House to America is unabashed: “You are no longer the driver of economic Globalism. Step out of the vehicle (the IMF) and allow Eastasia to finish the cruise towards Technocratic Neofeudalism.” Growing increasingly impatient with even the ghost of “representation” known as Congress, the implementation of increased voting rights at the IMF for the BRICS/AIIB nations and thus, an end to American veto power, can’t happen soon enough in the eyes of the RIIA. In the meantime, though, Europe and America must not wait to act – the World Bank and IMF head must represent this newfound multilateralism, declaring that Lagarde’s potential replacement could (and it is implied should) be Chinese. The installation of Globalist puppets like Zhou Xiaochuan or Jin Liqun to such a position would certainly herald the beginning of this handover in earnest. Chatham House also suggests that America should “show support for the AIIB and other emerging-market initiatives (read: BRICS),” though I suspect the “Good Witch of the East vs. the Wicked Witch of the West” dialectic is far too useful a propaganda initiative in selling the changeover to the global populous to be abandoned just yet.

All of this, of course, is a radically different outcome from the almost Utopian bill of goods sold by alt-media authors publicizing the “Great Reset” as a quick (albeit painful) end to Free Humanity’s woes. Some have already begun to subtly modify their stories to integrate these inconvenient facts, proclaiming that globalism itself is not the genesis of our problems, but that we merely have a “bad King.” Still embroiled in the paradigm of competing nation-states, too many have forgotten Globalism’s true nature as a multinational Superclass with little to no national identity to speak of.

The end of Pax Americana, the regionalization of the globe, a federalized global government under which all these seemingly disparate regions will be bound – these aren’t ideas cobbled together since 2008 in some floundering attempt to retain the current model of Western imperialism, nor are they a tacit acceptance of the “unforeseen” rise of the Second World. This plot has existed, in various forms, since at least the establishment of the post-War institutions the East is set to inherit.

The Multilateral World Order: An Old Plan Comes to Fruition

For the student of forensic history, ruminations about the “multilateral” and “multipolar” era we’re now on the cusp of are not difficult to find – even among some of the most frequently cited works in alt-media. Take, for example, the oft-mentioned 1997 book by Zbignew Brzezinski, The Grand Chessboard. While best known for the establishment of the “Brzezinski Doctrine,” (the encirclement of the Eurasian Heartland as opposed to its direct invasion) The Grand Chessboard includes many references to a multilateral world structured in regionally-administered blocs – specifically citing the economic rise of Asia:

The Grand Chessboard by Zbignew Brzezinski, pg. 153

The Grand Chessboard by Zbignew Brzezinski, pg. 153

In the chapter entitled, “The Far Eastern Anchor,” Brzezinski makes note of Asia as the new engine for world economic activity; and how does he suggest the Anglo-American Establishment best direct this synthetic “Eastern miracle”? Through the establishment of “multilateral structures” prevalent in the West that, as of 20 years ago, did not formally exist in the East. The Asian “working groups” (and the Asian Development Bank that supports them) as they existed at the time were not satisfactory in the eyes of Brzezinski.

In retrospect, however, it’s clear that Brzezinski’s aforementioned “web of multiltaeral and regional cooperative ties,” as confirmed by Chatham House, the United Nations, and the AIIB itself, have begun to emerge in the form of the dual Chinese-led development banks:

From the Chatham House policy paper, "International Economic Governance."

From the Chatham House policy paper, “International Economic Governance.”

Just this past week, a prominent alt-media commentator declared, “That [the rise of the AIIB] is a quantifiable way to show that China is taking a different direction than the Zbignew Brzezinski Grand Chessboard model.” This statement stands in such stark contrast to the actual text of the book in question that I’m forced to question whether people have truly digested and internalized these primary sources or are merely parroting one another’s unrealities.

Brzezinski is hardly alone among the cadre of Globalist “luminaries” promoting this multilateralism, nor is he the first – another protege of the Rockefeller family, the infamous Henry Kissinger, is not to be excluded in tracing this meme’s origins. From 1956 to 1960, Nelson Rockefeller hand-selected a then-youthful Kissinger to head up what was known as the “Special Studies Project.” The Commission was staffed with the task, as stated on pg. 35 of the Project’s literary adaptation, of “helping to shape a New World Order.” Its complete findings, published in 1961 as Prospects for America: The Rockefeller Panel Reports, are nothing short of a guidebook towards the multilateral future we now face.

I recommend this excellent blog post for a more thorough background on Prospects for America, but a select few passages deserve mention here; chiefly those regarding (you guessed it) the development of regional multipolarism in the East:

regional189

In discussing the topic of “multinationalism,” a regional bloc structure organized globally is a foregone conclusion to Rockefeller’s Special Studies Project. And how does the Kissinger-led, Rockefeller-commissioned panel suggest these “regional arrangements” should be made?

regional190

Not only should regionally federated blocs be organized worldwide, the latter “suggestions” given by the panel are almost universally at play in the East. Joint efforts in “economic development, common markets, and free trade areas” are exactly the purpose served by the BRICS and AIIB in our modern era, especially as these “regional agreements” are being rapidly integrated into the Globalist borg:

AIIB Secretariat Jin Liqun signs a cooperation pact with the World Bank - from China Daily

AIIB Secretariat Jin Liqun signs a cooperation pact with the World Bank – from China Daily

The “join accord on monetary and exchange agreements” are also quickly progressing within these new Eastern blocs; Zhou Xiaochuan, a longstanding member of the Bank for International Settlements and head of the People’s Bank of China, has been in support of such a joint accord in the form of the SDR for nearly a decade now. With the acceptance of the RMB into the SDR basket as of last December, we continue to see (as with the AIIB) the integration of regional blocs into globalized structures, exactly as the Project foresaw half a Century ago:

Zhou Xiachuan pictured w/French Finance Minister Michel Sapin, vowing to broaden SDR use earlier this year - via Xinhua

Zhou Xiachuan pictured w/French Finance Minister Michel Sapin, vowing to broaden SDR use earlier this year – via Xinhua

These supranational institutions are readily constructing the mechanisms by which the East will be fully integrated with the Anglo-American Establishment’s longstanding goal of global governance. Beginning in earnest with Nelson Rockefeller, Henry Kissinger, and Richard Nixon’s Neomercantile “opening of China” briefly after Prospects for America‘s initial publication, the timing is hardly coincidental. The trade imbalances globalism has wrought upon the people of Western society, too, are now a matter of the historical record – all as dictated back in 1961:

china75b

Conclusions

Despite this author’s dour take on the state of alternative media analysis regarding the BRICS/AIIB construct, not all alternative commentators don rose-colored glasses when gazing Eastward. There are any number of alt-media websites that examine the “East rising” meme within the full context of history.

Among these ranks is Catherine Austin Fitts. A former insider at both Dillon, Reed & Co. and the H.W. Bush Administration, Ms. Fitts is a whistleblower whose credibility is matched by few in our field. Perhaps due to the insider information yielded by her connections in a previous life, Catherine offers the most succinct breakdown of the “multipolar World Order” I’ve yet to come across when she says:

“What’s been happening is when Snowden came out with his revelations and they got publicized, you had a reaction in the BRICS nations to say, ‘These systems have no integrity. We need to build our own systems. Whether they’re internet and digital communications systems, payment systems, or clearance systems – and we need to be able to transact without going through the dollar. We need to build currency swaps and interaction.’

Now I think that ultimately what’s happening is that you started a process in 1995 where the United States tried to build out a global empire leading towards global governance, and the U.S. has stalled in many different fields and for a variety of reasons. They’re pregnant halfway, stuck in the mud, everybody mad at them, and it just wasn’t getting done. And if you look at what Snowden and Putin and the BRICS are up to, I think that’s Mr. Global deciding that the U.S. needs a little competition – that we have a better chance getting to a global currency and global governance through the Hegelian Dialectic of competition between Plan A and Plan B.

