Forums

Full Version: GLOBALISATION AND THE GLOBALISTS AGE
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
ATTEMPTED COUP IN VENEZUELA 
https://therealnews.com/stories/attempted-coup-in-venezuela-with-abby-martin-greg-wilpert-paul-jay 


‘NO TO NEW ELECTIONS ULTIMATUM MADURO SLAMS TRUMP,  EU FOR ARROGANCE AND DISRESPECT 
WHITHER BREXIT AND WHITHER BRITAIN AND THE FUTURE OF THE EU AND EUROPE

IS CORBYN’s SOCIALISM POSSIBLE WITHIN THE EU?  Lapavitsas and Jay
https://therealnews.com/stories/is-corby...as-and-jay

CLASS STRUGGLE OVER BREXIT
Lapavitsas and Jay

https://therealnews.com/stories/class-struggle-over-brexit-lapavitsas-and-jay

PAUL JAY: What the heck is going on in the United Kingdom? I spent a few hours today watching Parliament as they voted, and voted, and voted, on various amendments of a government resolution to put off the Brexit coming, looming hard Brexit nobody seems to want, but seems to continue to loom. The Parliament was kind of in chaos. Britain does not seem to know where to go. Prime Minister Elizabeth May is voted down on proposal after proposal; in fact, the only proposal she could get through Parliament today was to try to go back to the EU and postpone the Brexit. Here’s a little taste of what it sounded like; Jeremy Corbyn talking about the Labour motion. Go ahead and roll the clip, please.


SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE: Order. Order. The ayes to the right, 412. The nays to the left, 202.

The ayes to the right, 412. The nays to the left, 202. So the ayes have it. The ayes have it.

JEREMY CORBYN: Mr. Speaker, I reiterate our conviction that a deal can be agreed based on our alternative plan that can command support across the House. And I also–and I also reiterate our support for a public vote, not as a political–not–Mr. Speaker–not as political point scoring, but as a realistic option to break the deadlock. The whole purpose, Mr. Speaker, the whole purpose ought to be to protect communities that are stressed and worried. Those people are worried about the future of their jobs and their industries. Our job is to try to meet the concerns of the people who sent us here in the first place.

PAUL JAY: That is my–the beginning is my favorite part. Order, order. I can’t do it quite the way he did it. But that’s, in fact, exactly what the United Kingdom does not have now. The political process seems anything but ordered. Now joining us to try to make some sense of what happened today and what’s going on with this whole Brexit mess is Costas Lapavitsas. Costas is professor of economics at the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London. He’s also the author of the book The Left Case Against the EU. Thanks, Costas, for joining us today.

PAUL JAY: So, you were down outside Parliament today, and you’ve been following all this. So give us a bit of an update, where we’re at in the process, if one can call it that. And then the bigger question I have is how did the British elites, it seems to me, so lose control of all of this? When James Cameron, the prime minister–I don’t know, what is it, two years ago?–when they launched the referendum, they, one, they thought they’d win. And the British elites, I don’t think they wanted to unleash such chaos. So start with what happened today, and then let’s get into the bigger picture.

COSTAS LAPAVITSAS: OK. It is very easy to get confused about the shenanigans in British Parliament. The series of amendments, votes, and so on, and you lose track of what’s happening. So just to simplify and to give the gist of what has taken place the last three days, because there’ve beenthree consecutive days of voting, what has happened is this. On the first day, Parliament has decided that it does not want to support the deal that Theresa May has negotiated with the European Union. So that’s the first thing. That’s out, as far as Parliament’s concerned.

Second thing the Parliament decided the next day is that it does not want under any circumstances to end up with an exit from the European Union without a deal. A no-deal Brexit. That’s out, as far as Parliament is concerned. And what then it decided today, in view of what it had decided in the previous two days, is logical. Today it decided that it wishes to ask for an extension of the Brexit period, because of course the clock is ticking. On the 29th of March, the United Kingdom will be out of the European Union under current arrangements, because that’s what the law of the land says. So today Parliament has asked for an extension. How long that extension will be we will see. It’s not firmed up yet. We will see.

PAUL JAY: Didn’t the resolution that passed call for essentially a three month extension?

COSTAS LAPAVITSAS: Essentially that.

PAUL JAY: But the EU has to agree to this. That’s the other question.

COSTAS LAPAVITSAS: Sure. And there is room for play, room for maneuver on the part of the government. And that’s what I can tell you is the next step. Because although Parliament has voted to reject Theresa May’s deal, that’s what we got this series of votes, actually, the deal is still on the table. In truth the deal is still on the table. And what is being in play at the moment is a complex game of maneuvering and so on whereby the Prime Minister Theresa may is attempting to blackmail the hard right of her own party to make them support the deal, even at the 11th hour. So there’s every chance that her deal will be put in front of the Parliament again in the next few days, as we are approaching the 11th hour, as I said, as we’re approaching the 29th, and the clock is ticking. She might ask for an extension such that it will put enormous pressure on her own right wing, which has been the hardest of the Brexiters, and forced them to back a deal, because if they don’t there might be any Brexit at all.

PAUL JAY: Now, there are supposed to be European parliamentary elections. And in theory, if Britain is still in the EU, they should be running for these elections. I mean-

COSTAS LAPAVITSAS: That’s exactly what Theresa May wants to blackmail her right with, her right wing with. Because if they go for a long extension, which the Tory party, especially the right wing, does not want, then Britain will have to field European elections. They will get into the process of months of negotiations, and so on. Then it might be possible that there will be a general election or another referendum, or complications through Britain taking part in the Euro elections. That’s not what the extreme, the far right of the Tory party wants. And so Theresa May is blackmailing them. That’s basically what’s happening. She’s basically telling them if you don’t back me, even in the next few days, there might not be any Brexit at all.

PAUL JAY: There’s a lot of fracture lines in this struggle. Sections of the working class, sections of the British elites, want to stay in Europe. And vice versa, sections of the elites want to get out, and sections of the working class want to get out. When you get to how the Labour Party sees Brexit and how May and the right wing of the Conservative Party see Brexit, what’s the substance of the difference of what these two visions of Brexit are?

COSTAS LAPAVITSAS: OK. Now, these are the real questions for those who want to approach the issues from the perspective of political economy, from the perspective of socialist, radical politics. You see, it is very easy to get lost through the shenanigans of Parliament. It’s very easy to get lost in the day-to-day politicking that is now taking place in Parliament, which, incidentally, shows the demise of democracy in the UK. I’ll come back to that.

Now, when we look at the social forces involved in this, things become clearer. One thing that has become the obvious to all involved in this process is that the main centers of power in this country, economic power, in the first instance; in other words, the City of London, the financial interest; but also big industrial and commercial capital, particularly big industrial commercial capital with extensive expert interests. Those core elements of British capital, the British ruling class, do not want Brexit under any circumstances. They are forced, therefore, to remain.

I say this because a lot of people on the left are hopelessly confused on this. The City of London detests Brexit. It doesn’t want it. Big business, corporations and so on, don’t want Brexit, by and large. The main ones. They’ve made it very clear. They’ve wheeled out Japanese investors, as well; Japanese big businesses, U.S. big businesses, to say the same thing in this country, and so on. They’ve made it very clear that Brexit is not for them. They’re very happy in the European Union. You should have no doubt at all about it. That’s really the first important element in this.

