Neil Bush (Globalist), Jeb’s brother, joined Ted Cruz’s finance team on March 8th.
Jeb Bush (Globalist) endorses Ted Cruz for Republican nomination March 22nd.
Cruz’s wife Heidi was a member of the Globalist CFR (Council on Foreign Relations) and helped the CFR craft the document espousing the Globalist North American unity. However, in a campaign event in Tyler, Texas, in 2011, Cruz called CFR “a pernicious nest of snakes” that is “working to undermine our sovereignty.” This BTW is a very true statement that applies to all Globalists including the Bush family and Goldman Sachs.
In the 2007 bestselling book “The Late Great USA: The Coming Merger with Mexico and Canada,” Robert Pastor (CFR), who served as co-chairman of the committee which Hedi served, was called “the father of the North American Union” for the influence the CFR report had on the summit meeting between the heads of state of the U.S., Mexico and Canada.
Heidi served in the Bush White House, under Condoleezza Rice, as economic director for the Western Hemisphere at the National Security Council. She had previously served as the director of the Latin America office at the U.S. Treasury Department and as an assistant to Ambassador Robert B. Zoellick (Globalist), U.S. trade representative; an American banker who was the eleventh president of the World Bank.
Ted Cruz first supported Fast Track which would allow Obama (Globalist) to bypass the constitutional treaty approval requirement of 2/3rd senate vote. He even wrote an op-ed supporting this: “We strongly urge our colleagues in Congress to vote for trade-promotion authority” Cruz stated, along with co-author Rep. Paul Ryan (Globalist), R-Wis., in a Wall Street Journal (Globalist) op-ed on April 21.
This Trade Promotion Authority, also called fast-track would allow this treaty now called an agreement to be negotiated in secret by Obama, dumped on the Senate floor with no time to read, debate or change, and passed with a simple up or down vote of only 51% to pass not the 2/3rds required by the US Constitution. This TPP treaty BTW would end US Sovereignty and place this country and our constitution under the control of international corporations (Globalism). Next, Cruz does a 180 on this decision… “Cruz’s criticism of fast-track comes as a surprise, considering his public praise of the bill only two months prior.”
Where was Ted Cruz on the Audit the Fed vote? Answer: Missing in Action, no where to be found. However, Ted had no such problem when it came to reauthorizing the 100% Unconstitutional Patriot Act.
Cruz also had large, unreported loans with Goldman Sachs (Globalist), one of the major promoters of globalism. His wife is an executive at Goldman Sachs.
Globalism 101 explained … This is the same scheme being cooked up with all these so called ‘Free Trade’ agreements: Labour Minister Tony Benn (shortly before his death) emotionally explains why he fought against the European Union all his life and why we should too.
Talk radio KTRH 740 AM’s talent and employees all agree that Cruz is a saint and Trump is the devil. They have used their own group-think to work themselves up into a frothing mental lather of insanity and in the process turned KTRH into a Cruz echo-chamber. Their folks are constantly pumping Cruz and dissing Trump; and in the process, twisting themselves into unnatural mental pretzels. It is an amazing display of ignorance masquerading as truth and wisdom. All their talent: Michael Berry, Matt Patrick and Shara Fryer; even the weather-person and traffic man are getting in on the action. Add to this their paid programming: Mark Levin’s blind allegiance to Cruz and even Rush spent an hour defending Cruz; though Rush is much more circumspect, and you have a complete programming day designed to pump Cruz ad nauseam. The team at KTRH are amazingly monolithic in their politics. The lengths they will go to protect Cruz is very entertaining. For example, they are 100% positive that Cruz has never, ever cheated on his wife. How could they possibly know this? If it turns out that the National Enquirer is correct, they will all look more ignorant than they already do. How will they explain this to their loyal audience they have misled?