Catherine Austin Fitts

And therein lies why the “East vs. West” pseudo-conflict as currently portrayed is so disheartening to watch: One of the oldest tricks in the Globalist playbook, the Hegelian Dialectic, is being actively fomented in order to advance the cause of a “multipolar New World Order”… and a significant portion of alt-media has taken the bait.

It’s easy to see why so many people have relegated themselves to the belief that the post-“Great Reset” world led by the BRICS nations will end all transnational woes – the idea that “everything will be fine due time” is quite alluring bait, indeed. But in accepting the external, supranational synthetic “saviours” offered to us, our attention is drawn away from the internal, localized organic solutions that can thwart the machinations of Globalism at their core, be they Eastern or Western.

My intention in destroying the “Noble Lie” of this dialectic is not to instill hopelessness; far from it, Reader! It’s an attempt to empower – to acknowledge the true potential in the coming “Bretton Woods moment.” Despite the best efforts of the Machiavellian schemers mentioned throughout this article, the “Great Reset” will by no means be a completely orderly transition. While it may be true that we’re already well along the path outlined by the Brzezinskis, Kissingers, and Pickfords of the world, its success still depends upon our compliance.

As is the modus operandi of the ruling class, significant economic hardship is almost certain to be a key factor in coercing humanity’s consent for the multipolar World Order. In true Ordo ab Chao style, any number of top-down solutions will be offered (with weighty concessions) to “make the pain stop.” But what if, in ripping off the Band-Aid of our engineered “world economy,” people found the wound far less debilitating than the media talking-heads proclaimed? What if local trade, agriculture, and energy production were resilient enough on a wide scale to compete with multinational trade deals? What if individuals chose their own currencies and were in a position to reject the SDR-denominated system to be foist upon them?

Doubtlessly, we are still far from this vehemently decentralized vision of the future – and perhaps we always will be. Perhaps Free Humanity is simply not prepared for the hard work of genuine autonomy this time ’round.

But I do know this: We’ll never attain these lofty goals by pretending some external force will do it on our behalf.

The Future of America and Gold Standards, a Reader’s Perspective and My Response

In my recent post asking for audience feedback (in which I received a lot of valuable commentary – thank you), I received a series of comments from a fellow Truth-seeker named Peter. He shares a unique perspective from his experiences in Europe during the collapse of the USSR, which I’d recommend reading:

Comment #1
Comment #2

My response to Peter is a long one and includes a few perspectives I’ve yet to share in the form of proper articles, so I re-present them here in the hopes you might find them valuable. I’m also in the process of working on an entry about a recent Chatham House policy paper on the unfolding of multipolar World Order in 2016, so stay tuned for that as well.

My Response

I appreciate your unique perspective on this issue, especially as it pertains to alt-media programming of Americans vs. Europeans. I wonder how much of this is, as you suggest, a managed perception or merely a difference in culture, as the “prepping/survivalist” mentality of Americans has existed (in its modern form) since at least the age of the Cold War; in America, for example, there were/are no massive public works programs like bomb shelters or food stores as there were in the Soviet Union – Americans were urged to do this of their own accord. “Prepping” as opposed to “being prepared for.” That’s not to say I discount the possibility of some sort of “second American (color) Revolution,” as the breaking down of large nation-states to be (re)federalized under a new system would certainly weaken their ability to participate in this new “World Federalism.” The rest of the world has experienced hard times in a manner that America hasn’t in nearly 100 years, so we’re certainly overdue. As you say, only time will tell.

Of course, I wasn’t around to experience the dissolution of the USSR, but from what you’re saying there was a sense of relative affluence before the detonation of the country. There is no such affluence in America anymore. There is virtually no manufacturing, no jobs for the youth outside of the service sector, and those higher-paying jobs typically require a healthy dose of University brainwashing, which of course means indebtedness. In short, there’s little left to rob. In my brief time on this planet, I’ve watched this country go from a form of opulence to severe wealth dislocation; there are pockets of the country where reinvestment in infrastructure is strong, but many more that look like parts of the Third World. For example, if you were to ask a citizen of Detroit or Cleveland when the “economic collapse” is coming, they’d say it already came and went, and in the context of those cities they’d be right. And this is of course without mentioning the severe deterioration of physical and mental health, as most Americans have been poisoned (GMOs) without their realizing it over the past 20 years.

As I see it, there are three primary differences between the breakdown of Soviet satellite states and some hypothetical breakdown of the “United” States (though these are by no means the only differences).

  1. Americans are heavily armed and it’s hard to imagine a managed uprising in this country that doesn’t include significant bloodshed or resistance; much easier to control and direct a mob with Molotov cocktails and clubs than one with guns, which (in my opinion) is one of the main reasons Americans are being “slow-killed” by poisoning of water and food and “slow-robbed” via economic booms and busts as opposed to some overnight sea-change.
  2. Unlike the USSR, which had infrastructure to plunder by the West, American companies are no longer “American.” They’re sufficiently globalized and their wealth diffused enough to leave this country behind without thinking twice, as they already have in the post-GATT/Uruguay Round world. The TPP will only accelerate this. It’s a similar process to the looting of the USSR, but it’s being done in slow-motion and has only accelerated since 2008.
  3. We’re entering an era unlike any other we’ve seen in history with the rise of low-level algorithmic AI, robotics, and automation, and thus, I think it very difficult to extrapolate from history any clear picture of the future from where we stand today. For once, the phrase “this time it’s different” may ring true. For example, what is the future of Imperialism if you no longer need human soldiers to occupy a country (or at least significantly less humans) and use robots in their place? What is the future of “sweat shop Capitalism” if all manufacturing is completely automated? In this regard I have far more questions than answers.

As for the notion that there is some secret Chinese elite working on behalf of Free Humanity as in your linked article, I find this to be ridiculous wishful thinking if not overt disinformation. American corporations and capital built modern China. Anglo-American wealth managers, through the LBMA, have fixed metals prices and managed the wealth transfer from West to East since Day One. The BRICS concept was the brainchild of Goldman Sachs, and the PBOC itself are readily integrating themselves into the IMF’s SDR system. As such, I think the “Global Monetary Reset” your linked article mentions will include elements of a commodity/currency basket, but I’d be hard-pressed to call this a positive development.

 

Zimbabwe is indeed a resource-rich nation, though I would caution the idea that the IMF’s interests in Zimbabwe are fundamentally any different than China’s. Take, for example, Mongolia, which has been pumped dry of all her material wealth by the Chinese for decades now. The average Mongolian should have pockets overflowing with gold, but instead that wealth has ended up in the coffers of the PBOC. I see no reason why, in the long run, African nations will not be treated the same way.

There’s much more to say on this topic, but I would also caution your notion that a “Gold Standard” is in any way “better” than fiat standards in terms of control of populations. In fact, I’d say in many ways it’s worse. I’ve considered dedicating an entire article to this concept and may do so in the future, but I’d recommend a reading of Eustace Mullins’ original work on the Federal Reserve.

Unlike most of the researchers who followed in Mullins’ footsteps, he starts the history of monetary debauchery in America not with the creation of the Fed, but 50 years before, recounting the managed monetary crises of 1873, 1893, and 1907. Needless to say, the devastation they wrought couldn’t have been brought about without a Gold Standard. The monetary pendulum swings throughout history from “sound money” to “fiat money,” but the power behind the proverbial curtain never actually changes.

“He who owns the Gold makes the Rules.”

I’d also note that I’m not an atheist, merely an “anti-religionist.” I believe in “God” and have experienced significant evidence for this concept, but not in the manner of a “Bearded Man in the Sky” that’s outside of (and apart from) myself. But that’s a topic for another day!