Now, the problem is, the political expression of the British ruling class, the historic political expression of the British ruling class, the Tory Party, in other words, is split. The problem, then, is political. It’s not social or economic. It’s not as if there is a strong section of the British ruling class, a dynamic section that wants out of the European Union because it wants to capture global markets. And so these are fantasies. The problem is political. There is a section of the Tory Party, on the far right of the Tory Party, which-

PAUL JAY: Let me just add, quite allied, if I understand correctly, with Trump-type politics. Even some of the same players are involved.

COSTAS LAPAVITSAS: Exactly. Quite close to Trump-type politics. But obviously with British peculiarities. This is Britain. This is a European country. Britain is much more like the rest of Europe than it is with the United States, I should say. It’s a European country, still. Nonetheless, there is a section of the Tory Party, elements of which are very close to Trump, it’s true. That section of the Tory party doesn’t speak for any particularly well-organized section of the capitalist class. Certainly no well-organized economic interest, though there are some economic interests that support them. It’s not that. It is political. These people are very concerned about national sovereignty, and the way in which national sovereignty projects itself in Britain and the European Union. And they want to recapture national sovereignty the way they understand it. Politics is the main issue. And that section of the Tory Party has not been prepared to compromise in the slightest, and they’ve been prepared to oppose the main centers of economic and social power among the European [inaudible].

PAUL JAY: And in that way, again, it’s very similar to the United States, because in the referendum campaign it was all xenophobic, racist. The kind of language was very Trumpian language. So that section of that political stratum–it must have its own odd billionaire involved the same way Trump does rallying the far right of the of the working class.

COSTAS LAPAVITSAS: Well, let’s come to the working class in a minute. But some of these people have got rich people. Some of this political section of the Tory Party have got rich people behind them, of course. Some of them have got big interest themselves. But I repeat, that is not the core of the British ruling class. It’s a complete misapprehension. The centers of power in the British ruling class want the European Union. They’ve told us many, many times. So basically this is what has taken place on the side of the ruling class. The split, the political split in the ruling class is really what is important. It’s precisely because of this split that the referendum has gone the way it has gone. Because when the question of Europe was posed to the British people in 2016, it became a point on which all the frustrations, anger, disillusionment, general disaffection with neoliberal politics and neoliberal policies of the last four decades could concentrate. And these were, this was particularly obvious in the large concentrations of working class people in the country. But not only. Also in the South; key areas and so on. There is no doubt about it. The poor and the working class, especially the traditional working class in this country, voted for Brexit. And they voted for Brexit because they realised that the main centers of power wanted remain. They wanted the European Union. And if they wanted the European Union, the others did not.

It became one of these issues over which class anger coming from below could focus on and express itself. And it was able to express itself nationally because of the split in the Tory Party. If the Tory Party was united, the anger of the poor, the working class, and so on, would never have been able to express itself. We’ve seen this time and again in Europe. What made Britain different is this split at the top, the split in the Tory Party.  So the anger of the working class and of the poor could manifest itself nationally. Obviously not all of the working class thinks the same. Obviously not. That’s never been the case. But there is no doubt at all about it. Study after study has shown it. The poor, the marginal workers of this country, want change. Don’t let anyone tell you that this has changed. The proportions have not changed. If you go to the working class areas of the North, in particular, or other urban centers, people want Brexit. They want Brexit, still. Now, some of them have formulated that in terms of anger against immigrants, with some racist elements, and so on. Of course. The working class doesn’t find its own ideology off the shelf. It has to be organically developed through it. And that is part of what the left ought to do. And that’s whert we come to the left expression of political opinion this country. The Labour Party, and the left more generally, in this country in Europe.



The left so far has failed abysmally on the question of Europe. And part of the reason for the predominance of right-wing views among working people, to a certain extent, in this country and elsewhere, is the failure of the left. The left suffers from–I don’t know how to call it. Europeanism. It’s a kind of disease. It’s a new disease that has affected the European left, and it affects particularly the grey cells of the brain. Because if you’ve got it, you seem to abandon all kinds of political economy. You seem to think in moralizing terms, and to think in terms of ultimate goods and fantasies about what should happen in the world or shouldn’t happen in the world.

The left has failed to analyze things in class terms, and has failed to give people a class handle for their anger, and to direct it where it should go. In that context, confusion has prevailed.

PAUL JAY: So explain what Corbyn’s view of Brexit is, and how does it differ from May’s?



COSTAS LAPAVITSAS: Let me come to–specifically to the Labour Party. Because I see that the left has been confused. And that holds very clearly for the left on the continent, [inaudible] European left. In some ways the British left is more and less confused than the European left. What’s happening on the Labour Party among Labour Party supporters is astounding. Because some of the most traditional electoral bases of the Labour Party, the working class and the poor, want Brexit, as I’ve indicated. That’s very, very clear, in area after area, city after city.



PAUL JAY: Let me ask a quick question. Given that it might be a hard Brexit or something like it, and all of the stories of how that’s going to disrupt the British economy and various other things, that hasn’t changed the mood of people about it?



COSTAS LAPAVITSAS: People who say that don’t know the British well enough. Or the British working class well enough. It hasn’t really significantly affected proportions. Obviously we don’t know and we will not know until and unless some other vote or some other general measure of what they think, ballot measure. But every indication up to now shows that the line runs along the same path, pretty much. The same proportion, 50/50. Pretty much.



So some of the traditional strongest supporters of the Labour Party, the areas in which, which are naturally labor, want Brexit. But the membership of the Labour Party, especially in recent years, does no longer comprise primarily working class people. And the poor. Significant numbers of middle class people have entered the Labour Party.



PAUL JAY: Let me interject for a second, because the terminology is different in the United States. Somehow in the United States ‘middle class’ means the kind of people with a job, and the poorer people without a job, where everywhere else in the world more or less ‘middle class’ means not working class; more professionals and this sort of thing. Go ahead.



COSTAS LAPAVITSAS: That’s what I mean by middle class. Yeah, I use the term in the–deploy the term in the British or European usage.



PAUL JAY: The reason for the difference–because in the United States there’s only a middle class, because there’s actually not a class society at all. So there’s a middle class; of course there’s not really an upper or lower. And it’s all nonsense. But at any rate, go ahead.

COSTAS LAPAVITSAS: Yeah, of course. I understand that about the U.S., but I’m using it the British way. So basically, in my judgment, the membership of the Labour Party, a lot of the people who are active in it, come from what I called the middle class just a few minutes ago, by which I mean layers which have got more professional type of employment; comparatively better conditions; better housing; better education; that kind of thing. That’s where sort of the membership of the Labour Party comes from, and they are strongly for remain. These people are strongly for remain.

So you’ve got a massive problem within the Labour Party whereby large numbers of its elected working class, poor, are solidy for leave, and its membership is solidly for remain. The problem becomes even more pronounced because some of the leaders of the Labour Party comes from the Blair years, and those Blairites who used to run the Labour Party for many, many years, are also ardent Europeanists. Ardent Europeanists.

PAUL JAY: Let me just for a second, for our North American audience, for Blair you can think more like Bill Clinton-type politics, or Barack Obama, to some extent. But essentially worse.

COSTAS LAPAVITSAS: Worse, actually.



PAUL JAY: Worse. Yeah, worse. Yeah. You’re right. Because Blair, amongst other things, supported George Bush in the Iraq war, and such. So yeah, worse.