Demographics are an incredibly important factor in Geopolitics and Economics, yet most people have little understanding of how this works and so their ignorance of this topic is used against them, to deceive them into believing things that are just not true. I will not take the time now to give a detailed explanation but will provide basic information on which we can all agree. First concept is that depending on local customs, religions, etc. most girls/women do not start having children until they are 13 to 20. Also depending on local customs and religions girls/women may have more than one child during a span of one to two or maybe three decades. In the West and the more developed countries child birth starts at an older age and we have less children per woman. So what does this mean? It means that most developed countries cannot produce enough children to keep the population steady and stable … in fact many countries are teetering on a demographic cliff. We can’t see this cliff because it takes a couple of decades to become apparent. What happens during these decades? Well, you have less children and the same number of deaths. This means that the population decreases as we can see all over the Western world. This is bad. Really bad. Why? Because as people age, they become less productive and more expensive to maintain AND you have a smaller number of younger people available to support this.
Another hidden trend is that population growth happens very slowly, but the demographic nightmare happens very quickly and the recovery from falling off this cliff is very slow, some 20 years away if it happens at all.
It is estimated that you need a fertility rate of 2.1 just to keep the population growth at zero. If a country has less than 2.1 children per woman, then they are shrinking and may face the demographic cliff if they don’t increase child birth or import immigrants. 132 countries have a fertility rate less than 2.1. This includes the US @ 1.87; Canada @ 1.59; China @ 1.60; Russia @ 1.61; Japan @ 1.4 and all of Western Europe.
So whilst the propagandists and fear merchants are warning you about the unsustainable population explosion in countries like Niger @ 6.7, what they are not telling you is that the real danger to you, your family, your economy and your country is the massive population decrease that is 10 to 20 years out.
More reading and videos on this topic at ClearNFO:
Excellent article below by Tony Cartalucci concerning the ‘Showdown in Oregon between Armed Ranchers and Federal Agents’. Tony provides us a real plan that we can use effectively. To be honest, I really didn’t want to read this long article thinking it would be a pain and of small value, but I know Tony as a thoughtful writer so gave him the benefit of the doubt. I’m glad that I did, because this has provided me the outline for action that I have been looking for. Like so many, I’m tired of sitting here on the sidelines bitching and watching as our freedoms guaranteed by the constitution are subsumed by Corporate-Insurgents who have infiltrated our government, our schools, our media and our money system.
Based on my default positon on the status of the U.S., it was a little confusing for me to read Tony’s insurgency and counter-insurgency, since I tend to reverse the roles; but after reading this fine article, I agree with Tony.
Tony’s depiction is that the Insurgency are the forces that are trying to take over our country and the counter-insurgency would therefore be us the good citizens of the USA. My default position has always been that the insurgency took over our country way back in 1913 with the creation of the Federal Reserve and the 16th Amendment; so for me, those who want to wrest the control of this country back from private bankers and corporations are the insurgents. In many ways, it doesn’t matter whether you are the insurgency or the counter-insurgency since many of the tactics are similar, but I now tend to agree with Tony that we, the patriots are the counter-insurgency trying to rid our Republic of these interlopers who have taken control of our money, our government and have busied themselves shredding our constitution for the past 103 years. While it is true that the insurgents have also taken control of our media, our schools and our universities, they nonetheless can be seen as insurgents since we are the people living here on the ground suffering the abuse of the insurgents. I may have spent way too much time on this difference, but if we intend to rescue our Republic and our freedoms, we must take seriously the real things we can do in the real world to make real, tangible differences; after all that is what the enemies of freedom have been busy doing with their foundations and think tanks while we have been busy raising our families, working and paying taxes and of course watching Football, Sitcoms, etc.
EXAMPLE:
“Laws and regulations are designed to prevent independent local institutions, services, and economies from springing up and competing directly with the corporate-insurgency. Farmers in America have been fighting laws seeking to disrupt and regulate out of business, local farmer’s markets. Similar laws in regards to “intellectual property rights” seek to stifle the emergence of independent technological innovation and personal manufacturing. Understanding the greater implications of these laws should provide us a greater impetus to organize and find the means of circumventing them.”
