Are we as a society being kept from discussing the big issues? | Page 79 | INFJ Forum

Are we as a society being kept from discussing the big issues?

http://www.activistpost.com/2015/06/behind-bilderberg-trilateral-globalists.html

[h=3]Behind Bilderberg, Trilateral: the Globalists have a major problem[/h]
By Jon Rappoport

A gaping hole in the economic matrix

(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, Power Outside The Matrix, click here.)

Stay with me on this one. You’ll see what the powers-that-be are really worried about.

You can roll up Bilderberg, the Trilateral Commission, the Council on Foreign Relations, the World Trade Organization, NAFTA, and the several current trade treaties nearing completion… you can insert all these Rockefeller Globalist forces into one great corporate agenda, and…

There is a problem. A problem for Globalism. This is, behind the scenes, what the titans of control are whispering about.

It starts here: understand that mega-corporations are the instruments of world domination. They move into countries where cheap labor, land, and resources are abundant, and they take over. This is what they’re meant to do. This is the plan.

Intelligence agencies and armies may precede them, but the corporations are the most capable organizations on the planet, when it comes to exercising enduring control.

The top three or four hundred corporations are responsible for at least 25% of all world trade.

However… here is the rub. As Globalist policies allow corporations to shut down domestic factories in industrialized countries and open up those same factories in places where slave wages are the order of the day; as tariffs on imported goods are canceled, killing off businesses that try to compete with mega-corporations; as leading economies decline…


The consumer base for these mega-corporations shrinks.

To put it simply, the corporations sell products. They need buyers. All over the world.

The top manufacturing corporations are running their assembly lines at about half-capacity. They could produce much, much more of what they sell.

But only a tenth of the world population has the means to buy these products.

There are partial fixes for the problem: profit-making wars; sales of corporate products to governments; governments basically paying citizens so they can buy certain products. But, in the long run, that solution doesn’t cut it. The mega-corporations are still lacking consumers. You can create only so many artificial buyers. Beyond that, the market system irretrievably heads downward.

Mega-corporations have the potential to produce and sell more and more; the consumer base is shrinking.

Globalism, the very system that is determined to elevate the power of mega-corporations, is diminishing the number of people who can consume what the corporations make.

The snake has been eating its tail for some time now.

Mega-corporate CEOs and their advisors aren’t completely stupid. Some of them see the handwriting on the wall.

World Bank and IMF fixes aren’t going to make this problem go away.

Neither is some drastic depopulation program. That would be heading in the wrong direction. Fewer consumers.

What about a radical re-set involving a new global currency? Suppose, for example, every inhabitant of the planet were outfitted with a free credit card carrying substantial buying power? Theoretically, that might work, if you discount what people who actually earn a living are going to do when they see billions of their fellow humans who don’t work outfitted with comparable consuming power. And that rumbling class warfare would be just the stormy beginning of the trouble.

Creating money out of thin air to satisfy the avarice of banks, to pay off governments’ soaring debt, to boost corporate bottom lines is one thing. Creating money out of nothing to make six or seven billion brand new consumers is quite another thing. In that case, the corporate-welfare gifting would lead to pollution and destruction of the environment on a scale that makes current levels look like a few leaking picnic baskets on a Sunday park outing.

And over the course of several generations, populations would descend into a nightmare of side-by-side buying power and increased unemployment. If you think, psychologically speaking, that’s a marvelous idea, and would bring peace and contentment, you need a brain transplant.

There is another factor to consider: technological innovation. For mega-corporations, that means robots/machines replacing humans as employees. More unemployment—unless the corporations hold back and refrain from implementing the “automation revolution.”

The corporate thrust, however, is always about moving forward. More robots in the workplace. Bigger assembly lines. Higher production.

It turns out that the Globalist agenda has an expiration date. Beyond it, the system comes apart at the seams.

The normal solution to a problem of this magnitude is: think short-term; avoid the inevitable; pretend all is well; leave the answers to the next generation.

Consider how hard-charging greed-head mega-corporate masters would react to the following proposition: “Look boys, we know you have the ability to produce goods for two or three planets the size of Earth. But we want you to service only a tenth of one planet, and that base will shrink further. Okay? Don’t worry, be happy. Everything is fine.”