I truly do value your personal experiences on these issues, Peter, and thank you for taking the time to respond.

GUEST POST: Let’s Cut the Crap, Vladimir Putin is Helping to Usher in the Globalist NWO

A very thought-provoking and thoroughly-sourced article by Ken of RedefiningGod. It’s a long read, but if you’re a regular here at Stateless Homesteading, this shouldn’t dissuade you!

On the morning the Turks downed the Russian airliner, I stumbled across this article from notorious disinformation mill Veterans Today…

vtputin

It is such a good example of East/West dialectic propaganda and the “Putin as Savior” con that I decided it would be a good teaching tool for helping people to get real. And given all the confusing narratives that swirl around Putin and the current world situation, I think the best approach is to focus on two fundamental, telling things…

1) Putin’s cooperation in the globalists’ 9/11 operation, and

2) Putin’s promotion of the globalists’ UN as the solution to our current woes.

So let’s get started…

PUTIN AND 9/11

Even if one looks at Vladimir Putin from a naive, conventional perspective, he is a former KGB officer and is therefore fully familiar with the concept of false-flag terror. This being the case, it would not have escaped his attention that on the day of the 9/11 attacks, three New York high-rises fell after only two were hit by aircraft. So as an intelligence professional, he would have known that something was fishy on the very first day. And in the days following the attacks, Russian intelligence merged with holes in the US government’s official story would have made the inconsistencies quite glaring. This raises an obvious question…

Why did he spend the next 14 years playing along with the 9/11 “Official Story”?

In the immediate aftermath of 9/11, Putin stuck to the globalist talking points…
911puttalk
…From the BBC. Raw (untranslated) video of Putin making his remark on Bin Laden can be found here
putbinyou

And here are some key excerpts from the BBC article along with my comments…

>>> No proof needed

Mr Putin, who is in Brussels for meetings with European Union and Nato leaders, told reporters: “For us it is already clear. The only thing we do not know is the exact role he (Bin Laden) played (in the terror attacks on America). <<<

So Putin joined the globalist minion chorus in blaming the 9/11 attacks on Osama Bin Laden. This being so, could it be that Russian intelligence was unaware of Bin Laden’s close relationship with the CIA? Given that Bin Laden was a key figure in Russia’s war in Afghanistan, you can be sure they knew all about his CIA ties. And this means that Putin was attributing 9/11 to someone he knew was a CIA asset. For any reasonable person, this strongly suggests the possibility that the attacks were a false-flag operation conducted by the CIA, but Putin said nary a word about that, did he?

>>> The Russian president criticised Saudi Arabia for refusing to let the US launch attacks against Afghanistan from bases on its territory. <<<

So in addition to blaming the 9/11 attacks on Bin Laden, Putin was a cheerleader for the US attack on Afghanistan. One wonders if he was compensated for his support by being given the Russian distribution rights for Afghan opium.

>>> BBC Europe correspondent Justin Webb says President Putin is likely to try to persuade EU leaders that they, in turn, must be more willing to accept that Russia needs the freedom to take what actions it deems necessary in its ongoing battle against rebels in Chechnya. <<<

And this section brings us to Putin, Russian intelligence, and their own false-flag attacks against the Russian people. The Russian government are no strangers to the art of statecraft, and they too have used 9/11-style attacks to launch military action in places like Chechnya. See the Russian Apartment Bombings and the Beslan School Massacre for examples of their operations.

Getting back to Bin Laden and Afghanistan for a moment, have a look at this section of his Wikipedia bio…

Bin Laden met and built relations with Hamid Gul, who was a three-star general in the Pakistani army and head of the ISI agency. Although the United States provided the money and weapons, the training of militant groups was entirely done by the Pakistani Armed Forces and the ISI.”

So Bin Laden was connected to Hamid Gul, and can you guess who sat on the Editorial Board of Directors of Veterans Today until he died this past August?…
vtgul
…from Veterans Today

CIA to Bin Laden to Hamid Gul to Veterans Today — interesting connections, no? Truth be told, these high-level intelligence agents all work for the same people (the people who control all the money, the globalist central banksters) and they all know each other, which is why Putin’s support of the “blame Bin Laden” meme is all the more ridiculous. And if you are unfamiliar with what a rat’s nest of spooks and fraudsters Veterans Today is, have look at…

1) VT’s Chairman, Gordon Duff: Shady as Hell: The Veterans Today / RT / PressTV Disinformation Conglomerate (Part 1 – The Amazing Gordon Duff)
2) Gordon Duff’s company, Adamus Defense Group: The Veterans Today / RT / PressTV Disinformation Conglomerate (Part 3 – Gordon Duff’s “Adamus Group”)
3) VT’s Advisor, Leo Wanta: The Veterans Today / RT / PressTV Disinformation Conglomerate (Part 2 – Deconstructing the Bizarre Tale of Leo Wanta)

These guys are heavily involved in selling the East/West dialectic and the “savior” Putin to alternative news readers, which is why they put out garbage like the article featured at the top of this entry.

Now back to Putin…

Lest you think that Putin’s playing along with the Official Story was just BBC’s spin of his words, here are some things straight from the Kremlin website:

> Putin and Bush together pressed “all countries” to join the war on “terrorism” after 9/11…
911putkrem3
…From Kremlin.ru

> In the following month, November 2001, Putin visited the US and talked about Afghanistan during a speech at Rice University…
911putkrem2
…From Kremlin.ru. So even by the Kremlin’s own words, he was supporting the US invasion of Afghanistan and calling Bush’s stance “well grounded.” Yep, that’s a real truth-teller for ya.

> From there, Putin went on to visit Ground Zero in New York…
putin911
…From Kremlin.ru. If you read the article, you’ll see that he played it totally straight: he laid a wreath and expressed sorrow and solidarity over the “terrorist attack.”

> And Putin also sat for an interview with National Public Radio…
911putnpr
…From Kremlin.ru

I located the transcript of that interview on NPR.org. Here are two key excerpts…

>>> Question 17:

Mr. Siegel: President Bush now speaks of Osama bin Laden as “the evil one.” He uses the word “evil.” Is he also exaggerating now, and is it also a slogan for the day, or do you think that’s true?

President Putin: Actually, I think President Bush is being very mild in his choice of words. I have other definitions and epithets to offer, but I, of course, am being restrained by the fact that I am talking to the media and this is hardly appropriate.

The thing is that the people that you have just referred to, terrorists, especially terrorists who base themselves on man-hating fundamentalist ideas, these people, these terrorists, don’t really treat the rest of humanity as human beings. We are not even enemies, as far as they’re concerned. We’re just dust. We’re nothing and we’re a bunch of nobodies. And as people, these criminals deserve the most serious of attention and the most rigorous of treatment. <<<

So when questioned on Bin Laden, Putin expressed no reservations; he backed up President Bush’s narrative with gusto.

>>> From the Question 18 answer:

President Putin: …And I’m not afraid to say that openly, and I can tell you why, because exactly two years ago Russia was the first to come across the kind of terrorism that the Americans had to deal with on Sept. 11. And, of course, the scale was not as large but it was just as horrendous, where, in downtown Moscow and in other cities of the Russian Federation, residential buildings, apartment buildings, were exploded. And as a result of those acts of terror, hundreds of completely innocent people died. <<<

This passage reveals why Putin didn’t blow the whistle on Bush and 9/11. It’s because both he and Bush are globalist agents, and both he and Bush had conducted 9/11-style false-flags on their own people in order to advance the globalist agenda, both domestically (by tightening control over their people) and internationally (by drawing nations into multilateral efforts to fight “terrorism”).

