“Thus, the major output of the modern international Mass Media consists of only four categories:
1. Good presented as bad
2. Bad presented as Good
(That is to say simple inversion)
3. Good presented as Good for a bad reason
4. Bad presented as bad for a bad reason
(That is to say explanatory inversion)
These four categories, which can be summarized as either simple or explanatory inversion, account for all sustained and high impact modern major Mass Media stories without any exceptions.”Professor Bruce Charlton, Addicted to Distraction.
To untangle Brexit you have to disentangle everything else.
The Main Theme of dominant narratives of the 21st Century since 2000, 9/11
war on terror, Climate Beliefs and Haulocaustianity, Denialist Thoughtcrime and thought crime denunciation, Political Correctness, Identity politics, Divide and Rule, Media, Social Media, Censorship, Self-censorship. Peer Pressure Peer review, Star Worship, Cults of personality,
With that list, this list of Wells’s from The fate of Mann quoted in My poem Globalisation Unentangled.
Cabalists, Gnostics, Manichaeans, the Old Man
of the Mountains, Knight Templars, Satanists,
Rosicrucians, Illuminati, Freemasons, Rousseau,
Voltaire, Cagliostro, Madame Blavatsky, Mrs. Besant,
Trade Unions, Anarchists, Socialists, Theosophists,
Communists, Those Bolsheviks, a frightful horde
all plotting and getting hold of power and handing
it on and doing down Christianity and the Christian life
Wells The Fate of Man.p.259
the idea before it was clothed in words
so near 50 years, behindhand a hero fell.
Our reason can be our Judge, of the rivals;
Globalism, Authority, coercion and competition.
Parmenides or Heraclitus navigators both
If centuries be epochs with peculiar discretion
Public debate
Among independent academics, “there is scientific consensus that Article 13 cannot be allowed to stand”, the leading European centres researching IP and innovation law find. According to expert analysis, the Commission proposal is…
- Incompatible with existing EU law: The E-Commerce Directive forbids general monitoring obligations, which even the European Parliament Research Service says Article 13 would establish. Other premises of Article 13 are also unsupported by existing law and jurisprudence, including the assertion that platforms “optimizing the presentation” of uploaded content become liable for infringements. [Sources: Study 1, Open letter, Study 2, Study 3, EPRS]
- Incompatible with the Charter of Fundamental Rights as interpreted by the ECJ: It violates the principle of a fair balance between competing fundamental rights laid out by the European Court of Justice in case law. [Open letter, Study]
- Ambiguously worded and inconsistent: Even the official German translation contains differences that significantly alter the meaning of some provisions.
expert opinion
Article 13 takes an unprecedented step towards the transformation of the Internet, from an open platform for sharing and innovation, into a tool for the automated surveillance and control of its users.
– 70 internet luminaries including World Wide Web inventor Tim Berners-Lee and Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales
This [law] will lead to excessive filtering and deletion of content and limit the freedom to impart information on the one hand, and the freedom to receive information on the other.
– 57 signatories representing fundamental rights organisations, including Human Rights Watch and Reporters without Borders
States and intergovernmental organizations should refrain from establishing laws or arrangements that would require the “proactive” monitoring or filtering of content, which is both inconsistent with the right to privacy and likely to amount to pre-publication censorship.
– United Nations Human Rights Council report
In less than a month, the European Parliament will not only decide on a new #copyright law, but also on the future of the free and open #internet: If you are from the European Union, get active now, go to https://t.co/pxiZ11AGjG and ask your representative to #SaveYourInternet pic.twitter.com/mtBKaqIX9W
— Edward Snowden (@Snowden) March 5, 2019
“Thus, the major output of the modern international Mass Media consists of only four categories:
1. Good presented as bad
2. Bad presented as Good
(That is to say simple inversion)
3. Good presented as Good for a bad reason
4. Bad presented as bad for a bad reason
(That is to say explanatory inversion)
https://www.captaineuro.eu/the-norway-option-is-not-an-option-2/
Censorship in the Soviet Union.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_in_the_Soviet_Union
Censorship was performed in two main directions:
- State secrets were handled by the General Directorate for the Protection of State Secrets in the Press (also known as Glavlit), which was in charge of censoring all publications and broadcasting for state secrets
- Censorship, in accordance with the official ideology and politics of the Communist Party was performed by several organizations:
- Goskomizdat censored all printed matter: fiction, poetry, etc.