COSTAS LAPAVITSAS: Blair is actually a byword for dishonesty and perfidy in politics in this country and elsewhere. So there is still a body of Blairites in the Labour Party, especially in the parliamentary Labour party, the members of Parliament. And they’ve got very strong positions of leadership in the Labour Party. But of course, two, three years ago Jeremy Corbyn was elected to the leadership, and that is proper left. That is proper left, and that understands that the European Union is not the progressive project. The European Union is not an anticapitalist project. They also understand that if you want to do things that will change Britain and attract British capitalism and neoliberalism, you’ve got to take on the European Union. They understand that. But the reality they’re faced with in terms of their membership, in terms of their electorate, in terms of their members of Parliament, is very, very difficult. So they’d be navigating a minefield. What has been happening in the Labour Party is that the leadership has been navigating a minefield. A veritable minefield. That perhaps would help your audience understand the complexity of the responses.

PAUL JAY: So let me go–again, let me ask, in terms of the very substance of what Corbyn in the opening of this segment is talking about, the Labour vision of Brexit, what–put some meat on the bones. How do they see Brexit taking place, and how does differ from the Tories? And from the right wing of the Tories?

COSTAS LAPAVITSAS: Now we come to the, in a sense, analytical and intellectual problems of the left as a whole faces with Brexit and the European Union. Incidentally, one thing you’ve got to remember is that historically the British left, and I mean the organized left within the Labour Party but also the left outside the Labour Party, historically the British left has been probably the most euroskeptic left in Europe. I’ve lived in this country for 40 years. I well remember when I came here all that time ago the Labour Party had a very strong contingent of people who talked in the most disparaging terms of the European Union as a capitalist club that was going to do nothing good for workers, and it’s inevitably going to be proven right. However, the Labour Party has lost track of that. And that is that this characteristic all pretty much the whole of the European left.

So in that respect, it is characteristic of the European left, which has been afflicted by Europeans. And as I’ve mentioned to you, the issue here is-

PAUL JAY: Can I just quickly add for people again in our audience, when you’re saying European–the disease of afflicted, of Europeanism, if I’m understanding that, is where European finance capital operates far more collaboratively to dictate to, discipline, all of the countries of the European to, essentially, for the betterment of this pool of European capital. More collaboratively and less competitively.

COSTAS LAPAVITSAS: When you’re saying that you’ve got a view of the European Union implicit in this. And you’re thinking the European Union, essentially, is a governments club, as it is a set of institutions created by big business and the capitalist elites of Europe to further their own interests in complex and sophisticated ways. And I would agree with that. That’s exactly what the European Union needs. The conclusion I would draw from it and the conclusion that a lot of people on the left used to draw from it is of course the European Union is not a good thing for workers, and it’s not a good thing on the left. It’s not a left wing project. It’s actually a capitalist project.

And therefore the left, especially the left that is radical, socialist, and wants to change things, which is what the left has historically been, the left ought to be critical and rejectionist towards the European Union. To me all of this has long been obvious. You know, it’s a question of the degree to which you reject the European Union, and how you do it.

PAUL JAY: OK. The counter to that, I guess, would be yeah, but what if the Brexit is led by the far right, and the left is so weak that you’re going to wind up with a very far right controlled Brexit, and maybe in those conditions it’s not so good?

COSTAS LAPAVITSAS: Lots of people come up with it. I’ve got two answers. The first is that what actually happens after Brexit, or if Brexit be comes a reality, will depend in good measure on what the left will itself do to make Brexit a reality, and the ideas the left is putting on the table. If the left doesn’t put ideas on the table about the left Brexit, which I think is the only sensible Brexit, and some of us have been doing that systematically in the last few months, if the left doesn’t do that, they can hardly complain.

PAUL JAY: Well, is the Labour Party doing that?

COSTAS LAPAVITSAS: Some people within the Labour Party are.

PAUL JAY: No, I mean Corbyn. Is Corbyn’s vision of Brexit a left vision?

COSTAS LAPAVITSAS: Corbyn is trapped in what I just mentioned to you. Corbyn’s going to have an equation to solve in the Labour Party which is impossible, practically, to solve. He’s been navigating a minefield. It’s obvious that Corbyn doesn’t really–he would prefer a kind of Brexit. But his party doesn’t. And he’s got a terrible problem, because every time he attempts to put these ideas across, his MPs, members of Parliament, rebel. And he’s got problems from his party membership, which is actually more and more–has become more and more pro-Europe. They’ve created a complete fantasy of what Europe is and they’ve latched themselves onto that.

So to come back to what you said about the right wing Brexit. The first point is the left should put on the table its own ideas about the left Brexit, which is the only Brexit that can make sense. The second point I want to make in this is yeah, I recognize a right wing Brexit, a Tory Brexit, could get problems for working people. But just imagine what a Tory remain will be like. Just imagine what it would be for this country to remain in the European Union, in other words for Brexit to fail, and still you have a right wing government. That possibly would be the worst outcome for Britain, because it would indicate to people that democracy counts for nothing; you can vote on referenda, you can take positions. It counts nothing. Your vote may be negated. And in the end you will end up with the Tories, right wing people, still managing the economy, still managing political lives, and within the European Union. It will tell people that this totality of capitalist institutions in Europe, which basically sets the terms for the economy and society in Europe, is not changed.
WEALTH CONCENTRATION DRIVES A NEW GLOBAL IMPERIALISM 
https://www.globalresearch.ca/wealth-con...sm/5671426

Regime changes in Iraq and Libya, Syria’s war, Venezuela’s crisis, sanctions on Cuba, Iran, Russia, and North Korea are reflections of a new global imperialism imposed by a core of capitalist nations in support of trillions of dollars of concentrated investment wealth. This new world order of mass capital has become a totalitarian empire of inequality and repression.

The global 1%, comprised of over 36-million millionaires and 2,400 billionaires, employ their excess capital with investment management firms like BlackRock and J.P Morgan Chase. The top seventeen of these trillion-dollar investment management firms controlled $41.1 trillion dollars in 2017. These firms are all directly invested in each other and managed by only 199 people who decide how and where global capital will be invested. Their biggest problem is they have more capital than there are safe investment opportunities, which leads to risky speculative investments, increased war spending, privatization of the public domain, and pressures to open new capital investment opportunities through political regime changes.

Power elites in support of capital investment are collectively embedded in a system of mandatory growth. Failure for capital to achieve continuing expansion leads to economic stagnation, which can result in depression, bank failures, currency collapses, and mass unemployment.  Capitalism is an economic system that inevitably adjusts itself via contractions, recessions, and depressions.

Power elites are  entrapped in a web of enforced growth that requires ongoing global management and the formation of new and ever expanding capital investment opportunities. This forced expansion becomes a worldwide manifest destiny that seeks total capital domination in all regions of the earth and beyond.  

Sixty percent of the core 199 global power elite managers are from the US, with people from twenty capitalist nations rounding out the balance. These power elite managers and associated one percenters take active part in global policy groups and governments. They serve as advisors to the IMF, World Trade Organization, World Bank, International Bank of Settlements, Federal Reserve Board, G-7 and the G-20. Most attend the World Economic Forum. Global power elites engage actively on private international policy councils such as the Council of Thirty, Trilateral Commission, and the Atlantic Council. Many of the US global elites are members of the Council on Foreign Relations and the Business Roundtable in the US. The most important issue for these power elites is protecting capital investment, insuring debt collection, and building opportunities for further returns.