I think Tony Cartalucci has provided us some good ideas on how to push back on those who seek to destroy our freedom.
Just watched the video below. It was very good. Thanks to Hugh Cameron for directing my attention to this excellent video. Obviously Putin is in a leadership position so must chose his words carefully so that he doesn’t foreclose diplomatic or strategic options to move his agenda forward. What the USA has done to Russia and Ukraine is a crime. The good citizens of America and Russia and in fact the good citizens of the world are facing the same enemy and that is the NWO which seeks to destroy nation-states like Russia to usher in their unworkable Utopia with those in charge of this new order running the globe from a single fulcrum. What Russia, Europe and others may not realize is that part of this new order will be substantial population reductions. I think Putin realizes that he is dealing with certifiable psychopaths who give not a twit about human life. These folks who have insinuated themselves into the halls of power in this country (U.S.) would just as soon step on a bug as kill 100,000 or a million people. There are no mistakes about the Arab Spring or about Ukraine. This is all according to design using proven methods and is documented for all to read; but as Allen Dulles said… “People don’t read.”
Russian Documentary “World Order” with English subs
I have known many Muslims as friends, fellow students at the university and as co-workers. What I know firsthand is that most all of them were extremely intelligent, well-educated, affable, approachable and friendly. I have spent many an evening with them discussing religion, philosophy, history, and politics and playing chess. All of them were indelibly and unmovably stuck in their religion. None were violent or cruel as far as I am aware. Most had a fundamentally different view of women than most westerners, but some of my best memories are the times I spent with these incredibly intelligent and well-educated Muslims.
I also know that since WWI, the West has been using and abusing Muslims like property of no individual value or consequence. We have removed their sovereign leaders when it pleased us. We have consistently –at will– imposed the cruelest dictators; and redrawn their national boarders without respect to language, culture or religion as though it was our divine right. We have murdered many millions of innocent Muslim men, women and children in cold-blood without a second thought or the slightest tinge of remorse. We have supported the most radical and violent versions of Islam imaginable and spread this radical Islam far and wide for our own geopolitical agenda.
My Muslim friends at the University were terrified of the Shah of Iran and his secret police Savak; both of whom we installed and supported, yet they did not hate me for this and never blamed me.
The solution to the terrorist and the refugee problem is for the West to stop destroying countries in the Middle East like Syria, Libya, Egypt and Iraq and stop installing, arming and supporting dictators like the House of Saud, stop killing innocent Muslims en-masse and stop spreading the most brutal form of Islam the world has ever known called Wahhabism by our continued support of Saudi Arabia.
Those of us who have studied political history, are well aware of the state’s fear of an armed citizenry; and of the tyrants who first seek to register and then disarmed their subjects at every opportunity to cement their absolute power and control. Today is no different.
Here in the USA, we are fortunate that our founders gave us an unambiguous right to hold and bear arms and that this right shall not be infringed.
So on one level—overlaying all other levels— the state has a natural desire to increase its power, while the citizens have a natural desire to retain their self-determination and therefore reject the growth in the power and scope of the state at their expense. This is one level all people capable of critical thinking can agree. This contest of power can create extreme positions at either end of this battle.
But now –at a lower level—we have the practicality of arming our citizens. So what to do? Shall we allow or require that all citizens hold and bear arms? Some libertarians and anarchists would say it is none of our business and I agree with the spirit of this statement. But I have known certain people who shouldn’t own guns mostly because of a lack of training and more importantly a lack of respect. There are others who have a violent nature and should likewise not be operating a firearm.
Still here in the Good Old US of A we have people who are afraid of firearms and shudder at the sight or even the thought of their neighbor owning such a deadly weapon. It is my opinion that most of this abject fear is the result of ignorance, which can be cured by safety training and a few days at the firing range. What I have found is that most people who are afraid of firearms, tend to become the greatest supporters once they have had the opportunity to actually use a firearm properly. It feels good and is in fact addicting.