- Goskino, in charge of cinema
- Gosteleradio, in charge of radio and television broadcasting
- The First Department in many agencies and institutions, such as the State Statistical Committee (Goskomstat), was responsible for assuring that state secrets and other sensitive information only reached authorized hands.
Contents
Censorship in Nazi Germany.
Nazi Germany (1933–1945)[edit]
Shortly after Adolf Hitler rose to power in 1933, he established the Ministry of Propaganda with the goal that this agency would control all forms of mass communication in Germany.[15] At its peak of influence, the Ministry employed 1,500 employees spanning 17 departments.[16] Censorship policy was produced and implemented by the Reich Minister of Propaganda, Joseph Goebbels. As such, Goebbels oversaw the publication of all media that was to be widely distributed — literature, music, newspapers, and public events.[17] Any material that threatened the reputation of Hitler’s government or spoke ill of the regime was immediately censored and retracted.[18] Additionally, books that were already in circulation and written by Jewish authors were collected and burned.[19] Nazi bureaucrats saw their work and information control as necessary. It was, in their minds their duty to protect the German public from the harms of “undesirable books”.[20]
The control of information among young people was especially vital to the German government. On May 10, 1933, shortly after the Nazis rose to power, the government burned one-third of the total library holdings in Germany.[21] As soldiers burned at least 25,000 books in the center of Berlin, Goebbels spoke of the evils of literature and encouraged massive crowds to say “No to decadence and moral corruption!”.[22]. This event began a widespread effort to illustrate government control and align public opinion with party ideology.
The aim of censorship under the Nazi regime was simple: to reinforce Nazi power and to suppress opposing viewpoints and information.[23]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_in_Nazi_Germany
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_in_Francoist_Spain
Censorship in Francoist Spain,
was mandated by Francisco Franco in Francoist Spain, between 1936-1975. In Francoist Spain, primary subjects of censorship included public display of liberal political ideology, art forms such as literature and film, as well as symbols of foreign, non-conservative ideologies. This censorship was primarily driven by Franco’s vision for ideological unity in Spain.[1][2] As a result, Franco called for the censorship of materials that promoted liberal ideas from abroad, particular those of European origin. Aside from censorship of foreign ideology, symbols of Spanish identity, such as Catalonia, also became primary targets of censorship. Under his authoritarian reign, censorship was imposed primarily through systemic political repression. The Francoist State repressed expression of liberal social and political ideology among the Spanish public.
Aside from strong government censorship, Franco also gained the support of the Catholic Church in perpetuating censorship. Beyond censorship motivated by the Francoist State, individual critics had other, non-political interests that led them to becoming censors as well.[2][3] For example, individual censors would alter a text for clarity and coherence, or rewrite reviews on grounds of propriety as they deemed fit according to their individual standards. Political censors, on the other hand, would repress visible signs of liberal behavior and seek to paint a positive image of Franco.[3][4] Given the prevalence of censorship, Francoist Spain was also marked by a robust culture of resistance of censorship. In response to government suppression, Spain saw an era that subsequently fostered a culture of resistance, expressed in various art forms.[4]
Banning, South African Censorship by Editing Out, Spiking and Non Personhood.
| Part of a series on | ||
| Censorship by country | ||
|---|---|---|
 |
||
| Countries | ||
|
|
||
| See also | ||
DDOS attacks on Democratic action from Individuals to media conglomerates. Full Spectrum Mind Control.