Putin hasn’t told the truth about 9/11 because it simply isn’t time yet. The globalists had much to do after 9/11 to get us to where we are today, and now that they’re about ready to spring the Good Cop beats Bad Cop con, you’ll finally hear Putin speak the truth (some time between now and September of 2016).

[Part 2 – 27-28 November 2015]

PUTIN AND THE UNITED NATIONS

During Putin’s post-9/11 US tour in November of 2001, he also made a notable stop at the United Nations…
911putun
…From Kremlin.ru. Have a look at what the Russian article said about it…

>>> Mr Putin, in his turn, actively supported United Nations efforts against international terrorism, and stressed the necessity for all countries to comply with the resolutions and decisions of the UN Security Council and General Assembly. Mr Annan thanked Russia for its vanguard role in the UN’s fight against terrorism.

They also had a detailed discussion about the political settlement in Afghanistan and measures to prevent the country from turning into a hotbed of international terrorism. Mr Putin and Mr Annan agreed that decision-making on the future of Afghanistan was mainly up to Afghans with active assistance from the international community. <<<

So as you can see, both Putin and Annan were in with Bush on casting 9/11 as a real “international terrorist” attack and on “liberating” Afghanistan so it would stop being a “hotbed of international terrorism” (and start being a plantation for international opium production). But why, you ask? Because in order to bring the peoples of the world under UN/NWO control, the globalists must create global problems that require global solutions. One of the global problems they have purposefully manufactured is “international terrorism”; another is “manmade” climate change, and you’ll hear much more about this one in 3 short days…
cop21
Source

Besides Putin’s trip to the US, another very notable thing happened in November of 2001:the public was introduced to the “BRIC” concept. And it was done by none other than our good friends at Goldman Sachs
oneillbricsfull
…Here is a little about the paper’s author, Jim O’Neill, from Wikipedia

>>> Terence James “Jim” O’Neill, Baron O’Neill of Gatley (born 17 March 1957), retiring chairman of Goldman Sachs Asset Management, is a British economist best known for coining BRIC, the acronym that stands for Brazil, Russia, India, and China—the four rapidly developing countries that have come to symbolise the shift in global economic power away from the developed G7 economies

He joined Goldman Sachs in 1997 and he was appointed as the head of global economics research in 2001, which is also when he published the seminal BRIC paper…

On 28 May 2015 he was created a Life Peer as Baron O’Neill of Gatley, of Gatley in the County of Greater Manchester. <<<

Isn’t it interesting that Goldman Sachs’ Head of Global Economics Research (and a darling of the London Establishment), “Baron O’Neill of Gatley,” was the one who started the BRICS movement? And from that point on, the globalists began to slowly divide the G20 into “shirts and skins” in order to run the East/West dialectic. The G7 shirts would be given the role of the bad guys, and the G5 skins (the BRICS) would be given the role of the good guys. Since the public have been raised from childhood on good guy vs. bad guy stories, letting the “good guys” bring in the NWO would be a nice, easy way to win the public over to the new system.

The slow transition from the post-9/11 love-in to the current-day East/West dialectic conflict began a year after “Baron” O’Neill unveiled the BRIC concept. As the globalists moved the US towards the invasion of Iraq, Putin took the public stance of opposing “unilateral” action…
iraqputuni
…From CBS News

As you can see, Putin was calling for compliance with the UN from both Iraq (in its weapons programs) and the US (in sticking to the UN’s multilateral approach instead of taking unilateral action). Making unilateral action by nation-states look bad while making multilateral actions within the globalist UN framework look good is a core element of globalist propaganda. Neutering the nation-state and empowering the global central government is what globalism is all about, and that’s what “good guy” Putin is selling. As the CBS article goes on to say…

>>> Putin said Russia agrees with United States that it is important to “make sure that Iraq has no weapons of mass destruction in its possession.” But he added that “we do believe that we have to stay within the framework of the work being carried out within the United Nations.” <<<

Now if we step back for a moment and ponder all this, we see that there are two globalist agendas in play at the end of 2002: 1) the war on terror agenda and 2) the dialectic conflict agenda. In the war on terror agenda, the globalists were using the US to forcefully restructure the Middle East through invasions and color revolutions. And in the dialectic conflict agenda, they were building a counterbalance (the BRICS) to the US’ “increasingly insane unilateral actions.”

Putin’s support for both of these agendas was demonstrated after the Iraq invasion took place in 2003. Have a look at this article from 2004…
put2agenda
…From CNN

Reading this article, one might ask him/her self, “If the Russians were really opposed to the Iraq War, why would Putin reveal ‘intelligence’ that supports the position of those who started the War?” The answer is simple: because he was supporting both globalist agendas…

> As the article states, the Iraq War was facing domestic criticism, so Putin said what was needed to help fend off opposition to the war on terror agenda. Since the globalists still had several years worth of work to do in the Middle East, Putin had to help keep the operation on track.

> At the same time, he had to keep up the public stance of opposing the war so the dialectic conflict agenda could continue to develop. At the time the CNN article was written, there was still two years to go until the BRIC nations held their first unofficial meeting at the UN.

So by talking opposition from one side of his mouth and providing support from the other side of his mouth, Putin followed the globalist plan to a T.

A few years later, the East/West dialectic began to take material form. Here is something from the Kremlin website on “Cooperation within BRIC”…

>>> Political dialogue within the BRIC format began in New York in September 2006, when their foreign ministers conferred during the 61st UN General Assembly. Since then, the BRIC foreign ministers have met four times, including at a full-scale meeting in Yekaterinburg on May 16, 2008. The joint statement adopted as a result of the latter meeting formulated common approaches to crucial issues on the international agenda. <<<

So it was in the womb of the United Nations that Baron O’Neill’s BRIC spermatozoon found its target, and the BRIC alliance was born there nearly five years later. A full-scale meeting was held three years after that, which gave rise to a statement on their joint agenda in May of 2008. Before we examine that statement, though, we must have a look at what Putin said at the Munich Conference on Security Policy in February of 2007.

At the Conference, Putin unveiled the “world order dialectic” that we have become so familiar with over the past several years. This is from the transcript of his speech (which can also be watched on YouTube)

>>> what is happening in today’s world – and we just started to discuss this – is a tentative to introduce precisely this concept into international affairs, the concept of a unipolar world.

And with which results?

Unilateral and frequently illegitimate actions have not resolved any problems. Moreover, they have caused new human tragedies and created new centres of tension. Judge for yourselves: wars as well as local and regional conflicts have not diminished. Mr Teltschik mentioned this very gently. And no less people perish in these conflicts – even more are dying than before. Significantly more, significantly more!

Today we are witnessing an almost uncontained hyper use of force – military force – in international relations, force that is plunging the world into an abyss of permanent conflicts.As a result we do not have sufficient strength to find a comprehensive solution to any one of these conflicts. Finding a political settlement also becomes impossible.

We are seeing a greater and greater disdain for the basic principles of international law. And independent legal norms are, as a matter of fact, coming increasingly closer to one state’s legal system. One state and, of course, first and foremost the United States, has overstepped its national borders in every way. This is visible in the economic, political, cultural and educational policies it imposes on other nations. Well, who likes this? Who is happy about this?

[In these paragraphs, Putin introduces the PROBLEM: a United States that is running wild in the world trying to impose a unilateral order. He also expresses the collective REACTION (“This is visible in the economic, political, cultural and educational policies it imposes on other nations. Well, who likes this? Who is happy about this?”). Watch now as he promotes the SOLUTION: the BRIC alliance, multipolarity, and the UN…]

The combined GDP measured in purchasing power parity of countries such as India and China is already greater than that of the United States. And a similar calculation with the GDP of the BRIC countries – Brazil, Russia, India and China – surpasses the cumulative GDP of the EU. And according to experts this gap will only increase in the future.