Behind every Bilderberg, CFR, Trilateral conference, this is the specter that lurks in the shadows.

They’re not worried about escalating the level of their political control over populations. It’s the economics that don’t add up, no matter how many holes in the dam are temporarily plugged.

There is one extremely radical solution I haven’t mentioned. You could call it depopulation-repopulation. Via some vast plan, the numbers of people on Earth would be enormously reduced—and then over, say, the next hundred years or so, those numbers would be built up again with humans who, in some Brave New World fashion, are conditioned/programmed to be avid workers and consumers, who would be paid far more than a subsistence wage. These living androids/robots would satisfy the hunger of mega-corporations to produce and produce and sell and sell…

The multiple risks of trying a plan like that would amount to an open confession of an agenda so heinous it would create open-ended global revolution, from Tierra del Fuego to the North Pole.

Every present Globalist agenda-item does two things: a) it aims at tighter control of populations, and b) it enforces and progressively lowers a ceiling on mega-corporations. It reveals a future in which the number of those corporations will be drastically reduced. And that’s the rub. That’s the hidden factor.

Yes, the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. But everyone who thinks that analysis is the core of the current crisis is looking no farther than the end of his nose.

Because the rich, up the road, will get poorer, too. They’ll sink in the Globalist swamp.

The mega-corporate leaders are ultimately on both the sending and the receiving end of a long con. It’s a con perpetrated by their own system, a system built to make them kings forever.

How little they know.

It turns out that decentralization of power, on every level, is more than just the hope and dream of a relative few. It’s a planet-wide imperative; and survival is at stake.

The greatest economic matrix ever devised is blowing its engine.

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

This article may be re-posted in full with attribution.
 
Good interview about the mandatory vaccination and the international trade agreements...this stuff is crazy...why is everyone not talking about this stuff and rising up and taking their societies back off these madmen behind all these moves?


[video=youtube;xdSwBupZJRc]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xdSwBupZJRc[/video]
 
I find this entirely depressing.


[video=youtube;bjB-MsU6Yec]https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=bjB-MsU6Yec[/video]
 
I find this entirely depressing.


[video=youtube;bjB-MsU6Yec]https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=bjB-MsU6Yec[/video]

Different levels of consciousness

Try discussing that in an honest way without meeting a wall of anger though
 
Different levels of consciousness

Try discussing that in an honest way without meeting a wall of anger though


I find it amazing that anyone would want to detonate ANY nuke ANYWHERE in this day and age when people should fucking know better….much less, voting to nuke a populated country for reasons you are uneducated and ignorant of anyhow.
 
I find it amazing that anyone would want to detonate ANY nuke ANYWHERE in this day and age when people should fucking know better….much less, voting to nuke a populated country for reasons you are uneducated and ignorant of anyhow.

did you read the article i posted above about how people on various mood altering drugs are more likely to kill someone?

US americans are drugged upto the eyeballs...far more than the russians

here's the link: http://www.naturalnews.com/049992_psych_meds_murder_prescription_drugs.html

They're drugged out of their fucking brains man...and they've been taught to think that's normal. am i right in thinking those kind of drugs are advertised on the TV in the US on commercial breaks?
 
did you read the article i posted above about how people on various mood altering drugs are more likely to kill someone?

US americans are drugged upto the eyeballs...far more than the russians

here's the link: http://www.naturalnews.com/049992_psych_meds_murder_prescription_drugs.html

They're drugged out of their fucking brains man...and they've been taught to think that's normal. am i right in thinking those kind of drugs are advertised on the TV in the US on commercial breaks?


Oh…they’re advertised everywhere!
Any type of media you can think of…not to mention the free samples the sales reps give the doctors to “try out” on their patients.
 
Oh…they’re advertised everywhere!
Any type of media you can think of…not to mention the free samples the sales reps give the doctors to “try out” on their patients.

They're handed out like fucking sweeties over there!

I don't know how many times an american has told me i need to be drugged for talking about this stuff on a news and politics section of a public forum!