The Propaganda Multiplier
How Global News Agencies and Western Media Report on Geopolitics
This study by Swiss Propaganda Research was first published in 2016, it is presented here in English for the first time. Translated by Terje Maloy.
Therefore you always have to ask yourself: Why do I get
this specific information in this specific form at this moment?
Ultimately, it’s always about questions of power.”
Dr. Konrad Hummler, Swiss banking and media executive
July 27, 2017
Part one of the 2017 investigative report series.
Avaaz Investigative Report Series 2012 [Further Reading]: Part I | Section I | Part I | Section II | Part I | Section III | Part II | Section I | Part II | Section II
This series builds on Cory Morningstar’s previous writing and research tracking the connecting lines of networked hegemony that exist between the elite funded NGOs that dominate the non profit industrial complex. Here Morningstar sharpens her focus on key individuals involved in rebranding business-as-usual and a particular Fifth Avenue address to expose the roots of the false narratives favored by the financial elites. Ongoing regime change, climate reformism, financialization of nature and the ‘new economy’ come under Morningstar’s lens making very clear that Avaaz is the propagandizing seat of smart power for those who would have us continue, in sweet delusion, consuming the earth to death. — Australian activist Michael Swifte
Foreword:
n 2012-2013 I wrote an investigative series titled Avaaz: Imperialist Pimps of Militarism, Protectors of the Oligarchy, Trusted Facilitators of War. I introduced the series began as follows:
“The Ivy League bourgeoisie who sit at the helm of the non-profit industrial complex will one day be known simply as charismatic architects of death. Funded by the ruling class oligarchy, the role they serve for their funders is not unlike that of corporate media. Yet, it appears that global society is paralyzed in a collective hypnosis – rejecting universal social interests, thus rejecting reason, to instead fall in line with the position of the powerful minority that has seized control, a minority that systematically favours corporate interests.
Huffington Post renews smear campaign against UK Professor Piers Robinson
By Julie Hyland
10 December 2018
A smear campaign against Professor Piers Robinson, chair in politics, society and political journalism at the University of Sheffield, has been renewed with an article in the Huffington Post.
Robinson is one of a small number of academics and independent journalists to challenge the official narrative around the “war on terror,” especially regarding the civil war in Syria. Along with Professor Tim Hayward (environmental political theory, University of Edinburgh) he is a founding member of the Working Group on Syria, Propaganda and Media (WGSPM). Established to facilitate “rigorous academic analysis” of media reportage of the Syrian war, it investigates the role of propaganda more broadly in shaping public perception of conflicts and its connection to western geo-strategic objectives.
The issue of staging and manipulation etc covers more than just Douma, as we show here: https://t.co/mCzpZJm1nL … a proper, fully independent, transparent and impartial investigation is needed into all these events. @Tracking_Power @Tim_Hayward_
— Piers Robinson (@PiersRobinson1) February 13, 2019
Clearly if wikipedia allows a person who reveals their political agenda (see attached) to edit pages, there is a huge problem. This is clearly visible on my entry which has been overwhelmingly edited by Cross and which is clearly unbalanced. pic.twitter.com/jNjWT4Qnsp
— Piers Robinson (@PiersRobinson1) May 9, 2018
William Connolley
Jump to navigationJump to search
|
William Connolley
|
|
|---|---|
Connolley in May 2008
|
|
| Born | 12 April 1964 |
| Nationality | British |
| Education | M.A. (Oxon.), D.Phil. (Oxon.) |
| Alma mater | University of Oxford |
| Occupation | Software engineer |
| Known for | Blog activity about climate change |
| Political party | Green Party of England and Wales |
| Children | 2 |
William Michael Connolley (born 12 April 1964) is a British software engineer, writer, and blogger on climatology. Until December 2007 he was Senior Scientific Officer in the Physical Sciences Division in the Antarctic Climate and the Earth System project at the British Antarctic Survey, where he worked as a climate modeller. After this he became a software engineer for Cambridge Silicon Radio.