There is no reason to doubt that the economic potential of the new centres of global economic growth will inevitably be converted into political influence and will strengthen multipolarity.

In connection with this the role of multilateral diplomacy is significantly increasing…

I am convinced that the only mechanism that can make decisions about using military force as a last resort is the Charter of the United Nations. And in connection with this, either I did not understand what our colleague, the Italian Defence Minister, just said or what he said was inexact. In any case, I understood that the use of force can only be legitimate when the decision is taken by NATO, the EU, or the UN. If he really does think so, then we have different points of view. Or I didn’t hear correctly. The use of force can only be considered legitimate if the decision is sanctioned by the UN. And we do not need to substitute NATO or the EU for the UN. When the UN will truly unite the forces of the international community and can really react to events in various countries, when we will leave behind this disdain for international law, then the situation will be able to change. <<<

So there you have it. The globalists are using the United States to do all the dirty work in restructuring the world for the UN-centered NWO, and they are laying all the blame for the damage on the US nation-state, not themselves or their UN. At the same time, they are building up the BRICS as heroes who will save the world from the “rampaging American unipower” by bringing about a STRONGER UN which “will truly unite the forces of the international community and can really react to events in various countries.”

As you can see, Putin is all about bringing in a United Nations that is able to dominate the nation-states of the world, including the US. And this is reflected also in the joint statement from the first full-scale BRIC meeting. If you read through the statement, you’ll realize very quickly that it’s all about the UN. Allow me to take you on a tour of the key points…

> According to the BRIC alliance, what kind of world order should we have?…

“The Ministers reiterated that today’s world order should be based on the rule of international laws and the strengthening of multilateralism with the United Nations playing the central role.”

  • One with the globalists’ UN playing the central role.

> According to the BRIC alliance, how do you make the UN stronger like Putin suggested at Munich?…

“They reaffirmed the need for a comprehensive reform of the UN with a view to making it more efficient so that it can deal with the current global challenges more effectively. The Ministers of Russia and China reiterated that their countries attach importance to the status of India and Brazil in international affairs, and understand and support India’s and Brazil’s aspirations to play a greater role in the United Nations.”

  • Translation: “Reform it by giving the rest of the BRIC nations permanent seats on the UNSecurity Council.”

> According to the BRIC alliance, how do we solve the world’s economic malaise?…

“The Ministers noted that sustainable development of global economy in the long-term as well as finding solutions to the acute global problems of our time, such as poverty, hunger and diseases are only possible if due account is taken of the interests of all nations and within a just global economic system…

The Ministers spoke in favour of intensifying the dialogue to achieve the internationally agreed development goals, primarily the Millennium Development Goals, on the basis of global partnership for development. They supported international efforts to combat hunger and poverty.”

  • By conforming to the UN’s Sustainable Development rules and reaching the UN’s Millennium Development Goals of course.

> According to the BRIC alliance, how do you end the scourge of terrorism?…

“The Ministers unequivocally condemned terrorism in all its forms and manifestations, committed for whatever purposes. They reiterated that terrorism constitutes one of the most serious threats to international peace and security and that the international community should take necessary steps to enhance cooperation to prevent and combat terrorism. They particularly highlighted the importance of the UN cooperation framework and the need for all member states to implement international conventions of the United Nations and UN Security Council resolutions on fighting terrorism.

The Ministers emphasized the importance of the implementation of the UN Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy in all its aspects and expressed their opinion that all member states should make concerted efforts towards expeditious finalization of a Comprehensive Convention on International Terrorism at the UN.

  • So we end globalist organized and funded terrorism by fully complying with the globalistUN’s Counter-Terrorism Strategy. Why didn’t I think of that?!

> According to the BRIC alliance, is manmade climate change for real?…

“The Ministers spoke in favour of strengthening international cooperation to address climate changein the context of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change and the Kyoto Protocol. They expressed their desire to work closely together in order to carry out the Bali Action Plan.”

  • Yep, it’s real, and everyone needs to follow the UN plan to mitigate it.

It was after this joint BRIC statement was released that the Kremlin posted the “Cooperation within BRIC” statement, and the latter contains a passage that we also need to see…

“BRIC is a loose group of countries including Brazil, Russia, India and China, the largest economic growth and political influence centres among emerging economies. These countries have a substantial integration potential in their respective regions.

So what do the Russians mean by “substantial integration potential in their respective regions”? They are talking about a BRIC role in helping integrate the world’s nations into the United Nations Development Regions…
ungroupings

Take a moment to think about the continents of the world:

In North America, the globalists have the US to lead the UN integration effort;
in Western Europe, they have the EU to lead the integration.

Now let’s add the BRICS…

In Eurasia (the middle part of the Europe/Asia landmass), they have Russia to lead the integration;
in Asia, they have China and India to lead the integration;
in South America, they have Brazil to lead the integration;
in Africa, they have South Africa to lead the integration.

Can you see how the BRIC alliance helps pull the developing world into the UN’s regional system?

With all this laid before us, we see that Putin and his BRICS alliance are helping bring in a New World Order centered on a region-based United Nations. And in doing this, they are stopping the evil plans of the Western globalists, right?

Wrong.

The Western globalists’ plan for the New World Order has always called for it to be UN-centered and region-based. They published the blueprint for it back in 1961, and here are some excerpts from pages 35 and 26 (please pardon my crooked scanning)…
pfa35
nwovision26
UNNWO35

Can you guess from which book these excerpts were taken? It was this one…
prospectforamerica
…And it was the result of a Rockefeller-funded initiative called the Special Studies Project.

Can you guess who was the director of the Project? It was Vladimir Putin’s personal friend, Henry Kissinger…
kissputfriends
…From the New York Times

So Putin is helping implement the NWO his pal Henry Kissinger helped design back in 1956…
kissputie
…To learn more about this subject, read The Rockefeller Plan for the BRICS New World Order, in their own words…

Now that I’ve shown you what Putin and the BRICS are up to — using their own verifiable words — it’s time to state the obvious…

PUTIN’S CULT OF PERSONALITY AND THE BRICS ALLIANCE
ARE BOTH GLOBALIST FRONTS
PURPOSE-BUILT TO DRAW THE WORLD INTO THE NEW WORLD ORDER
BY CONVINCING THE PEOPLE THE EVIL WESTERN GLOBALISTS HAVE BEEN STOPPED
AND THE IMPERIALIST POWERS HAVE BEEN DEFEATED.

If this reality causes you to lose your false hope, good. False hope must be released in order to grasp on to true hope. And false solutions must be rejected in order to make way for real solutions.

[Part 3 – 29 November 2015]

VETERANS TODAY AND DIALECTIC PROPAGANDA

Now that we’ve explored what Putin and the BRICS are really about, it’s time to turn our attention back to the laughably absurd Veterans Today article that inspired this essay. As we look upon it, let’s make some observations, address some key points, and find a reason for hope.

POINT 1 — The first thing of note is the author, Preston James, who describes himself as aSocial Psychologist with “numerous” intel contacts.
prestonsp

If you wanted to mindfu*k a person – change his or her thoughts, feelings, and behaviors using social stimuli conveyed through mass media – whom would you employ? Why, a social psychologist of course. The controlled mainstream and alternative media are all staffed by such professional mindfu*kers. Their bios will show a background in psychology, intelligence, think tanks, and/or military psywar. Just have a look at who else sits on the Veterans Today Editorial Board of Directors
khrus

It’s important to realize that when you read Veterans Today, you are subjecting yourself to psywar. Their job is to mindfu*k you into accepting both the East/West geopolitical dialectic and the Christ/Antichrist spiritual dialectic.