And so today we read about certain people –president of Liberty University– saying everyone should be armed; and there is a case in Georgia that supports this proposition: In 1982, the Kennesaw City Council unanimously passed a law requiring heads of households to own at least one firearm with ammunition. Crime went to zero. And certainly the historical facts prove that if someone at the San Bernardino Christmas party was allowed to carry a firearm, 11 of the 14 dead would still be alive and 13 of the 17 injured would have been unscathed.
But I am not convinced that everyone should own and/or carry a firearm though I would welcome a move in that direction.
Bottom line is that we all have the right, but I think we should all be trained in gun safety and practice shooting on a regular basis. Should the state require this? Certainly not, nor should the state seek to limit or infringe on our right to hold and bear arms.
Author Patrick Wood discusses his recent book “Technocracy Rising”, in a 3-part interview. (Summary of parts, below) Technocracy Rising
Patrick Wood is an author and lecturer who has studied elite globalization policies since the late 1970’s, when he partnered with the late Antony C. Sutton to coauthor Trilaterals Over Washington, Volumes I and II. He remains a leading expert on the elitist Trilateral Commission, their policies and achievements in creating their self-proclaimed “New International Economic Order.”
An economist by education, a financial analyst and writer by profession and an American Constitutionalist by choice, Wood maintains a Biblical world view and has deep historical insights into the modern attacks on sovereignty, property rights and personal freedom. Such attacks are epitomized by the implementation of U.N. policies such as Agenda 21, Sustainable Development, Smart Growth and in education, the widespread adoption of Common Core.
Wood is a frequent speaker and guest on radio shows around the nation. His current research builds on Trilateral Commission hegemony, focusing on Transhumanism, Technocracy and scientism, and how these are co-opting economics, politics and religion around the world.
Technocracy, Trilaterals & TPP: An Interview with Patrick Wood
Published on Sep 11, 2015 by Richard Grove with Tragedy and Hope
Patrick Wood: Technocracy Rising Interview (Part 1 of 3) Length – 1:13:53
Part 1: Energy based Currency, Columbia University origins of Technocracy, Eugenics, Population Control, and Agenda 21, origins of Positivism and Scientism;
Patrick Wood: Technocracy Rising Interview (Part 2 of 3) Length – 56:40
Part 2: Trilaterals, CFR, Rockefellers, U.N., 1992 Rio Conference, Agenda 21 and Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP);
Patrick Wood: Technocracy Rising Interview (Part 3 of 3) Length – 57:21
Part 3: Wood’s work with Antony C. Sutton, the Origins of the Trilateral Commission, Trilaterals and Larry King, and how the Trilateral Commission influenced the U.S. Govt. since 1973 to present day. Thanks to Ernie & Donna Hancock at FreedomsPhoenix.com for the use of their studio, and to Rick Malchow for his assistance in bringing you this interview.
Technocracy Rising: The Trojan Horse Of Global Transformation Paperback – December 29, 2014 by Patrick M. Wood(Author)
Observe, while these two fine gentlemen discuss the history that created the world we live in today. Enjoy!
Kevin Cole on Carroll Quigley, Cecil Rhodes and the Reconquest of America
Published on Aug 24, 2015
Show Notes from Tragedy and Hope: Our Interesting Times: Carroll Quigley, Cecil Rhodes, and the Reconquest of America (through the creation of an International Polity)
“Kevin Cole joins the “Our Interesting Times” podcast with Timothy Kelly to discuss his paper “Carroll Quigley and the Article that Said Too Little: Reclaiming History from Omission and Partisan Straw Men” and the historical importance of Quigley’s magnum opus Tragedy and Hope: A History of the World In Our Time. We also talk about Cecil Rhodes and how his plan to reclaim America for the British Empire was largely achieved in the 20th century via the creation of an elite international polity.
Kevin is a historian, writer and researcher. He has also assisted in the production of several documentaries including State of Mind: The Psychology of Control and The Ultimate History Lesson: A Weekend with John Taylor Gatto.”