Connolley received national press attention over several years for his involvement in editing Wikipedia articles relating to climate change. Connolley was a member of the RealClimate website until 2007 and now operates a website and blog that discuss climate issues. He has also been active in local politics as a member of the Green Party.
Wikipedia editing[edit]
Connolley began editing Wikipedia in 2003[16] and served as a Wikipedia administrator from 2006 until 2009.[17] He has been cited and quoted in the media regarding these activities, especially with respect to his editing in the area of climate change. He was cited by Nature magazine, in their December 2005 review of the reliability of Wikipedia, as an example of an expert who edits Wikipedia.[18] Nature quoted Connolley, in 2006, as saying that “some scientists have become frustrated with Wikipedia” but that “conflict can sometimes result in better articles”.[19] In July 2006, a New Yorker article described him as briefly becoming “a victim of an edit war over the entry on global warming”, in which a sceptic repeatedly “watered down” the article’s explanation of the greenhouse effect.[20] Connolley told the magazine that Wikipedia “gives no privilege to those who know what they’re talking about”.[20] Various books have cited Connolley as an example of how expert editors on Wikipedia are given “no more credence” than anonymous editors of the site.[21][22][23] In 2007, The Sunday Times of London ran an interview of author Andrew Keen that discussed Connolley and his Wikipedia editing. It identified Connolley as “an expert on global warming”, stating: “After trying to correct inaccuracies Connolley was accused of trying to remove ‘any point of view which does not match his own’. Eventually he was limited to making just one edit a day.” The article stated that Wikipedia’s Arbitration Committee “gave no weight to [Connolley’s] expertise, and treated him with the same credibility as his anonymous opponent.”[24]
Two internal disputes at Wikipedia in which Connolley was involved received additional attention. A 2005 Wikipedia climate change dispute involving breaches of etiquette, rather than content bias, was cited by a paper in the Journal of Science Communication as an example that “resonated deeply as it highlighted what can befall respected experts who wade into controversial wiki-waters”. The paper stated that Connolley did “not suffer…fools gladly”.[25] The same paper noted a 2009 Wikipedia arbitration in which it was concluded that Connolley had used administrator privileges to his own advantage in content disputes, and these privileges were removed.[25] Other academic papers have discussed Connolley’s editing activities on Wikipedia and the dispute resolution process as it has been applied to him.[26]
Why Wikipedia Matters.
https://twitter.com/PMotels/status/1097878932068683776
This exchange with David Graeber indicates why controlling the narrative on Wikipedia Pages is so important, Mr Hallam has an unremarkable web Presence and in that old Pejoritive has a “Great Face for Radio”.
https://tools.wmflabs.org/pageviews/?project=en.wikipedia.org&platform=all-access&agent=user&start=2018-11-25&end=2019-02-23&pages=Greta_Thunberg
https://www.alexa.com/topsites
Wikipedia No 5.
Prevention is better than Cure. Proactive Mind Control and You. #CONTEST #Prevent #BigBrother #1984
https://wikispooks.com/wiki/Kevin_Galalae this case as meticulously documented by Kevin Galalae in the late naughties and Early 2010’s reveals how deeply ingrained this problem is now in British Society.https://wikispooks.com/w/images/0/06/Covert_Censorship_at_Oxford_and_Leicester_University.pdfWe have an Establishment hijacked by a Paranoid Cohort who fears its own (Subjects) Citizens) https://wikispooks.com/w/images/b/b9/Turning_the_Tide.pdfOf Course, Spinoza’s famous Lines are relevant here.