POINT 2 — Take note of the fearful imagery…
horsemen
…and fearful words they use in the article…

>>> And these “most evil criminals in history” fully realize that in order to take over the whole World they will eventually need to establish their own centralized massive military forces and secret police power.

Most normal folks would define such crimes against humanity as raw tyranny and psychopathy beyond imagination.

And that is exactly what the system is that these Globalists are trying to engender, Worldwide Tyranny and their own 24/7 surveillance system coordinated together to produce what is best described as a virtual boot in the face of all humanity 24 hours a day, seven days a week withno end ever. [“with no end ever”: this sounds like hell, doesn’t it, and hell is the same concept they use to scare you in the Christ/Antichrist dialectic] <<<

Fear is a very powerful force within the human psyche, and it is the mind-killer. If they can keep you in fear and present you with a simple good guys vs. bad guys fairy tale that requires no thought, they are doing your thinking for you. You can no longer afford to allow that. Here is something I previously wrote about their use of fear in the East/West dialectic…

BEGIN EXCERPT>>> 1 – They set up a China-centered alliance as an opposing force to the Western alliance.
This part of the strategy was hinted at in the mainstream press in this 2002 UPI article, titled “China Wants Its Own ‘New World Order’ To Oppose US Version.” It is common practice for the Cabal to use opposing forces to achieve their ends, and they always make sure they have influence or control over both sides.

2 – They have been driving the world public into the hands of the Chinese alliance.
How have they approached this, you ask?

> They have widely publicized a heinous New World Order planned by the Western Powers while simultaneously publicizing a benign New World Order planned by China and its allies (thus establishing danger from one side and safety from another).

> They have instigated outrageous and provocative action, both economic and military, by the Western powers (this adds a new insight into the open-for-all-to-see Wall Street / City of London criminality and recent Western military boondoggles in Afghanistan, Iraq, Egypt, Libya, and Syria).

> They have broadly exposed damaging information about Western nations, especially the US. This is the motivation behind WikiLeaks, Snowden, and a thousand smaller disclosures. And after Snowden outed the NSA’s activities to the general public, where did he run to hide? First to China (Hong Kong), then to Russia. So what is the psychological message? China and Russia (the BRICS alliance) is where you run for safety from the evil US, its Western allies, and all their horrible behavior.

It is really very simple: the Illuminati built a rabbit trap (in the BRICS alliance) that looks like a nice, safe hole to hide from danger. Now they are beating the bushes (with the Western powers) to drive the rabbits toward the trap. <<<END EXCERPT

As you read the Veterans Today article, note how it serves to scare people away from the West and towards Putin (and the stronger UN he will bring in). Can you see how the rampaging Western horsemen in the picture would scare rabbits towards the BRICS trap?

POINT 3 — Take note of the references to BABYLON and LUCIFER in the article. This is part of the Christ/Antichrist spiritual dialectic the globalists are also trying to sell the awakening public. If you look at some of the author’s previous work on the “Secret Space War”…
jamesaliens
…you’ll begin to see that the…

“bad unilateral NWO” vs. “good multilateral NWO” conflict
is supposedly part of a larger
“bad aliens” vs. “good aliens” conflict.

Before you write the guy off as a nutter, though, it’s important to note that it was none other than the Rockefellers who launched the UFO Disclosure Movement (see Why are the Rockefellers and the Jesuits guiding the UFO Disclosure Movement?), and the Vatican has been talking about aliens as well (see The Vatican is preparing to introduce the Anunnaki to us). As insane as it all might sound, this ET stuff actually appears to be a real part of their agenda. And if you read the article, you get a basic idea of the two sides they are presenting to the public:

The “Bad Aliens” – “…subterranean Reptoids who are luciferians, evil to the core and allegedly working very hard to set up a Globalist NWO system using the ‘mystery Babylon religion’…”

The “Good Aliens” – “the so-called actual invading aliens from outer space in the final battle will turn out to be God’s army against the aliens (Dracos or Reptoids) which come up from underground to fight at the battle of Armageddon.”

So the Antichrist side is the US, the West, and the Luciferian lizards, and the Christ side is Russia, the BRICS, and the angel army from outer space. Sounds like an Ed Wood movie…
edwood
…does it not? But the globalists might actually try to put on such a show. If you are interested in delving into this particular rabbit hole, I recommend you read Obama and the 2nd Coming. It’s a good primer on what to expect.

And now we find a reason for real hope…

Point 4 – Note that the article attempts to address the growing awareness of Putin’s dialectic role…

>>> The Russian Federation under President Putin’s leadership seems to be a major exception to this apparent Worldwide Globalist control matrix.

Some fear Russia is just playing an assigned dialectical role and not really against the NWO System that these Globalists are trying to shove in place. <<<

The fact that they even mentioned this tells us the War of the Narrative is turning against them. If their “Putin as hero” fairy tale were holding up, they would make no mention of the dialectic out of fear of drawing attention to it. They brought it up because they had to bring it up — they had to do something to combat it.

They even went so far as to slightly distance themselves from Putin in an effort to feign reasonability and open-mindedness…

>>> Until President Putin releases all this Intel to the Russian Mass Media and to the Alternative Media on the Internet, we must reserve judgment as to his true motives despite how promising they now appear. <<<

Of course, this distancing is just for show. They have always been tireless promoters of Putin’s cult of personality…
putfeargod
…(Link)

The article also offers a way for Putin to prove he’s really a hero and not a dialectic roleplayer…

>>> Now is the time for Putin and the Russian Federation to clearly show it true hand if it is legitimate in its fight against the Globalists by doing a big public Intel dump. <<<

Given that Putin’s good guy role in the dialectic is to…

1) block the West (like he’s doing in Syria),
2) EXPOSE the West (like he did with the Turks), and
3) ultimately defeat the West,

…what the article suggests is essentially this…

“Please, Mr. Putin, prove you’re not a dialectic roleplayer by doing exactly what the dialectic calls for you to do.”

How ridiculous is that?

And therein lies our hope: they are losing control of the narrative. This might seem like a small thing right now, but the complications this unleashes on the globalists will grow over time.

Love always…

[Addendum 1 – 29 November 2015]

PUTIN VS. THE WEST AT THE CLIMATE CHANGE SUMMIT

With the Paris Climate Change Summit just hours away, it’s time to look back to the G20 Summit that happened earlier this month. Here is an excerpt from Update 87

BEGIN EXCERPT>>>

[Addendum 10 – 16 November 2015] – East versus West on Climate Change

According to a Bloomberg Business article titled As Terrorism Unites G-20, Climate ChangeExposes Divisions

>>> The divide at the G-20 initially emerged over whether countries will back a more “differentiated” approach, where developed nations carry an extra burden, or “shared” emissions responsibilities, which would require developing nations to make bigger cuts, according to officials who asked not to be named…

The BRICS nations called for a greater focus on emissions pledges to be “differentiated” based upon national circumstances, suggesting they favor industrialized nations doing more to limit emissions than developing ones. <<<

This last paragraph is in keeping with Putin’s reported skepticism on manmade climate change:Putin Believes Global Warming ‘Is A Fraud To Restrain Developing Nations’. So this argument over “differentiated” measures versus “shared” measures might end up being the reason cited for Putin’s potential blocking of a climate deal at the upcoming summit.

In addendum 3 of this update I asked, “What kind of show will they put on, a cooperative love-in or a breakdown between West and East?” Looking at the back-and-forth over Syria and Climate Change, it appears that this G20 Summit is being used to demonstrate the (phony) conflict between the West and East. Should the BRICS be seen as frustrating the West on both Syria and Climate Change, it will set the stage for more provocative actions by the “insane West.”