I want to say to them: ''no...i think you need to be taking less drugs''

and in the same breath they'll criticise marijuana!

lol

they're fucking doped out of their brain on synthetic shite manufactured by the rockefeller network but they won't smoke something grown naturally....incredible...what is the fucking logic there? How does that compute?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Skarekrow
I did some psychotherapy sessions when I was younger, and basically I was just a hormonal teen, but around the third session they pretty much just said "Yea here, have some drugs!" and it surprised me how insanely easy it was to get them. I never took any of them because I had read up on potential side effects and I knew I was just angry/upset/hormonal about how fucked up things were/are and not because of anything that was out of my own control emotionally. It was easy then, pretty sure it's even easier now.
 
http://www.activistpost.com/2015/06/behind-bilderberg-trilateral-globalists.html

[h=3]Behind Bilderberg, Trilateral: the Globalists have a major problem[/h]
By Jon Rappoport

A gaping hole in the economic matrix

(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, Power Outside The Matrix, click here.)

Stay with me on this one. You’ll see what the powers-that-be are really worried about.

You can roll up Bilderberg, the Trilateral Commission, the Council on Foreign Relations, the World Trade Organization, NAFTA, and the several current trade treaties nearing completion… you can insert all these Rockefeller Globalist forces into one great corporate agenda, and…

There is a problem. A problem for Globalism. This is, behind the scenes, what the titans of control are whispering about.

It starts here: understand that mega-corporations are the instruments of world domination. They move into countries where cheap labor, land, and resources are abundant, and they take over. This is what they’re meant to do. This is the plan.

Intelligence agencies and armies may precede them, but the corporations are the most capable organizations on the planet, when it comes to exercising enduring control.

The top three or four hundred corporations are responsible for at least 25% of all world trade.

However… here is the rub. As Globalist policies allow corporations to shut down domestic factories in industrialized countries and open up those same factories in places where slave wages are the order of the day; as tariffs on imported goods are canceled, killing off businesses that try to compete with mega-corporations; as leading economies decline…


The consumer base for these mega-corporations shrinks.

To put it simply, the corporations sell products. They need buyers. All over the world.

The top manufacturing corporations are running their assembly lines at about half-capacity. They could produce much, much more of what they sell.

But only a tenth of the world population has the means to buy these products.

There are partial fixes for the problem: profit-making wars; sales of corporate products to governments; governments basically paying citizens so they can buy certain products. But, in the long run, that solution doesn’t cut it. The mega-corporations are still lacking consumers. You can create only so many artificial buyers. Beyond that, the market system irretrievably heads downward.

Mega-corporations have the potential to produce and sell more and more; the consumer base is shrinking.

Globalism, the very system that is determined to elevate the power of mega-corporations, is diminishing the number of people who can consume what the corporations make.

The snake has been eating its tail for some time now.

Mega-corporate CEOs and their advisors aren’t completely stupid. Some of them see the handwriting on the wall.

World Bank and IMF fixes aren’t going to make this problem go away.

Neither is some drastic depopulation program. That would be heading in the wrong direction. Fewer consumers.

What about a radical re-set involving a new global currency? Suppose, for example, every inhabitant of the planet were outfitted with a free credit card carrying substantial buying power? Theoretically, that might work, if you discount what people who actually earn a living are going to do when they see billions of their fellow humans who don’t work outfitted with comparable consuming power. And that rumbling class warfare would be just the stormy beginning of the trouble.

Creating money out of thin air to satisfy the avarice of banks, to pay off governments’ soaring debt, to boost corporate bottom lines is one thing. Creating money out of nothing to make six or seven billion brand new consumers is quite another thing. In that case, the corporate-welfare gifting would lead to pollution and destruction of the environment on a scale that makes current levels look like a few leaking picnic baskets on a Sunday park outing.

And over the course of several generations, populations would descend into a nightmare of side-by-side buying power and increased unemployment. If you think, psychologically speaking, that’s a marvelous idea, and would bring peace and contentment, you need a brain transplant.

There is another factor to consider: technological innovation. For mega-corporations, that means robots/machines replacing humans as employees. More unemployment–unless the corporations hold back and refrain from implementing the “automation revolution.”