“Better that right counsels be known to enemies than that the evil secrets of tyrants should be concealed from the citizens. They who can treat secretly of the affairs of a nation have it absolutely under their authority; and as they plot against the enemy in time of war, so do they against the citizens in time of peace.” ― Baruch Spinoza
https://wikispooks.com/w/images/0/06/Covert_Censorship_at_Oxford_and_Leicester_University.pdf
Here is why I believe that I have a duty to expose Britain’s spy activities on Canadian, and indeed on all, students:
1. It is illegal, hence it violates privacy laws, the Data Protection Act, expressional rights, education law, and a variety of human rights, both in Britain and its equivalents in Canada and elsewhere, to name but a few. It also prejudices and distorts the adjudication of legitimate complaints, as my experience amply demonstrates, silences the media, which are supposed to act as the guardians of truth, and renders civil society powerless, leaving no one and no institution strong enough to ensure that the government respects the law.
2. It is subject to abuse, as my case also demonstrates. If this has happened to me, I shudder to think what happens to British citizens whose ideas are found to be to the dislike of Britain’s secret services and who are within the reach of Britain’s secret service goons. What criteria are used to decide who should be purged from Britain’s universities and what consequences follow? Who oversees the censors and inquisitors? Are they accountable to anyone? Obviously not, since they operate in secret and outside the bounds of the law. Have I already been placed on a no-fly list as punishment for my efforts to expose this spy program? Will Britain seek to punish me further down the road by tampering with the breaks of my car or stabbing me in the back in a dark alley? Who is to know? Isn’t this what Britain’s intelligence agencies have been doing since their inception in places far and near? Will American border guards copy my hard drive and tear my car apart next time I cross into the US? Most likely they will.
3. It perverts the academic environment. There can be no free debate if secret service agents with secret agendas control the exchange of ideas and decide who can graduate and who cannot. In such an environment only subjects deemed to be politically safe will be objectively discussed and only topics that meet with the censors’ approval will be funded. Furthermore, is the information the government collects on students used to prevent graduates from obtaining government jobs because they are deemed to have the wrong political inclinations? My case already demonstrates that strong criticism of Britain’s foreign policy is sufficient grounds to prevent students from graduating. But what happens if one’s criticism only marginally offends the secret service?
4. It creates a society of mistrust, where citizens spy on citizens and everyone must guard what he or she says in order not to offend the powers to be and to conform. Having been born and raised in communist Romania, I know how easy it is for such a cancer to spread and how toxic it can be for society. Before long, an environment of mutual suspicion affects everyone and everything.
5. It impoverishes and eventually kills the democratic process. Why? Because it excludes opinions that question the status quo and the people who hold them from the political process and, more importantly, from the public discourse. 6. It is a betrayal of students’ trust. No one likes to pay good money to be spied on and punished for ideas freely expressed in an environment of learning, an environment that is purportedly sacrosanct. Innocent young men and women are unbeknown to them sowing the seeds of their own destruction and exclusion rather than constructing a better future for themselves. By expressing views that run contrary to the interests of the elites, young people are being secretly branded as “enemies of the state” by government agents who spy on them and who have the power to interpret others’ opinions any which way they like.
7. In a time of acute credentialism, it has the potential to distort the political process of nations who employ graduates from British universities duly screened to conform to British values and educated not to question the wisdom of British policies. Britain, one must remember, graduates more foreign students than any other nation except the USA. The supremacy of the English language, as the language of global communication, confers unfair advantages to the universities of English-speaking nations, and Britain is abusing this advantage.
8. It criminalizes thought.
9. It politicizes teaching and learning.
10. It is plain stupid and a waste of taxpayers’ money. No terrorist takes a university course to announce his aggressive intentions. If anything, those with destructive plans will paint a totally different picture of themselves and their tendencies. In the faint hope of preventing a terrorist plot, the British government is wasting millions if not hundreds of millions (depending on the extent of this program) of taxpayers’ money and untold human resources that could be better used for more constructive pursuits. No wonder Britain’s deficit has skyrocketed! Worse, the freedoms and values the British government purports to defend are the first victims of this spy and censorship program. Kevin Galalae.Kevin’s Experiences are also recounted in other spheres of Public and Civic Life, other programs such as Co-intel Pro,
THAT OLD CHESTNUT, IT’S ALL LIES BUT NOT THE CLIMATE CHANGE THING? GO FIGURE.