<<<END EXCERPT

Given the recent shoot-down of the Russian warplane in Syria, we can expect Putin to put on a big show of being tough on the West in the climate negotiations. This will likely result in one of two outcomes:

1) The BRICS will force the West to accept “differentiated” carbon-cutting responsibilities in order to get a deal.

2) A unanimous deal will not be reached, and Putin will be cast as the one who blocked it.

Either way, the globalist script will probably call for the evil West to punish Putin, so be on the lookout for “terrorist attacks” in Russia at some point after the Summit ends (and probably before the end of the year).

Masters of Metal: China, the Rothschild Fix, and the “New World Currency”

Lies, Damned Lies, and Forensic History

As regular consumers of alternative media have likely noticed, China’s voracious appetite for gold has been reported on ad nauseam in the wake of the 2008 Depression. Endless geopolitical and economic analysts have mused about the implications of Chinese gold accumulation, with most concluding (perhaps prematurely) that some form of gold-backed Yuan is on the horizon. Some extend this scenario further, optimistically declaring that the BRICS NDB (New Development Bank) and AIIB (Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank), led by China, will usher in a “New Golden Era” of progress and prosperity, spelling the end of the Western model of Central Banking tyranny.

The reason for this transfer of precious metals from West to East by the Anglo-American Establishment, these pundits prognosticate, is a simple and tragic combination of incompetence and malfeasance. The aged and corrupt West must end, and in the wake of its destruction, the Phoenix of the East must rise.

Does this narrative, however, have any basis in reality when viewed within the context of history? How have institutions traditionally defined as “Globalists” participated in satiating China’s gold fever? Is the hand of the Red Shield, infamously and intimately involved in the metals market for over 200 years, at work, even in the East?

And what, ultimately, do the answers to these questions spell for the “BRICS Saviour” meme?

To begin answering these questions, we must analyze the history of the London Bullion Market Association (LBMA) and the ignominious “Precious Metals Fix” that makes it all possible.

The (Global) Fix Is In

In 2010, the alternative finance community was set ablaze by the revelations of bullion trader turned whistleblower Andrew MacGuire, contending that JPMorgan and HSBC, operating as agents for the Federal Reserve, had suppressed the price of precious metals in an effort to silence the “Canary in the Coal Mine” amidst unprecedented money printing. By using managed selloffs via algorithmic trading bots, bullion banks drove down the price of “electronic/paper” metals certificates at the COMEX, effectively capping their price and ultimately driving them down to new 5-year lows.

The Commodities Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) deemed MacGuire’s claims credible enough to warrant further investigation; led by Bart Chilton, the CFTC’s probe into silver price manipulation ended in September of 2013 with the stunning declaration that no illegal activity had occurred:

“Based upon the law and evidence as they exist at this time, there is not a viable basis to bring an enforcement action with respect to any firm or its employees related to our investigation of silver markets.”

-CFTC Statement

What many fail to realize is that the CFTC’s conclusion is technically correct. JPMorgan and HSBC were not acting in violation of any legal structure; they were, in fact, merely implementing the dictates of the long-standing LBMA Metals Fix:
LBMA1

The LBMA's early history, as recounted by themselves

The LBMA’s early history, as recounted by themselves

Already we can identify the hand of the Anglo-American Establishment at work by way of the East India Company. The LBMA’s commentary on the nearly global “Silver Standard” of the 17th and 18th Century is not without consequence; the British Empire’s domination of the gold market of the era made subjugation of nations like China and India, rich in silver wealth, notoriously difficult to colonize.

The Opium Wars changed this nearly overnight. Beyond the engineered addiction and mercantile foothold the opium trade gave the East India Company in China, it also made way for the wholesale looting of China’s silver wealth:

“From China, the Company bought tea, silk and porcelain. The Chinese wanted silver in return. Over the next 100 years tea became a very popular drink in England, and there was a fear that too much silver was leaving the country to pay for it. To stop this happening, the Company became involved in a triangular trade by smuggling opium (a highly addictive and illegal drug) from India into China.

The Company grew opium in India. They were looking for something that the Chinese would accept instead of silver, to pay for the goods they bought at Canton. Opium was a valued medicine which could deaden pain, assist sleep and reduce stress. But it was also seriously addictive and millions Chinese became dependent on the drug.”
British Library

With China gutted of her material wealth, the Chinese silver standard came to an end in November of 1935, a mere decade before the implementation of the first truly “Global Gold Standard,” the Bretton Woods agreement.

The path was set for a worldwide metals price-fixing mechanism, and the LBMA was more than happy to provide. Front-running the Bretton Woods agreement by decades, the LBMA’s own gold fix – run by N.M. Rothschild – was officially established in 1919:

LBMA4

By the LBMA’s own admission, the Rothschilds maintain this price fixing mechanism to the present, and seemingly, the sole beneficiary of their recent price suppressing actions is none other than China, the very country looted of monetary metals a century ago. Is this a rare act of benevolence from the Rothschild family, or do they have big plans for the East’s newfound wealth in the coming World Order?

The writings of the British analogue to the Council on Foreign Relations, Chatham House, seems to suggest the latter.

Chatham House Rule and the Gold-Backed SDR

Established in the wake of World War I at the Paris Peace Conference, the Royal Institute of International Affairs was created. Fulfilling the dream of the Last Will and Testament of Cecil Rhodes, the RIIA also birthed its more widely known American outpost, the Council on Foreign Relations. Its headquarters, Chatham House, have become the RIIA’s colloquial moniker.
Screenshot from 2015-07-28 18:41:50As what many would contend is the world’s premier “Think Tank,” Chatham House has been far from bashful in exploring a wide range of topics, and in the wake of the “Great Recession,” gold and the IMF’s “Special Drawing Rights” (SDRs) have been chief among them.

While national Central Bankers like Ben Bernanke have been vocal in their opposition towards a remonetization of gold, the supranational level represented by groups like the IMF, Bank of International Settlements, the CFR, and Chatham House have been far more accommodating towards the idea of a return to a “partial gold standard.” Chatham House has gone so far as to create the “Chatham House Gold Taskforce” designed explicitly to examine gold’s role in a “multipolar World Order.”
goldtaskforce

This task force has yielded a number of fascinating forecasts. Take, for example, these 2011 comments by Lord Meghnad Desai, the Indian-born, British-naturalized member of the House of Lords and Chatham House member in a paper entitled, “Gold, the SDR, and Other Matters.” Desai remarks:
DesaiGoldSDRFar from challenging gold’s role as a monetary metal, Chatham House is recommending the exact opposite: Nothing less than a gold-backed SDR to take the place of the dollar as World Reserve Currency, with calls for the IMF to make legal the monetization of gold. All this coming from a man who is a Professor at the Keynesian London School of Economics, lecturing chiefly on econometrics and Marxian Economics. Quite the curious blend of ideology, no?

Desai’s commentary is far from the only (seemingly) pro-precious metal rhetoric born of the “Chatham House Gold Taskforce.” Also included in the report were the writings of one Catherine Schneck of the University of Glasgow, entitled, “Adding Gold to the Valuation of the SDR,” directly echoing Baron Desai’s recommendation:
Screenshot from 2015-07-28 19:28:09Schneck, perhaps directly referring to Chinese gold acquisition, makes specific note of the RMB’s current exclusion from the SDR in the paper’s introduction. The inclusion of the RMB in the article also seems to imply that “reducing the USD weighting” as called for in bullet point 3 could indeed be “in favour” of the RMB in the future, overtly stating that the Euro, Pound, and Yen are unfit for the task:
Screenshot from 2015-07-28 19:27:47

Schneck concludes her paper by recommending potential avenues to “mitigate possible obstacles” in implementing a gold-backed SDR. Manifestations of Globalist “monetary magic” could include:
schneckgolddd

Allowing the IMF to issue more SDRs than they have gold hearkens back to the era of bank-issued Gold Certificates and their eventual monetary debasement; not a new scheme by any means. Nor are “residual” gold claims, which were commonplace during the Bretton Woods era. The last statement, “not include any right to sell SDR for gold,” would effectively ensure that gold could never be redeemed by “citizens” from banks, assuring gold coinage would never actually circulate.