The corporate thrust, however, is always about moving forward. More robots in the workplace. Bigger assembly lines. Higher production.

It turns out that the Globalist agenda has an expiration date. Beyond it, the system comes apart at the seams.

The normal solution to a problem of this magnitude is: think short-term; avoid the inevitable; pretend all is well; leave the answers to the next generation.

Consider how hard-charging greed-head mega-corporate masters would react to the following proposition: “Look boys, we know you have the ability to produce goods for two or three planets the size of Earth. But we want you to service only a tenth of one planet, and that base will shrink further. Okay? Don’t worry, be happy. Everything is fine.”

Behind every Bilderberg, CFR, Trilateral conference, this is the specter that lurks in the shadows.

They’re not worried about escalating the level of their political control over populations. It’s the economics that don’t add up, no matter how many holes in the dam are temporarily plugged.

There is one extremely radical solution I haven’t mentioned. You could call it depopulation-repopulation. Via some vast plan, the numbers of people on Earth would be enormously reduced–and then over, say, the next hundred years or so, those numbers would be built up again with humans who, in some Brave New World fashion, are conditioned/programmed to be avid workers and consumers, who would be paid far more than a subsistence wage. These living androids/robots would satisfy the hunger of mega-corporations to produce and produce and sell and sell…

The multiple risks of trying a plan like that would amount to an open confession of an agenda so heinous it would create open-ended global revolution, from Tierra del Fuego to the North Pole.

Every present Globalist agenda-item does two things: a) it aims at tighter control of populations, and b) it enforces and progressively lowers a ceiling on mega-corporations. It reveals a future in which the number of those corporations will be drastically reduced. And that’s the rub. That’s the hidden factor.

Yes, the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. But everyone who thinks that analysis is the core of the current crisis is looking no farther than the end of his nose.

Because the rich, up the road, will get poorer, too. They’ll sink in the Globalist swamp.

The mega-corporate leaders are ultimately on both the sending and the receiving end of a long con. It’s a con perpetrated by their own system, a system built to make them kings forever.

How little they know.

It turns out that decentralization of power, on every level, is more than just the hope and dream of a relative few. It’s a planet-wide imperative; and survival is at stake.

The greatest economic matrix ever devised is blowing its engine.

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

This article may be re-posted in full with attribution.

When there's plenty of food/shelter for all, you have to wonder what the point of money is, and for how long we'll keep it around just because we're used to it. I find that it's annoying and gets in the way of moving forward. How many brilliant minds are we missing out on because they can't afford education or the system weeds them out? Or creativity for that matter, which seems like a huge part of moving forward, is ignored in school unless you're in the arts. The strict adherence to a grading system definitely limits the expression of creativity and so it's unpracticed and never learned/embraced. There's an element of creativity in learning pretty much anything that you aren't learning by rote, and that goes the same for making something new. If you want to progress faster, you should encourage learning and creating. Making education require money, and making it so that people don't have the time or money to invent things, will naturally be slower, as well as nay-saying just to discourage interest.

And the reason Europe went ahead is because people are more scared of getting thrown into prison or Guantanamo and what their treatment will be like visiting in the US than there. Fear tactics ftw! Build the base that people need to avoid a harm, rather than disincentivizing things that aren't inherently harmful, but may lead to it.

There's a balance to strike so long as there are people who freak out and go all on violent on things, but that means you should focus on showing people how to build the foundation for not freaking out all the time.
 
Last edited:
When there's plenty of food/shelter for all, you have to wonder what the point of money is, and for how long we'll keep it around just because we're used to it. I find that it's annoying and gets in the way of moving forward. How many brilliant minds are we missing out on because they can't afford education or the system weeds them out? Or creativity for that matter, which seems like a huge part of moving forward, is ignored in school unless you're in the arts. The strict adherence to a grading system definitely limits the expression of creativity and so it's unpracticed and never learned/embraced. There's an element of creativity in learning pretty much anything that you aren't learning by rote, and that goes the same for making something new. If you want to progress faster, you should encourage learning and creating. Making education require money, and making it so that people don't have the time or money to invent things, will naturally be slower, as well as nay-saying just to discourage interest.