The global power elite are aware of their existence as a numerical minority in the vast sea of impoverished humanity. Roughly 80% of the world’s population lives on less than ten dollars a day and half live on less than three dollars a day. Concentrated global capital becomes the binding institutional alignment that brings transnational capitalists into a centralized global imperialism facilitated by world economic/trade institutions and protected by the US/NATO military empire. This concentration of wealth leads to a crisis of humanity, whereby poverty, war, starvation, mass alienation, media propaganda, and environmental devastation have reached levels that threaten humanity’s future.

The idea of independent self-ruling nation-states has long been held sacrosanct in traditional liberal capitalist economies. However, globalization has placed a new set of demands on capitalism that requires transnational mechanisms to support continued capital growth that is increasingly beyond the boundaries of individual states. The financial crisis of 2008 was an acknowledgement of the global system of capital under threat. These threats encourage the abandonment of nation-state rights altogether and the formation of a global imperialism that reflects new world order requirements for protecting transnational capital.

Institutions within capitalist countries including government ministries, defense forces, intelligence agencies, judiciary, universities and representative bodies, recognize to varying degrees that the overriding demands of transnational capital spill beyond the boundaries of nation-states.  The resulting worldwide reach motivates a new form of global imperialism that is evident by coalitions of core capitalist nations engaged in past and present regime change efforts via sanctions, covert actions, co-options, and war with non-cooperating nations—Iran, Iraq, Syria, Libya, Venezuela, Cuba, North Korea and Russia.

The attempted coup in Venezuela shows the alignment of transnational capital-supporting states in recognizing the elite forces that oppose Maduro’s socialist presidency. A new global imperialism is at work here, whereby Venezuela’s sovereignty is openly undermined by a capital imperial world order that seeks not just control of Venezuela’s oil, but a full opportunity for widespread investments through a new regime.

The widespread corporate media negation of the democratically elected president of Venezuela demonstrates that these media are owned and controlled by ideologists for the global power elite. Corporate media today is highly concentrated and fully international. Their primary goal is the promotion of product sales and pro-capitalist propaganda through the psychological control of human desires, emotions, beliefs, fears, and values. Corporate media does this by manipulating feelings and cognitions of human beings worldwide, and by promoting entertainment as a distraction to global inequality.  Recognizing global imperialism as a manifestation of concentrated wealth, managed by a few hundred people, is of utmost importance for democratic humanitarian activists.  We must stand on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and challenge global imperialism and its fascist governments, media propaganda, and empire armies.
NETANYAHU BELIEVING THAT HE WILL RULE THE WORLD AS WITH NIMROD - PHARAOH AND ALL THE REST:

“JUST WHEN THEY THINK THEY HAVE IT - THE EARTH- UNDER THEIR CONTROL IT IS SNATCHED AWAY FROM THEM”

SUCH WILL BE THE CASE WITH BIBI TRUMP - POMPEO - KUSNER AND THE REST OF ANTICHRIST’S RETINUE 

BENJAMIN NETANYAHU's PLAN TO RULE THE WORLD 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=awCwuJjZCTU&feature=youtu.be
NEW WORLD ORDER COMMUNISM BY THE BACKDOOR  
SO EXACTLY WHERE IS FACEBOOK'S LIBRA AND INDEED SILICON VALLEY TAKING THE DIGITAL WORLD?  IS THIS JUST ABOUT DATA OR ABOUT CREATING THE NEXT PHASE IN GLOBALISATION, THE SURVEILLANCE SOCIETY AND THE NWO. ALSO WHO CONTROLS IDENTITY IN A DIGITAL AGE? IS THIS THE RISE AND RISE OF THE DIGITAL WILD WEST OR ARE  THERE REGULATIONS INBUILT. ALSO WHAT HAPPENS WHEN PRIVATE INTERESTS CONFLICT WITH PUBLIC INTERESTS? 
WE ALREADY KNOW THAT THE PUBLIC BANKING SYSTEM HAS BEEN HI-JACKED BY PRIVATE BANKING CARTELS SUCKING WEALTH INTO THE COFFERS OF THE 1%. WE CAN BE FORGIVEN TO ASK IS THIS ALL A SILLY-CON BY SILICON VALLEY?  IS THE SOLUTION TO ALL THESE DEVELOPMENTS IN THE DIGITAL WORLD TO JUST DO IT AND DIVE IN OR JUST SAY NO OR CAN WE NAVIGATE A THIRD WAY? ALSO MAYBE THIS WILL BE THE ONLY PLACE ON THE WEB THAT HAS THE SPIRITUAL VISION AND CONSCIOUSNESS TO NOTE SOMETHING REMARKABLE. ARE THE SEISMIC QUAKES HITTING UPTO 7.1 ON THE RICHTER SCALE TAKING PLACE UNDER SILICON VALLEY RECENTLY A WARNING FROM THE HEAVENS ABOVE THAT COSMIC NATURAL LAW ULTIMATELY REIGNS AND THAT CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS HAVE NO RIGHT TO ACT AS MAMMON AND PHAROAHS OF THE NWO. MANKIND HAS ARRIVED AT A CROSSROADS TO LITERALLY GO UP OR DOWN. THE CHOICE RESTS IN OUR HANDS TO CREATE A DESTINY THAT WORKS FOR ALL OR JUST THE 1%. 


FACEBOOK’S LIBRA CURRENCY MONETIZES IDENTITY AND THREATENS PRIVACY 

July 5, 2019



Bill Black discusses Facebook's new proposed crypto-currency, called “Libra.” Facebook could use this technology to standardize identity and create a world of ultimate surveillance, and then profit from it, says Black

THE SECRETS OF SILICON VALLEY: WHAT BIG TECH DOESN'T WANT YOU TO KNOW 


Once a sleepy farming region, Silicon Valley is now the hub of a global industry that is transforming the economy, shaping our political discourse, and changing the very nature of our society. So what happened? How did this remarkable change take place? Why is this area the epicenter of this transformation? Discover the dark secrets behind the real history of Silicon Valley and the Big Tech giants in this important edition of The Corbett Report.
GOD SAVE THE QUEEN. THE US DESTRUCTION OF THE BRITISH EMPIRE 
Larry Romanoff
https://www.globalresearch.ca/save-queen/5693500

This is a little-known and never-discussed part of US history, but yet one of the major factors that propelled the US to its overwhelming manufacturing and economic supremacy after the Second World War. It involves the final destruction of the British Empire, for which no thinking person would have regrets, and also the conditions obtaining after the end of World War II. The First World War caused Britain to lose about 40% of its former Empire and wealth, and the Second World War completed this task, but not without the little-known predatory intercession of America.


During the Second War, Britain needed huge volumes of supplies of food, raw materials, manufactured goods, armaments and military hardware. But Britain’s factories were being destroyed by the war, and in any case lacked sufficient productive capacity. Britain also increasingly lacked money to pay for those goods, its solution being to purchase on credit from its colonies. Canada, India, Australia, South Africa, and many other nations supplied England with necessary goods and war materials, on promise of future payment. The plan was that after the War ended, Britain would repay these debts with manufactured goods which a rebuilt Britain would be able to supply. These debts were recorded in the then British currency of Pounds Sterling, and maintained on ledgers in the Bank of England, commonly referred to as “The Sterling Balances”.