Nobody talks about wars causing global warming
There is little or no acknowledgement of the role of warmongering in the global warming debate. While there is condemnation of, for example, the production of greenhouse gases from Indonesia’s palm oil fires, or from controlled burning of wasted natural gas or oil (flaring), there is little concern over the deliberate burning of oilfields.
In 2016 ‘responsible scientists‘, academics from the world’s most distinguished universities, including Stephen Hawking, wrote in an open letter begging for action on climate change
This map from Nasa shows temperature data from four international science institutions, showing rapid warming in the past few decades.
The striking thing about this chart is the big spike around World War II. Global warming reached its highest point in recent history,
The world is in the middle of what is likely to be the warmest 10 years since records began in 1850, says the Met Office.
Notes on data released March 1, 2019 (v6.0)
February’s globally-averaged, bulk-layer atmospheric temperature anomaly of +0.36°C (+0.65°F) is essentially unchanged from January.
The NH warmed a bit, but that was counterbalanced by cooling in the SH. NOAA has declared that the long-awaited El Niño, a warming of tropical Pacific Ocean waters, has officially arrived, though as they had anticipated for several months, the strength of this one is minimal. Indeed, the month’s tropical satellite temperature anomaly is a weak +0.43°C (+0.77°F), which is only half of February 2016’s major El Niño value of +0.86°C (+1.55°F).
Something that Ryan Mause showed me: What color would that map be, if the global average temp (0.36 C deg) was applied globally?
Answer: It would be fully white. Basically, it would mean no change.
-
Thanks for the great perspective. Suppose they will have to update the color scale for the map to cover the deceptiveness that the world is not warming that much.
-
Very true.
To got a bit further…Nick Stokes considers -0.2 deg C to +0.2 deg C to designate a “cool spot” https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/02/28/the-seas-get-cooler-around-iceland-some-charts-and-anecdotes/ …former meteorologist Tony Banton considers it a “cold spot.”
So +0.36 deg C is apparently just above “cool” or “cold” according to those warmista experts.
-
What color would that map be, if the global average temp (0.36 C deg) was applied globally?
0.36 C isn’t the global average temperature, it’s the ‘difference’ from the global average temperature for February between 1981 and 2010.
THE OLIGARCHS BEHIND THE “HUMANITARIAN” REGIME CHANGE NETWORK NOW EXPLOITING JO COX’S DEATH TO PUSH FOR UK LABOUR SPLIT
Wrong Kind of Green Nov 14, 2018 Avaaz, Humanitarian Agencies, Imperialist Wars/Occupations, Purpose [Public Relations Arm of Avaaz], Social Engineering, The International Campaign to Destabilize Syria, Whiteness & Aversive Racism
October 22, 2018
By Vanessa Beeley and Whitney Webb
https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2018-03-14/debates/071C37BB-DF8F-4836-88CA-66AB74369BC1/SalisburyIncidentFurtherUpdate
the theatre is sublime, infact Absurdist gold.
in Men from Caria (fr. 111) when he mocks one of the sophists for dancing at a dinner party, saying the following:
Don’t you see the
pansy dancing with his hands? He’s not ashamed—the
man who explains Heracleitus to everyone,
and is the only person able to make sense of
Theodectas’ art57
This film also details the progress of the coming collapse of the United States and the formation of the North American Union.
https://www.bitchute.com/video/mvJpHd4SEOrB/
This From Back in the Day from The Wrong Kind of Green is an Apt summary, Introduction Postcript and Prayer against Neo Liberalism.
The Climate Change religion is to be the fountain head of the Culling of the Human Species.
https://www.bitchute.com/video/XikjAJ4yeLXv/
A Neocon is an Israeli Firster who supports the Neocon Wars which are for the benefit of Israel and against the interests of America – the invasion of Iraq in 2003, the Regime Change Ops in Libya and Syria from 2011, and now the projected war with Iran.