A pseudo-gold standard if there ever was one.

The Chatham House Gold Taskforce’s premier publication, “Gold and the International Monetary System,” maintains the more typical Newspeak of Globalist documents with its somewhat reserved analysis; its most revealing passages, however, greatly reinforce the thesis already outlined herein.
Screenshot from 2015-07-28 20:42:35

The document reiterates the “rising China” narrative, noting that China’s recent advancements in the form of the recently-launched Shanghai Gold and Silver Exchange are a “small step” in subverting the dollar as the World Reserve Currency:
Screenshot from 2015-07-28 20:43:16Ultimately, the Chatham House Gold Taskforce concludes that, while the RMB is a strong contender for reserve currency status, it still lacks one major prerequisite for the role – Inclusion in the IMF’s SDR basket: 
Screenshot from 2015-07-28 20:43:37Chatham House also seems to advocate a digital, cryptographic version of gold as opposed to physical notes. Perhaps as a direct response to the rise of cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin and BitGold, perhaps as the implementation of a “One World” digital currency as foretold by Nicholas Rockefeller, Chatham House devotes an entire section of its policy paper examining “digital gold.”
Screenshot from 2015-07-28 19:29:45Screenshot from 2015-07-28 19:30:30
So it seems that the Anglo-American Establishment has lofty aspirations for China’s gold horde and the RMB after all. Regardless of the manner by which China’s reunion with precious metals has manifested, however, this Globalist plot coming to fruition is still dependent upon Chinese participation.

Is there any evidence to suggest that China desires inclusion into the SDR basket? Would they allow the West to use their gold as collateral against the SDR (or something akin to it) as a reserve currency as opposed to the Yuan?

Enter stage East.

Crouching PBOC, Hidden Bank of International Settlements

Meet the latest actor in our twisted drama, Zhou Xiaochuan:
XIAOCHUAAAAAAN

A Globalist by any objective metric, Xiachuan is the head honcho at the People’s Bank of China, effectively the Janet Yellen of Eastasia. Readers, look into the eyes of this man. If anyone were to lead the world’s return to “sound money,” a BRICS without usury, and a gold-backed Yuan utopia of gold-plated puppies and kittens, by necessity, it would have to be China’s most powerful Central Banker.

Think he can pull it off?

Unfortunately for those still steeped in the millieu of the “BRICS Saviour Paradigm,” I don’t think he particularly wants to. He probably never has, as long before Xiaochuan began China’s purchase of Rothschild “fire sale” gold via the LBMA, he joined the Board of Directors of the Bank of International Settlements.

For readers not yet aware of the specific role the BIS has to play in the “Rings Within Rings” structure of the Anglo-American Establishment, it is referred to by Georgetown Professor, Globalist insider, and whistleblower Carroll Quigley as the “apex” of the “powers of financial capitalism.”

The powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent meetings and conferences. The apex of the systems was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world’s central banks which were themselves private corporations. Each central bank…sought to dominate its government by its ability to control Treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country, and to influence cooperative politicians by subsequent economic rewards in the business world.”

-Professor Carroll Quigley, Tragedy and Hope

It is to this “apex” which Xiaochuan counts himself as a proud member of, and it is via this “apex” which he published his official position on Chinese precious metals, the future of the Yuan, and the SDR. The title of this BIS paper? “Reform The International Monetary System,” and its vision for the future is virtually identical to that of Chatham House and the Anglo-American Establishment.

Xiaochuan makes mention of the Silver and Gold Standards of the past, right before discussing the "creative reform" necessary to save the global monetary system

Xiaochuan makes mention of the Silver and Gold Standards of the past, right before discussing the “creative reform” necessary to save the global monetary system

If the Yuan is to become a gold-backed currency (let alone the World Reserve Currency), it will not be accomplished by the desires of the People’s Bank of China. It is not the RMB that Xiaochuan applies these grandiose aspirations to, but the IMF and its Special Drawing Right:

The PBOC's recommendation for the SDR as a supra-national reserve currency

The PBOC’s recommendation for the SDR as a supra-national reserve currency

Presumably, a world in which the SDR is a “super-sovereign reserve currency” would also include the Yuan in the SDR currency basket. At least, it will if Xiaochuan and Chatham House have anything to say about it. And of all those shiny kilo bars of gold and silver recently re-homed to Shanghai?
xiao3Zhou would have them priced in SDRs in international trade. It seems the PBOC would see the Shanghai Gold Exchange as a mere clearing house as opposed to a physical exchange devoted to pricing outside the LBMA fix.

Xiaochuan’s damning statements as head of the PBOC and BIS Board Member are not his first documented foray into international financial debauchery. Precious metals researcher and forensic historian Charles Savoie contends that Zhou Xiaochuan had participated in the wholesale liquidation of “paper” silver contracts at the behest of the LBMA at the turn of the Century. If true, this would have effectively lowered the price of silver from 2000-2004 in favor of the COMEX pricing mechanism.

The Gold Anti-Trust Action Committee (GATA) pressed the LBMA on potential silver price manipulation via Chinese silver liquidation, much to the chagrin of Jeffrey Christian of the CPM Group, who referred to China’s paper silver dumping as a “myth.”  A masterful PR move in providing an alibi of sorts for Xiaochuan’s silver manipulation, as the CPM Group is a 1986 spin-off of none other than the criminal banking syndicate known as Goldman Sachs.

The same Goldman Sachs that, in 2003, coined the term BRICS and “forecast” the rise of Brazil, Russia, India, and China in a paper entitled, “Dreaming With BRICs: The Path to 2050.” Bear in mind, this is a full four years before the BRICs even existed.
Screenshot from 2015-07-28 23:24:10

 

Screenshot from 2015-07-28 23:24:27

What incredible foresight the analysts at Goldman have! Or perhaps it’s insider knowledge? Maybe even assistance in drafting the BRICs “vision?” Whatever the case, it is to this “BRICS Dream,” the dream of Goldman Sachs, that the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development make reference to when calling on the BRICS bank to fund “sustainable development” projects throughout Asia:
Screenshot from 2015-07-28 23:31:49

Some, when faced with the evidence of widespread collusion between financial Elites of West and East, paraphrase a passage of Sun Tsu’s The Art of War – “Keep your friends close, your enemies closer,” and perhaps this is indeed the ultimate goal of the People’s Bank of China.

But an equally prescient American saying also comes to mind: “Don’t let the fox inside the hen house.”

In Closing

Has the fog before the eyes of Free Humanity begun to dissipate? Hopefully enough to realize that the BRICS “anti-hegemon” are no friends of human autonomy. In viewing the BRICS NDB’s recent appointments to upper management, the organization’s participants are barely distinguishable from World Bank and IMF rosters, and while the controlled demolition of China’s financial crisis just begins to emerge, so, too, will the pre-arranged monetary “solution” to the woes it shall create, as outlined throughout this article.

An end to the “Debt and Death” paradigm will not come from national, supranational, or hierarchical structures, but from those seeking Freedom themselves. Unparalleled advancements in decentralization of trade and manufacturing. Truly local agricultural independence. Open-source software, not to mention news. Modern pioneers in liberty are already making great strides in these and many other fields, and it is from these men and women which hope springs eternal.

Not Zhou Xiaochuan’s Globalist gold horde and whatever “New World” monetary paradigm will be foist upon us in the wake of the next financial crisis.