And the reason Europe went ahead is because people are more scared of getting thrown into prison or Guantanamo and what their treatment will be like visiting in the US than there. Fear tactics ftw! Build the base that people need to avoid a harm, rather than disincentivizing things that aren't inherently harmful, but may lead to it.

There's a balance to strike so long as there are people who freak out and go all on violent on things, but that means you should focus on showing people how to build the foundation for not freaking out all the time.

Yeah money is an illusion created to empower some (those who control it) and to dissempower others

A moneyless society would be ideal but in the short term i think we need to be looking at wrestling control of the money supply off the central bankers and putting money back into the service of the people
 
When there's plenty of food/shelter for all, you have to wonder what the point of money is, and for how long we'll keep it around just because we're used to it. I find that it's annoying and gets in the way of moving forward. How many brilliant minds are we missing out on because they can't afford education or the system weeds them out? Or creativity for that matter, which seems like a huge part of moving forward, is ignored in school unless you're in the arts. The strict adherence to a grading system definitely limits the expression of creativity and so it's unpracticed and never learned/embraced. There's an element of creativity in learning pretty much anything that you aren't learning by rote, and that goes the same for making something new. If you want to progress faster, you should encourage learning and creating. Making education require money, and making it so that people don't have the time or money to invent things, will naturally be slower, as well as nay-saying just to discourage interest.

And the reason Europe went ahead is because people are more scared of getting thrown into prison or Guantanamo and what their treatment will be like visiting in the US than there. Fear tactics ftw! Build the base that people need to avoid a harm, rather than disincentivizing things that aren't inherently harmful, but may lead to it.

There's a balance to strike so long as there are people who freak out and go all on violent on things, but that means you should focus on showing people how to build the foundation for not freaking out all the time.

I've been saying this for 30 years....so of course I think what you said here Brilliant! Hahahahahaha....

Suppressing our ability to create as our natural talents lead us has been the bane of society leading to all sorts of ills including both physical and mental. This has come in many many forms including binding us into slavery by the use of money as well as a robotic like system where we are expected to fit like cogs in a machine. This is done through methods such as our education system, employment hierarchies, and TV.

I've pretty much been a healer of sorts for my whole life and I came to the conclusion a long long time ago it was essentially the suppression of our natural selves that has led to mental and physical illness along with destruction of the planet. If given the chance we can be our natural selves during and through our creation process - however that unfolds. The ideal community would allow people to use their gifts in a creation process to benefit others. In this way there would be an energy exchange - a gift exchange - between each and everyone as they contribute themselves - their creations - to others in the community.

For example I know many people who participate in the SCA - the Society for Creative Anachronism - where they make things such as armor - accurate period clothing - swords and knives - music played with ancient and old instruments - people who make the old instruments and so on. When I've been with those people at the events where they gather to re-enact the period - these people laugh and play with one another. They barter with each other for the creations brought with them. These same people outside of the SCA are dull and listless and their work production is minimal. In the SCA "world" they are allowed to express themselves through their creations and therefore happy. I have watched in fascination a blacksmith happily work and sweat at the forge hammering out a sword for someone who will appreciate it. That's hard work plus it's hot! One wouldn't think they would choose such a work environment. Yet he insisted this was what he loved. This was what he was born for.... He freely admitted hating his regular job and would quit in an instant to be a blacksmith if he could make a living.

There is a natural flow of energy that happens moving through a person when they are in the creation process best suited to their natural talents. They come alive....They sparkle....and their creations generally turn out well. The energy literally moves through them from the prana of the universe into their creations and when genuinely received by another person will flow in to them as well. This is how communities thrive and foster the well being in everyone.

This is energy exchange.

It can also happen between plants and plants - animals and animals - plants and people - and animals and people.

While I know many here do not hold with the ultimate agenda of the Cabal...and the Shift perspective and all that....but truly the Cabal agenda included making humanity miserable. Miserable. Unhappy. Sad. Despondent. Empty.

There are many benefits to those in the highest power by having that agenda. For one thing it's a way to motivate people to buy things.