Neocons support the American Empire, massive military spending, perpetual war, and American “Full Spectrum” Global dominance.
They are anti democracy, authoritarian and elitist, disdaining ordinary people and treating them with utter contempt.
The Neocons started taking power in America during the 1980’s with people like Dick Cheney, Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz who were all members of the Reagan/Bush admin.
The early Neocons like the Kristol’s were Revolutionary Trotskyites in the 1960’s and Dems.
They switched to the GOP in the 1970’s and 1980’s as an easier route to power.
Most of them have been making there way back to the Dems since Trump became the GOP nominee in mid 2016 (or when Hillary started running in mid 2015).
Paul Wolfowitz was mentored by Leo Strauss, who is considered to be the “Godfather of Neoconservatism”, as a student
The term Globalism has been around from at least the 1960’s but its origins come from Cecil Rhodes Round Tables which were set up around 1900 as a mechanism for Rhodes and his allies from the British and South African Oligarchs to take over the world.
The CFR and Chatham House (Royal Institute for International Affairs) were set up in the 1920’s.
The Bilderberg group held its first meeting in 1954 at the Bilderberg Hotel.
The Trilateral Commission was set up by David Rockefeller and Zbigniew Brzezinski in the mid 1970’s.
Globalism is another term for Neoliberalism, which is another term for Corporatism.
It is principally pushed by Neoliberal wealthy elites who pretend to be lefties, but are actually Corporatists or Corporate Fascists.
The principal protagonists are George Soros, the Rothschilds and the Rockefeller family.
Globalism
https://ian56.blogspot.com/2018/12/what-is-globalism-globalism-is.html?showComment=1551432305224
What is Globalism? Globalism is Neoliberalism which is Corporatism
The term Globalism has been around from at least the 1960’s but its origins come from Cecil Rhodes Round Tables which were set up around 1900 as a mechanism for Rhodes and his allies from the British and South African Oligarchs to take over the world.
The CFR and Chatham House (Royal Institute for International Affairs) were set up in the 1920’s.
The Bilderberg group held its first meeting in 1954 at the Bilderberg Hotel.
The Trilateral Commission was set up by David Rockefeller and Zbigniew Brzezinski in the mid 1970’s.
Globalism is another term for Neoliberalism, which is another term for Corporatism.
It is principally pushed by Neoliberal wealthy elites who pretend to be lefties, but are actually Corporatists or Corporate Fascists.
The principal protagonists are George Soros, the Rothschilds and the Rockefeller family.
WATCH: The real causes for Antisemitism is NOT what Israel claims:
1. Criticizing Israel is NOT #antisemitism.
2. AIPAC is not a Jewish Group
3. The Holocaust is not 'owned' by #IsraelWatch our complete video clarifying this important issue. pic.twitter.com/PHUBFLMF8c
— Torah Jews (@TorahJews) February 18, 2019
Notes for a Poem or some prose. Globalisation, A big Question?
This book is intended for normal, mainstream, secular, modern, disaffected and alienated intellectuals; those who are complicit in political correctness (as are all intellectuals) but who are (when not distracted, drugged or dreaming) in a state of despair.
This book will, I hope, help such people to understand their condition, and present the likely choices. It will not help them to save their world (too late for that) but it may help them to save their souls.
*
*
Note: Why I use the term Political Correctness, instead of Liberalism or Socialism?
The reasons include:
1. The confusion over what ‘liberalism’ means – to some a free marketeer, to others a socialist. My definition of political correctness is broad and includes most mainstream conservatives, libertarians and anarchists; who are nowadays all significantly PC.
http://thoughtprison-pc.blogspot.se/
http://addictedtodistraction.blogspot.se/
Thus, the major output of the modern international Mass Media consists of only four categories:
1. Good presented as bad
2. Bad presented as Good
(That is to say simple inversion)
3. Good presented as Good for a bad reason
4. Bad presented as bad for a bad reason
(That is to say explanatory inversion)
These four categories, which can be summarized as either simple or explanatory inversion, account for all sustained and high impact modern major Mass Media stories without any exceptions.