After the Second War ended, the US was the world’s only major economy that had not been bombed to rubble, a nation with all its factories intact, and able to operate at full capacity producing almost everything the world needed. The US had enormous capacity to supply, but the many countries of the British Empire, whose economies were in sound condition and had money to pay, were refusing to buy from the US since they were waiting for the UK to rebuild and repay the outstanding debts with manufactured goods. The US government and corporations realised that this enormous market consisting of so many of the world’s nations, would remain closed to it for perhaps decades, that it would have little or no commercial success in any part of the former British Empire so long as those Sterling Balances remained on the ledgers in the Bank of England. And this is one place where the true nature of America comes into sharp focus, an incident which serves better than many to illustrate the story of American “fair play” and of the US creating “a level playing field”.



At the end of the war, Britain, physically devastated and financially bankrupt, lacked factories to produce goods for rebuilding, the materials to rebuild the factories or purchase the machines to fill them, or with the money to pay for any of it. Britain’s situation was so dire, the government sent the economist John Maynard Keynes with a delegation to the US to beg for financial assistance, claiming that Britain was facing a “financial Dunkirk”. The Americans were willing to do so, on one condition: They would supply Britain with the financing, goods and materials to rebuild itself, but dictated that Britain must first eliminate those Sterling Balances by repudiating all its debts to its colonies. The alternative was to receive neither assistance nor credit from the US. Britain, impoverished and in debt, with no natural resources and no credit or ability to pay, had little choice but to capitulate. And of course with all receivables cancelled and since the US could produce today, those colonial nations had no further reason for refusing manufactured goods from the US. The strategy was successful. By the time Britain rebuilt itself, the US had more or less captured all of Britain’s former colonial markets, and for some time after the war’s end the US was manufacturing more than 50% of everything produced in the world. And that was the end of the British Empire, and the beginning of the last stage of America’s rise.



Americans have been propagandised into believing that their country selflessly supported the European war effort, and generously planned and financed the entire rebuilding of all of war-ravaged Europe. Their heads are full of ‘lend-lease’, the “Marshall Plan” and much more. But here we have three silent truths: One is that the US assisted Europe and the UK primarily because it needed markets for its goods. US corporations found little purchasing power in the European nations that were now largely destroyed and bankrupt, and without these markets the US economy would also have crashed. It was commercial self-interest rather than compassion or charity that prompted the US financial assistance to the UK and Europe. All the US did was provide large-scale consumer financing for the products of its own corporations, with most of the ‘financing’ never leaving the US. The Marshall Plan was mostly a welfare program for American multinationals. The second truth is that Europe and England paid heavily for this financial assistance. It was only in 2006 that Britain finally paid the last installment on the loans made to it by the US in 1945. The third is that the post-war financing of Europe was not primarily for reconstruction but as the foundation for an overwhelming political control that has largely persisted to this day. Funds from the American’s vaunted Marshall Plan were spent more to finance Operation Gladio than European reconstruction.


As William Blum so well noted in one of his articles, the US was far more interested in sabotaging the political left in Europe than in reconstruction, and Marshall Plan funds were siphoned off to finance political victories for the far right, as well for the violent terrorist program known as Operation Gladio. He also correctly mentioned that the CIA skimmed off substantial amounts to fund covert journalism and propaganda, one of the conduits being the Ford Foundation. As well, the US exercised enormous economic and political restrictions on recipient countries as conditions for the receipt of funds, most being used to help re-entrench the European bankers and elites in their positions of economic and political power (after a war that they themselves instigated) rather than to assist in reconstruction. In the end, the Europeans could have done as well without this so-called ‘assistance’ from the US, and Europe would have been far better and more independent today had they refused the offer. The conviction of most Americans that their nation ‘rebuilt’ Europe is pure historical mythology created by propaganda and supported by ignorance.
WHAT HAPPENS IN THREE CITIES OF THE WORLD IS ABSOLUTELY CRUCIAL IN UNDERSTANDING HOW THE WORLD POLITICAL ECONOMY IS RUN. MOST PEOPLE DO NOT HAVE A CLUE WHICH 3 CITIES I AM TALKING ABOUT BECAUSE NO ONE EVER TALKS ABOUT THIS. ALSO THE WAY THE WORLD IS MOVING IN OUR ERA THERE IS A 4TH CITY WHICH WILL RULE ROOST AND THAT IS JERUSALEM AS GLOBAL VISION 2000 HAS JUST HELD A CONFERENCE IN LONDON ON THIS THEME. YOU WILL CERTAINLY NOT LEARN THAT IN THE TOP BUSINESS SCHOOLS OF THE WORLD. THE 3 CITIES OR RATHER CITIES WITHIN CITIES ARE THE POTOMAC IN WASHINGTON DC, THE CITY OF LONDON IN LONDON AND THE VATICAN IN ROME. THE LINKAGE BETWEEN GLOBAL MILITARY POWER, MONEY POWER AND IDEOLOGICAL CONTROL IS INTERCONNECTED AND ONE.  ONE CAN GO FURTHER IN THIS FRAMEWORK AS WE HAVE TO DISCARD ALL WE HAVE BEEN TOLD AND TAUGHT ABOUT RIGHT AND LEFT WING POLITICS AND GOVERNMENT AS IT IS ALL A HALL OR MIRRORS. ALSO IF WE TAKE THIS DIAGNOSIS AND ANALYSIS OF POWER, CONTROL AND AUTHORITY SERIOUSLY WE NEED TO FACTOR IN THE SATANIC DAJALLIC DIMENSION. 


IT'S PROBABLY TOO MUCH TO TAKE IN IF YOU HAVE BEEN BROUGHT UP IN A SECULAR MATERIALISTIC OUTLOOK. IN ORDER TO UNDERSTAND THIS YOU WILL NEED A MENTAL IF NOT SPIRITUAL DETOXIFICATION PROCESS. BUT IF YOU ARE ON THE SEARCH FOR TRUTH YOU NEED TO DISCARD THE OLD PARADIGMS OF DECEIT AND PURIFY YOUR MIND, SPIRIT AND BODY AND ENTER THE REALM OF THE UNIVERSAL PARADIGM SHIFT WHICH IS ALSO SEEKING TO ESTABLISH A MORAL POLITICAL ECONOMY. AS ONLY THIS CAN DELIVER AN UNIVERSAL JUST AND PEACEFUL WORLD FOR HUMANITY, NATURE AND THE PLANET.   MORE WILL FOLLOW ON THIS IN ORDER THAT YOUR SEARCH FOR TRUTH LEADS YOU TO THE CORRECT DESTINATION RATHER THAN THE ABYSS. 


BLACK POPE, LUCIFER AND THE JESUITS 
http://www.volkwordtwakker.nl/en/truth-o...he-jesuits

The Jesuits and the Black Pope

Everything starts with Lucifer, Satan. The current power in this world is in the hands of those who worship him. And those that you think they have the power not more than jumping jacks on the world stage.

Regularly read your stories about how the Black Pope, head of the Jesuits, would be the most powerful man on earth. This is not so because above him are a number of families from The Papal Bloodlines, descended from Satan directly and ultimately determine what happens in the world.


(Logo of the Jesuits - "IHS" are the first three letters of JESUS in the ancient Greek.)


(former Black Pope Peter Hans Kolvenbach along with former pedophile Pope)

Senior Jesuits are Luciferians, they believe in Lucifer. The Dutchman Peter Hans Kolvenbach is the former General of the Jesuit order. The General of the Jesuits is called "black pope".