(Recorded 8.23.2015)
PDF: “Professor Carroll Quigley and the Article that Said Too Little: Reclaiming History from Omission and Partisan Straw Men”
Also discussed: Western Civilization, Trivium, History of the Trivium Method, Liberal Arts, Education, Isocrates, Cybernetics, Anglo-Saxon Prussianism, Neoliberalism, The Round Table Group, The Pilgrims Society, The Reece Committee, Imperialism, Royal Institute of International Affairs, Council on Foreign Relations, International Relations History, Andrew Carnegie, Rhodes Scholarships, The English-Speaking People, The Anglosphere, Internationalism, World Bank, IMF, United Nations, NATO, Tax-Free Foundations, Rothschild, Rockefeller Foundation, Carnegie Institute for International Peace, 5-Eyes, Intelligence, William Binney, John Taylor Gatto, Compulsory Education
Like MLK, as far as I’m concerned, the color of one’s skin is not as important as the content of one’s character. However, I am fair skinned and am thus generally envious of those with more color than me so you could say I tend to be slightly prejudiced against my pink brethren and slightly more positive towards those fellows –who by no choice of their own– are blessed with a darker skin.
Notwithstanding the above, I was raised in an all-white family and played with mostly white kids. I had a few friends who were Hispanic in origin but no black friends. Maybe that was the result of segregation, I just don’t know but I never saw any black people during my youth until we ran track in high school against another school that was almost entirely black.
I don’t recall having any negative opinions of black people and I have no recollection of my mother or father making negative comments towards our black brethren, so you could say I was agnostic on the topic of race; really having no experience on which to base any judgment. I was mostly curious.
After high school, I did have occasion to meet and greet a few blacks but just a few. I recall feeling bad for the blacks since they were slaves –or rather some of their ancestors were– and felt okay with my self-appraisal since I knew I was not prejudiced and had no ill feelings toward any person based on color. I would however go out of my way to be nice and friendly as a sign of respect and some misplaced guilt.
My mother dabbled in genealogy a bit and it is clear from her investigation that neither side of my family owned any slaves in the New World. In the Old World, that might be a different story however. My wife dug a little deeper into my family history and found out that I’m a direct descendant of a few ruthless folks including some Roman Emperors; but since the sins of the father generally carry down only seven generations, I conclude that I’m pretty clear in terms of family karma.
The only reason I divert into this little family history lesson is to establish my bona fides that neither I nor my family have ever owned any slaves in America.
So being white as the driven snow in terms of slavery and even whiter by skin color, I could safely say I don’t have a prejudiced bone in my body.
Now, do I like thugs, or anti-social people who want to rob, steal or hurt others? Nope. It doesn’t matter if they are white, black or poky dot, I do not like ignorant, violent people and probably never will in spite of any amount of media propaganda that says it is cool to be cruel. Am I suspicious of people who think they are gangsters or dress and act like a gangster? Yep. (BTW, if your mother drives you to school, you are not a gangster.) So if you dress like a gangster and/or act like a gangster or a thug, I will be suspicious and may not like you. And for the record, I don’t want to see your underwear or your white, brown or black butt crack.
Do I owe the blacks anything more than respect and dignity? Nope. Do they deserve equal protection under the law? Yes.
Since my youth described above, I have joined the work force and am happy to report that I have had two managers who were black: one a woman and one a man. Both were excellent human beings and deserved and received my respect and admiration.
Black Like Me
Now just because I am pure in terms of racism, is no excuse for being ignorant of the real issues blacks have faced and continue to face to a lesser extent today in this country. To this end, I read a book called ‘Black Like Me‘ which had a profound impact on my view of racism in this country. If you haven’t read this book. Do it. It’s a 188 page diary written in 1959 by a white man who dyed his skin black and traveled anonymously as a black man and wrote about his experiences. It will curl your toe-nails and enlighten your brain and disabuse you of many false premises many whites seem to share including myself. This book allowed me to peer into the true nature and brutality of racism.