From the Shift or Ascension perspective it was agreed that Earth was going to be a place where we had an opportunity to experience Fear ranging from anger to sadness
and all it's myriad shades in between. It was one of the reasons we incarnated here in the first place. We were going to get to pretend or act out the idea we were all alone and not connected to anything. The Cabal greedily accepted the position of creating Fear for us to experience.

In my mind it's good you're noticing the uselessness of money. It's good you're noticing the lack of creativity allowed. One day we will have the ability to create once more and I would hope to find people like you to be part of team of creating something wonderful for our communities.

Thank you for the chance to for me to dream a little dream here in this moment. :hug:
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: muir
Yeah money is an illusion created to empower some (those who control it) and to dissempower others

A moneyless society would be ideal but in the short term i think we need to be looking at wrestling control of the money supply off the central bankers and putting money back into the service of the people

Some people just shoot their rpgs when they hear noises in the dark. Ain't no shame in it.
 
I've been saying this for 30 years....so of course I think what you said is here Brilliant! Hahahahahaha....

Suppressing our ability to create as our natural talents lead us has been the bane of society leading to all sorts of ills including both physical and mental. This has come in many many forms including binding us into slavery by the use of money as well as a robotic like system where we are expected to fit like cogs in a machine. This is done through methods such as our education system, employment hierarchies, and TV.

I've pretty much been a healer of sorts for my whole life and I came to the conclusion a long long time ago it was essentially the suppression of our natural selves that has led to mental and physical illness along with destruction of the planet. If given the chance we can be our natural selves during and through our creation process - however that unfolds. The ideal community would allow people to use their gifts in a creation process to benefit others. In this way there would be an energy exchange - a gift exchange - between each and everyone as they contribute themselves - their creations - to others in the community.

For example I know many people who participate in the SCA - the Society for Creative Anachronism - where they make things such as armor - accurate period clothing - swords and knives - music played with ancient and old instruments - people who make the old instruments and so on. When I've been with those people at the events where they gather to re-enact the period - these people laugh and play with one another. They barter with each other for the creations brought with them. These same people outside of the SCA are dull and listless and their work production is minimal. In the SCA "world" they are allowed to express themselves through their creations and therefore happy. I have watched in fascination a blacksmith happily work and sweat at the forge hammering out a sword for someone who will appreciate it. That's hard work plus it's hot! One wouldn't think they would choose such a work environment. Yet he insisted this was what he loved. This was what he was born for.... He freely admitted hating his regular job and would quit in an instant to be a blacksmith if he could make a living.

There is a natural flow of energy that happens moving through a person when they are in the creation process best suited to their natural talents. They come alive....They sparkle....and their creations generally turn out well. The energy literally moves through them from the prana of the universe into their creations and when genuinely received by another person will flow in to them as well. This is how communities thrive and foster the well being in everyone.

This is energy exchange.

It can also happen between plants and plants - animals and animals - plants and people - and animals and people.

While I know many here do not hold with the ultimate agenda of the Cabal...and the Shift perspective and all that....but truly the Cabal agenda included making humanity miserable. Miserable. Unhappy. Sad. Despondent. Empty.

There are many benefits to those in the highest power by having that agenda. For one thing it's a way to motivate people to buy things.

From the Shift or Ascension perspective it was agreed that Earth was going to be a place where we had an opportunity to experience Fear ranging from anger to sadness
and all it's myriad shades in between. It was one of the reasons we incarnated here in the first place. We were going to get to pretend or act out the idea we were all alone and not connected to anything. The Cabal greedily accepted the position of creating Fear for us to experience.

In my mind it's good you're noticing the uselessness of money. It's good you're noticing the lack of creativity allowed. One day we will have the ability to create once more and I would hope to find people like you to be part of team of creating something wonderful for our communities.

Thank you for the chance to for me to dream a little dream here in this moment. :hug:

I would have some words for the cabal, but somebody's pressing my buttons again. Damn dirty apes!

Money's uses are only for control and keeping people down to look better by comparison once the shortages are obsolete.
 