(Former Black Pope Peter Hans Kolvenbach)

Many people forget this man when it comes to major players in the secret societies. The Jesuit order has had a great influence on the formation of the Bavarian Illuminati, and this organization is used as a lightning rod / front for the Vatican. (See diagram)

Von Weishaupt (also known as Johann Adam Weishaupt - founder of the illuminatenorden in 1776), after all, was trained by Jesuits in canon law (Catholic canon law). Many of the former monarchies were generally not pro Vatican, the Vatican so it worked out well that the Bavarian Illuminati wanted to disrupt the monarchies.

The other kabal families like the Rothschild family only the auditors of the Kabal and follow the traditional order of the Jesuits. Also, they are nothing more than puppets and lightning. (See diagram)

Peter Hans Kolvenbach General of the International Military Order of the Society of Jesus is seen by many as one of the main people responsible for the attacks of September 11, 2001 on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. The New World Order is the fourth empire, an empire under the Vatican under Lucifer. Since the secretions of the Roman Catholic Church during the Reformation does the Luciferian cult everything possible to regain full control.


(Kolvenbach and his former staff)

The Jesuits (officially established by Pope Paul III in 1540), the Military Intelligence Service of the Vatican. And controlling a large part of the actions of the so-called "illuminati" and the hierarchy in the Vatican.

(Jesuit power structure)

The two people who represent these bloodlines in practice:

  1. Pepe Orsini - Italy

  2. Henry Breakspear - Macau, China

The most powerful man in the world Pepe Orsini, also known as the Grey Pope. Not the white stuff and not, as often assumed, the Black Pope. A little further down, we find the most powerful organization in the world, the Jesuits. This order, also called the secret service of the Vatican, is headed by a General, better known as the Black Pope. And yes, the Black Pope is powerful, but not the most powerful man on earth. The former "president of the EU," Herman "Catholic bastard" Van Rompuy belonged to the Jesuit sect and is responsible for more than one murder million people in the Middle East and Africa.

Among the Jesuits also contains the Illuminati and are not, as many people think, the famous families like the Rockefellers. of the thirteen Illuminati families are:

The "black pope" is practically the service from within the Vatican and not the regular pope. The Knights of Malta are also under the control of the Jesuits. All the misery of the past centuries is almost always suffer back into a black pope. The involvement of the Vatican and the Jesuits at the NAZI regime is well documented. H. Himmler founded the SS to the model of the Jesuit order.


(Headquarters issue in the Vatican.)

From 1963 also includes the Vatican officially join the club of Satan. This has become known by a now-deceased Jesuit priest Father Malachi Martin who wrote a book about this event.

Malachi Martin, a former Jesuit priest and Vatican insider, writes in his book "Windswept House: a Vatican Novel" that there was a satanic ritual in 1963, in Saint Peter's Basilica in Rome. During this event named "Placing on the throne of the fallen archangel Lucifer" Satan was formally placed on the throne in the Vatican. Simultaneously were held in America rituals to ratify this "throne". Pope Paul the Sixth, which from 1963 to 1978 was a function would have once said: "The smoke of Satan has entered the church and around the altar", referring to the satanic ritual. And he should know, elected a week before the ritual ...

The Church has thus officially secretly brought under the power of Satan. Was it in 1963 for an occult stronghold, after the ritual is merged with the Vatican utterly demonic side. Unfortunately know many sincere priests, bishops and Catholics nothing from here. Still does not change the fact that they are currently stuck in an occult stronghold which plays a key role in the coming New World Order.

Furthermore, Martin writes in another book, The Keys of this Blood, "the incident of Satanic pedophilia - rites and practices - has already been documented by some bishops and priests as widely dispersed as Turin in Italy to South Carolina in the United States. The sectarian practices of Satanic pedophilia are considered by professionals to be the highlight of the rituals of the Fallen Archangel ".

Shortly before his death gave Malachi Martin a few interviews in which he confirms the satanic practices within the church. A short section of such interview you find at the bottom of this article.

Lucifer, Satan has the world in its grip. Not surprising that pedophiles quietly sit back in the topfunkties and will never worry about. Almost everything in this world, every organization or structure, ends or begins with Satan.

They have taken control of several organizations together with the Military Order of Malta, such as:
  • The United Nations

  • NATO

  • European Commission

  • Council on Foreign Relations

  • Several central banks

  • Large bedrijfen (SP 500)

  • Secret services - Secret services

  • Different societies and cults like Freemasonry (Freemasonry) ( "The Brotherhood") and Opus Dei.

Nevertheless, if you all people worldwide marketing in those positions of power against the population you're talking about a fraction. Light and love is really in the majority! But only if the sheeple once wake up and realize that they do not allow control and dominate Satan, maybe then something will change.

The holders of the post of black pope over the years:

(1) - Ignatius Loyola (1541-1556).
St. Ignasius of Loyola
Founder of the Jesuit order in 1534.
(2) - Diego Lainez (1558-1565).
(3) - Francis Borgia (1565-1572).
Francis Borgia from the notorious Borgia family. The Borgias had many unacknowledged children who also include names of the Jesuit order infiltrated.
(4) - Everard Mercurian (1573-1580).
(5) - Claudius Aquaviva (1581-1615).
(6) - Mutius Vitelleschi (1615-1645).
(7) - Vincent Caraffa (1646-1649).
(8) - Francis Piccolomini (1649-1651).
(9) - Alexander Gottifredi (1652-1652).
(10) - Goswin Nickel (1652-1664).
(11) - John Paul Oliva (1664-1681).
(12) - Charles de Noyelle (1682-1686).
(13) - Thyrsus Gonzalez de Santella (1687 to 1705).
(14) - Tamburnini Michelangelo (1706-1730).
(15) - Francis Retz (1730-1750).
(16) - Ignatius Visconti (1751-1755).
(17) - Aloysius Centurione (1755-1757).
(18) - Lorenzo Ricci (1758-1775)
(19) - Thaddeus Brzozowski (1805-1820).
(20) - Luigi Fortis (1820-1829).
(21) - Jan Roothaan1829-1853).
(22) - Peter Beckx (1853-1887).
(23) - Antonio Maria Anderledy (1887-1892) (.
(24) - Luis Martin (1892 to 1906).
(25) - Franz Xavier Wernz (1906-1914).
(26) - Wlodimir Ledochowski (1915-1942).
(27) - Jean-Baptiste Janssens (1946-1964).
(28) - Pedro Arrupe (1965-1983).
(29) - Peter Hans Kolvenbach (1983-2008)
 
Jesuit General during the attacks in the USA on September 11, 2001. It is remarkable that Kolvenbach the first black pope who called for his resignation from the position of black Pope. The appointment black stuff is for life or until it appears that the black pope a "heretic." Resides now in Syria.


(30) - Adolfo Nicolás Pachón (2008 - ????).
(The current black Pope.)


Summary taken from: Thomas E. Zeyen, SJ Jesuit Generals: A Glance into a Forgotten Corner, University of Scranton Press, 2004.