What this book taught me is that yes indeed I did have some racial preferences despite my proven purity explained above. Why? Because I realized that I never wanted to be black. I would rather be white. If I were to be black that would be okay but I wouldn’t want to be subjected to what many blacks endured in the 60s or prior. It also taught me that I was not sensitive or even aware of the many lasting deep scars this inflicted on our fellow citizens. ‘Black like me’ was proof positive of the soul-destroying, racial hatred and base prejudice that existed during this time. This realization provoked a deeper understanding and genuine sensitivity to the black man’s plight and exposed to my ignorant brain not just the casual, gossamer understanding of the importance of respect, but much deeper, sapient meaning of the word dignity. For the first time in my life the word dignity had salt to it. It had meaning. I realized that our racism had robbed an entire race of their human dignity with racial slurs, put downs, separate drinking fountains, restrooms, etc.
I turn now to Martin Luther King, Jr. to drive home my point from the very emotional and heart-wrenching perspective of a father. If you have no children, you cannot imigine the injury this causes to a father’s heart.
“Letter from a Birmingham Jail [King, Jr.]”
Martin Luther King, Jr., in jail in Birmingham, Alabama, April 1963
16 April 1963
My Dear Fellow Clergymen:
…”when you suddenly find your tongue twisted and your speech stammering as you seek to explain to your six year old daughter why she can’t go to the public amusement park that has just been advertised on television, and see tears welling up in her eyes when she is told that Funtown is closed to colored children, and see ominous clouds of inferiority beginning to form in her little mental sky, and see her beginning to distort her personality by developing an unconscious bitterness toward white people; when you have to concoct an answer for a five year old son who is asking: “Daddy, why do white people treat colored people so mean?”; when you take a cross county drive and find it necessary to sleep night after night in the uncomfortable corners of your automobile because no motel will accept you; when you are humiliated day in and day out by nagging signs reading “white” and “colored”; when your first name becomes “nigger,” your middle name becomes “boy” (however old you are) and your last name becomes “John,” and your wife and mother are never given the respected title “Mrs.”; when you are harried by day and haunted by night by the fact that you are a Negro, living constantly at tiptoe stance, never quite knowing what to expect next, and are plagued with inner fears and outer resentments; when you are forever fighting a degenerating sense of “nobodiness”–then you will understand why we find it difficult to wait. There comes a time when the cup of endurance runs over, and men are no longer willing to be plunged into the abyss of despair. I hope, sirs, you can understand our legitimate and unavoidable impatience.”
U.S. Marshals escorted Bridges to and from school
So I imagined how one of my children would feel and how I would feel being robbed of my human dignity in front of my children who look up to me and I became profoundly sad. All this became real to me. This experience has helped with my understanding. But does this mean we should further destroy a man’s dignity with a handout and not a hand-up by way of a job? No. Does this mean we should feel guilty? No. Does this mean we should offer up special privileges? No. Does this mean that all men should be treated equally and have equal opportunities? Yes. Does this mean that every man deserves dignity until proven they do not? Yes.
Old Ben Franklin
So for some wise advice on how to help a man when he is down, I turn to one of my favorite writers, old Ben Franklin:
“I am for doing good to the poor, but I differ in opinion of the means. I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it. In my youth I traveled much, and I observed in different countries, that the more public provisions were made for the poor, the less they provided for themselves, and of course became poorer. And, on the contrary, the less was done for them, the more they did for themselves, and became richer.”
Benjamin Franklin died in 1790 at the age of 84. He had bought and sold slaves earlier in his life but wrote the following in 1772…
In an unsigned letter to the London Chronicle, he asked readers whether it was absolutely necessary to sweeten their tea with slave-produced sugar. Could such a “petty pleasure…compensate for so much misery produced among our fellow creatures, and such a constant butchery of the human species by this pestilential detestable traffic in the bodies and souls of men?”
Later at age 81 Franklin signed a public exhortation that declared “the Creator of the world” made “of one flesh, all the children of men.”
As a final thought on race, I turn to the US Declaration of Independence: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”