Something I’ve been meaning to say about The Tragedy of the Commons. Bear with me for a small thread on why our embrace of Hardin is a stain on environmentalism. tldr: we’ve let a flawed metaphor by a racist ecologist define environmental thinking for a half century. 1/
— mattomildenberger (@mmildenberger) March 4, 2019
https://en.wikipedia.org/…/Truth_and_Reconciliation…
I think the south African Experience can teach us a lot of how we might move on from the last 15 years and the Fabricated War on Terror.
The Truth and Reconciliation Commission,
April 1996, East London, South Africa
On the first day
after a few hours of testimony
the Archbishop wept.
He put his grey head
on the long table
of papers and protocols
and he wept.
The national
and international cameramen
filmed his weeping,
his misted glasses,
his sobbing shoulders,
the call for a recess.
It doesn’t matter what you thought
of the Archbishop before or after,
of the settlement, the commission,
or what the anthropologists flying in
from less studied crimes and sorrows
said about his discourse,
or how many doctorates,
books and installations followed,
or even if you think this poem
simplifies, lionizes,
romanticizes, mystifies.
There was a long table, starched purple vestment
and after a few hours of testimony,
the Archbishop, chair of the commission,
laid down his head, and wept.
That’s how it began.
Cashless Society, BlockChain, Global Warming, Gold, Carbon . Geo Political Full House.
HAS THE HOLOCAUST REPLACED CALVARY AT THE CHRISTIAN FESTIVAL OF EASTER?
Has the Holocaust replaced Calvary at the Christian festival of Easter?
What is the direction of travel and the main narrative embedded in the Narrative of the past 40 years? The Rules-Based International Order or ( New World Order ) Narratives.
1. Globalisation and Urbanisation.
2.Petro Dollar Hegemony . Addiction to Oil.
3. Man Made Global Warming
4. Overshoot Overpopulation
5. Elitism, Starfucking worship of ”The Elites** Submission to Judgement by Experts?
https://longhairedmusings.wordpress.com/2018/04/04/wwiii-is-nothing-but-another-colonial-resource-war/
https://archive.org/details/Morethantaboo2013HolocaustWhatstrueandWhatsfalseHD
Psyop More Than Taboo 2013 The Holocaust What’s True and What’s Not is Being Used as Justification for Wars.
WATCH: This is extremely dangerous to our democracy…
A few days ago, every local news station in America owned by the Sinclair Broadcast Group – a massive media conglomerate – read short a statement about the spread of “fake news”. The same statement, word-for-word. CBS, ABC, NBC and Fox, it didn’t matter. They were united in their chant.
As you watch the montage – put together by user “D” on youtube – you have to ask yourself: What is the mechanism behind this? Who wrote the statement, and what structure allows their words to be spoken by hundreds of mouths to millions of viewers?
Most importantly – how revealing is this of our media? How often has this united-front of opinion been present, but less obvious?
USURY HELL´S FUEL MANS OPPRESSOR
BOURGOISE RESOLUTION AND
GLOBALISATION UN ENTANGLED.
the idea before it was clothed in words
so near 50 years behindhand a hero fell.
Our reason can be our Judge, of the rivals;
Globalism, Authority, coercion and competition.
Parmenides or Heraclitus navigators both
If centuries be epochs with peculiar discretion
The Steady Enmity of Powerful People
“Crime doesn’t pay.” Actually it does, handsomely. If you are a banker or large financial player, it pays wonderfully. You get filthy rich committing the crimes and after…you continue to get filthy rich.
https://t.co/tWaSX2PIc4— GrubStreetJournal (@GrubStreetJorno) November 4, 2019 https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
— GrubStreetJournal (@GrubStreetJorno) November 4, 2019
ARRBY