Source: http://www.odvn.nl/de-jezuieten-en-de-zwarte-paus
SO THERE WE HAVE IT ALL SOWN UP FOR 2020. FROM THE ECONOMIST FORECAST TO THE ANNUAL DAVOS JAMBOREE OF THOSE CONTROLLING THE DAJALLIC SYSTEM. THIS WHOLE EXERCISE SERVES THE PURPOSE OF THE DAJALLIC SYSTEM ALONE AND NO ONE ELSE. IT IS ALSO TAKING PLACE UNDER THE SHADOW OF A DISINTEGRATING NEOLIBERALISM WORLD ORDER AND GEOPOLITICAL AND MILITARY PROVOCATIONS BY A MADMAN IN CHARGE OF A SUPERPOWER. NOT ONLY IS THIS WINTER LOOKING BLEAK BUT HUMANITY'S FUTURE IS BLEAK IF THIS CROWD REMAIN IN CONTROL. THE  MAIN TAKEAWAY THIS EVENING IS THAT THE 99.99%  OF THE WORLD POPULATION WHOSE FUTURE IS BEING DETERMINED NOW HAVE NO OTHER CHOICE BUT TO ENGAGE IN AND MOVE TOWARDS THE UNIVERSAL PARADIGM SHIFT FOR SELF DETERMINATION.  THIS WILL BE OUR FOCUS HEREAFTER.         

THE DAVOS WORLD ECONOMIC FORUM IS AT IT AGAIN – 
CELEBRATING 50TH ANNIVERSARY
https://www.globalresearch.ca/wef-celebr...ry/5701359 


THE UN AND CENTRAL BANKS : A ROCKEFELLER AND ROTHSCHILD COUP 
https://www.bitchute.com/video/15OwLPbJZGAN

WORLD ECONOMY WOULD COLLAPSE IF BANKS STOPPED LAUNDERING MONEY
https://www.bitchute.com/video/ZUCmtMbyMtuK



Friends, this year the WEF is celebrating its 50th Anniversary. Forty-nine (49) of the insanely pompous – and every year more – WEF events took place in Davos, Switzerland. Just one, in 2002, after 9/11, was moved to New York City, paradoxically for ‘security reasons’ they said – the logic of such a move was as ludicrous as the WEF itself.


Friends, you should go to the WEF, the notorious World Economic Forum in Davos, (21-24 January), where a 12 square-meter hotel room costs US$ 10,000 per night (if you don’t believe it, look it up on the internet), and where it’s totally normal that sharpshooters are everywhere on roof tops in subfreezing temperatures – to protect the about 3000 upper-echelons, of course – and that a huge section of the Zurich airport has been cordoned-off for the private planes of the ‘environmentally conscious elite’ — and where Trump arrived this morning, Tuesday, 21 January; and where the “plane-spotters” with their sophisticated binoculars and telescopes are practically camping in the airport areal — to be first when the airport gates are opened, for them to enter the airport terraces to “spot” the arriving VIP / CEO / celebrity private planes (you get the picture, it’s sort of like Black Friday, with the campers in front of the Walmart gates) – hundreds of private jets are expected – the normality of abject uselessness and decadence of the rich – and its acceptance and even glorification by the populace, is much more than George Orwell could have ever thought of when he wrote 1984 in 1948.

This year some 130 high-ranking guests, protected by international law, are expected – whoever they may be – in addition, are also anticipated 5 Royals, 22 Presidents, and 23 Prime Ministers. They will be shielded by Swiss police and military, a total of about 5000. President Trump will get about 300 special Swiss security police, in addition to his own security contingent, plus a private helicopter, brought in by military cargo from the US. His two days in Switzerland will cost the US tax-payer more than US$ 3.4 million, not including security personnel; peanuts compared to the entire Chabang for some 3,000 “high-level” VIPs and celebrities, or simply “wanna-be-seens”, who are eager to rub their elbows sore with the ‘real important’ people. What a farce!

The Zurich police chief told a reporter, that they, the police, have good relations with Trump’s security detail, “we are seeing eye-to-eye, they consider us as [i]competent and equals[/i]”. What can I say? It looks like this high-ranking Swiss police officer’s self-esteem depends on the acceptance level of Trump’s secret service police. How sad!

When President Trump steps off Air Force One, he transfers immediately under utmost security, including the watchful eyes of zillions of sharp-shooters on the airport’s rooftops to his helicopter, especially flown-in from the US in a military cargo plane, to be carried like a king to Davos. Most of his support troops will have to travel in blinded SUVs and limousines in the WEF-congested highways to Davos. Trump will be in best company – Greta Thunberg is also expected in Davos, albeit with a day’s delay, due to a sudden high fever. Nevertheless, she promised to be there.

The protection of this incredibly ludicrous event, is gigantic, costing millions and millions. It’s an orgy of power and money, of  the men and women who call the shots over our western world – or that’s what they would like to believe, and they may, if you, folks, don’t wake up and take the reins into your own hands, the hands of the people, because it is the steering wheel of the people that is at stake – not the command lever of the super-rich.

They say, President Trump’s security risk is today even higher than what it was in 2018, when he first attended Davos, because of the constant threats on Iran, and mostly because of his ruthless, out-of-law assassination of Iran’s top General, Qassem Suleimani. That’s why his security detail has to be even larger than it would be otherwise. – Well, you may ask, since when does a murderer deserve protection? – Unless he is a suicide risk, which Trump – the epitome of egocentricity, certainly isn’t.

They, these WEFers, will just continue robbing you – as they have been doing for at least the last 200 years – and they have managed to this so skillfully – that the great lot of us ‘folks’ admire them – come to watch them in awe arriving in their private jets and taking off in their private jets… that’s how low we have sunk. But it’s never too late, folks, to wake up and ignore this nonsense – ignore and discard it. They are not worthy of an iota of your attention.

Their agenda is spiked with lies and deceptions. This is the official agenda – 
it’s called an agenda for “Stakeholders for a Cohesive and Sustainable World”:

1. How to address the urgent climate and environmental challenges that are harming our ecology and economy

2. How to transform industries to achieve more sustainable and inclusive business models as new political, economic and societal priorities change trade and consumption patterns

3. How to govern the technologies driving the Fourth Industrial Revolution so they benefit business and society while minimizing their risks to them

4. How to adapt to the demographic, social and technological trends reshaping education, employment and entrepreneurship.


That’s what the outside world gets to see and hear debated, the common folks like you and me, and those thousands ‘climate change’ protesters that have been trekking for tens of kilometers through snow and cold to reach Davos and leave their message to the Big Ones – “take responsibility, our planet is burning”. These people may get to hear some of the official debate on (man-made – CO2-caused)-climate change, and promises on what they – the Big Ones – will do about it.

When behind the scene, behind closed doors – off earshot of the ‘commons’ – another narrative will be discussed, most likely in combination with ‘climate’, how to use climate and the fake climate propaganda, combined with harmful, potentially deadly G5 and soon G6 radiation technology, the 4th Industrial Revolution, and the gene- and “biotechnology – GMOs, and more to the heart of the matter, CRISPR (pronounced “crisper” – Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats), a genome editing tool that can selectively alter human (and other living beings’) DNA.

These forces of commandeering power combined and united – plus, of course, eternal wars – may alter the course of the world. One of the elite’s key objective is reducing the world population, so that the elite can continue living in opulence, without having to share Mother Earths generous, but limited resources with 7.7 billion people, and growing – use some of them, deplorables, as oppressed slaves and get rid of the rest.

That sounds harsh. But these are not my words. Already in the 1960s Henry Kissinger, the world’s most sought-after war criminal still alive, a Rockefeller ‘scholar’ and associate and steadfast Bilderberg Society steward, said that a key objective of the Bilderbergers is population reduction. In 1974, newly rewarded by the Nixon Administration as Secretary of State, for the fascist coup “9/11/73” he led in Chile, had this advice:

“Depopulation should be the highest priority of foreign policy towards the third world, because the US economy will require large and increasing amounts of minerals from abroad, especially from less developed countries.”

There you have it. The dark Luciferian elite of the WEF may be talking eugenics. We don’t know. But given the supremacy of the west and the deplorable fate of the deplorable people, who knows? It doesn’t look too farfetched with all we know that is going on in the occult. With Washington’s / Pentagon’s / NATO’s ability of extra-judiciary drone killing of just about anybody who may be considered a US ‘national security’ risk, or rather a risk of preventing the Global Elite to reach its target of Full Spectrum Dominance – we are moving ever closer to an all-annihilating WWIII – except that this very elite knows that with a nuclear holocaust there will be no winners, that they themselves may be wiped out – how to enjoy then the stolen riches? – So, they may opt for a “soft” version of population reduction – eugenics – and continuous, eternal and highly profitable regional conflicts and wars.

The thing is: wake up folks, do not believe the corporate-finance elite’s lies, no matter how well they are manufactured, packaged and presented, do not fall for their deceptive propaganda. It’s never too late, because we, folks, are 99.99% against 0.01%. Don’t fall into their trap. They – the elite, the WEF schmucks – all want you to act against your own interests. Do your own research, do your own math – and stop watching mainstream media, they all collude with the same lies, that’s why they are paid billions by the small deep, dark interest groups.
IT IS TIME THAT THE FRANCOPHONE AXIS WITHIN GLOBALISATION AND GLOBALISTS HAS THE TORCHLIGHT OF TRUTH SHONE UPON IT. FRANCE AS ONE OF THE MOST NOTORIOUS COLONIAL POWERS IS STILL IMPOSING ITS HEGEMONY IN FRANCOPHONE AFRICA. ONE OF THE MAIN TOOLS IT HAS BEEN USING LIKE THE AMERICANS AND THE BRITISH BEFORE HAS BEEN THEIR CURRENCY AND THE ROLE OF THE FRANC AS PART OF FINANCIAL IMPERIALISM AGAINST FRANCOPHONE COUNTRIES. 


IT IS TIME FOR AFRICANS TO DECOLONISE THEMSELVES FULLY AND COMPLETELY BY ENDING USE OF THE CFA FRANC AND WITHDRAW HOLDING THEIR CURRENCY RESERVES IN PARIS. THE FRENCH SHOULD PACK THEIR BAGS AND LEAVE FRANCOPHONE AFRICA OTHERWISE BE SENT BACK WITH BODY BAGS. THE FRENCH NEED TO BE TAUGHT A LESSON IN CIVILISATION IN THAT THOU SHALL NOT STEAL FROM OTHERS. THIS IS ONLY THE FIRST STEP AND THEY NEED TO BE COMPELLED TO REPATRIATE THE MISAPPROPRIATED MONIES AND ASSETS BACK TO AFRICA. IN ORDER THAT AFRICANS CAN REBUILD THEIR OWN COUNTRIES AND ECONOMIES AND DO NOT NEED TO COME AS ECONOMIC MIGRANTS TO EUROPE. THIS DIMENSION TO RESTRUCTURING THE INTERNATIONAL ORDER MAY BECOME MORE PRESSING AND SALIENT. THE RACE XENOPHOBES AND RIGHT WING RACE NATIONALISTS NEED TO BITE THE BITTER BULLET OF HISTORY. YOU CAN NOT HAVE A FREE FRANCE IF YOU DO NOT HAVE A FREE AFRICA.     


CAN THESE WEST AFRICAN NATIONS DECOLONISE THEIR CURRENCY?
https://www.trtworld.com/africa/can-thes...ency-31462

The CFA Franc has always seen as a vestige of colonialism, but now eight West African countries are aiming to decolonise and start their own currency. Eight West African countries have proposed to withdraw their currency reserves from the French central bank. The proposal would look to replace the euro-linked CFA franc with a new common West African currency: eco. The French-regulated CFA franc is currently used by 155 million people across the African continent in 14 West and Central African countries.


The CFA was specially created in 1945, after the 1944 Bretton Woods Agreement, which saw the world usher in a new global monetary system with the US dollar replacing the gold standard. The French-regulated CFA franc was for the French colonies of Africa, it is linked to the euro and its convertibility is guaranteed by France. According to the arrangement, described by analysts as a colonial relic, these African countries had to deposit half of their foreign currency reserves in the French central bank.

Benin’s President Patrice Talon announced last Thursday that the West African Monetary Union wants to take back control of its currency. Eight African countries including Togo, Burkina Faso, Mali, Senegal, Ivory Coast, Niger and Guinea Bissau have reached an agreement to pull the reserves from France. "We all agree on this, unanimously, to end this model," Talon told French media last Thursday. The move, if it happens, could also have serious implications for the French economy.

Decolonisation?
The CFA franc has been the currency used by French colonies since 1945, and despite the subsequent independence of several African nations, it is still in use. The system is seen as one of the last vestiges of colonialism and the CFA franc has always been a target of criticism. Talon said that the decision may take time, but it has been adopted at the meeting of Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS). "The injustice has gone for too long. It is time to discuss issues with France to clarify many things, to allow us to have our monetary sovereignty. We do not have it today,” Chadian President Idris Debby said during a media briefing last Monday. An agreement was made to introduce a single currency, eco, for the entire region by 2020. According to the plan, as a first phase, Gambia, Ghana, Guinea, Nigeria and Sierra Leone, which currently have their own currencies, will launch the eco. Then in the second phase, the eight countries which use the CFA franc will replace their currencies. The eco first came to the fore in 2003, however, it has been delayed several times. 

Will it be any different this time? 
Nassir M A Doutoum, an Africa Researcher at the Association of Researchers on Africa (AFAM) told TRT World that as part of a decolonisation process, most leaders of African countries have attempted to realise moves like this in the past. Leaders like Sekou Toure, Modibo Keita, Sylvanus Olympio and Thomas Sankara criticised the colonial policy of the CFA, and some of them even stopped using it. 

Doutoum Said: “But somehow, the leaders who tried to give on up on CFA were eliminated or killed. In the past, African countries were not ready to realise it, however, today’s circumstances are different. As of today, the struggle against CFA is not just based on leaders and intellectuals, also most of the African public supports the idea.” According to Doutoum, France has tried to prevent several NGOs in various African countries that have been protesting CFA and trying to raise awareness about the damage it does to Africans. 

There have already been protests in the past to say no to the CFA and the issue may be gaining even more momentum among the public. Doutoum sees that the developments as a whole may allow this attempt to succeed. AFAM Researcher Kaan Devecioglu described Talon’s statement during an interview with TRT World as both courageous and divorced from reality as he believes that the statement was mainly political. He says that whoever criticises the CFA in the continent gains sympathy and support, but it is just rhetoric. He says every country has to form a consensus, which is no easy task.

How will France’s future in Africa be shaped?
Professor Ahmet Kavas, an African expert, Turkey’s former ambassador to Chad and founder of the Association of Researchers on Africa (AFAM), said: “Even France recognises the independence of the African countries which it colonised in the past, but France still keeps deep political, cultural, economic, and social ties with these countries.”  In this context, Kavas stated that for Africa’s natural resources to reach markets, France stipulates the CFA (also known as west-middle African franc) be used as the mandatory currency in its previous colonies. He adds that to maintain competitiveness in the international arena and to sustain its current position, France doesn’t want to abandon opportunities provided by its colonies.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15