Last edited:
http://rt.com/uk/267739-trident-whistleblower-navy-discharge/

[h=1]Discharged Trident whistleblower rebukes Royal Navy ‘spin’[/h] Published time: June 17, 2015 11:09
Edited time: June 17, 2015 12:42 Get short URL

trident-whistleblower-navy-discharge.si.jpg
Photo from wikileaks.org

150144



Tags
Arms, Military, Navy, Nuclear, Politics, Security, Terrorism, UK, Vessels, War

Nuclear whistleblower William McNeilly, who had been dishonorably discharged from the Royal Navy, says military “spin doctors” have tried to obscure the safety and security concerns he raised in an extensive dossier last month.
McNeilly now claims to have been dishonorably discharged from the service, having not been heard from for over a month.
Reports over the intervening period suggested he was held in a secure military facility.
In a new nine-page document published online, he said: “It is shocking that some people in a military force can be more concerned about public image than public safety.”
McNeilly posted his original findings online last month while AWOL, raising up to 30 issues regarding nuclear weapons safety and base security.
The Navy immediately claimed McNeilly’s allegations were “subjective and unsubstantiated” and “factually incorrect or the result of misunderstanding or partial understanding.

Read more​Trident nuke safety questioned by Salmond after Navy whistleblower leak

Read more‘Nuclear disaster waiting to happen’: Royal Navy probes Trident whistleblower's claims

Read more​Nuclear safety incidents soar 54% at UK’s Clyde sub base & arms depot
McNeilly has now responded, saying: “Other submariners have been anonymously releasing information to journalists.
It’s only a matter of time before worse information comes out, and everything is proven to be true.
There had initially been discussion over whether McNeilly would be charged under the Official Secrets Act, fears which seem to have abated.
All of the charges against me were dropped; there’s nothing that I can be charged with now,” he said.
Most people know that I acted in the interest of national security. However, I was still given a dishonorable discharge from the Royal Navy.
McNeilly feels he was discharged by the Navy “on the claim that my sole aim was to discredit their public image.
Having served aboard the Trident submarine HMS Victory earlier this year, McNeilly said he was shocked at what he saw there.
When I joined the Royal Navy, I had no idea that I was going to work with nuclear weapons. When I found out, I was happy. I used to think they were an essential tool in maintaining peace, by deterring war,” he said.
It wasn’t until I saw the major safety and security issues that I realized the system is more of a threat than a deterrent.
The furor around McNeilly’s leaks saw Scottish National Party MP Alex Salmond raise the question of Trident safety in Parliament, saying “Trident is a key issue for people in Scotland.”
It is bad enough that Scotland is forced to house these weapons of mass destruction, but these alleged breaches of security are deeply worrying – there must be absolutely no complacency,” Salmond said.
McNeilly has said claims he was an SNP agent are wrong, although he added he supports the party’s aim to remove Trident from Scotland.

I’ve been strongly advised to remain silent and live a private life,” he said.
However, he has no plans to go quietly, it seems.
I’m civilian now, and I have the right to free speech. I’m not going to waste that freedom by just sitting around on my ass, while the UK is in danger.
A Royal Navy spokeswoman confirmed to Portsmouth News that McNeilly is no longer in the Navy.
 
http://rt.com/usa/267622-senate-tor..._medium=aplication_chrome&utm_campaign=chrome

[h=1]Senate votes to ban waterboarding and other forms of torture[/h] Published time: June 16, 2015 18:58 Get short URL

senate-torture-vote-ban.si.jpg
Reuters/Kevin Lamarque

5K357



Tags
CIA, Guantanamo, History, Human rights, Law, Military, Politics, Scandal, Security, Terrorism, USA, Violence, War

The US Senate has voted to outlaw many forms of torture, including waterboarding, "rectal feeding," mock executions, hooding prisoners, and sexual humiliation in any sector of the US government.
By a vote of 78 to 21, the Senate agreed on an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) that limits the US government to interrogation and detention rules delineated in the US Army Field Manual. The amendment also requires that US officials immediately notify the International Red Cross in the event of an individual taken into US custody or control.
The amendment was introduced last week by Republican Sen. John McCain and is co-sponsored by Democrat Dianne Feinstein, the former chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee. The committee released in December a report detailing harsh interrogation and torture methods employed by the Central Intelligence Agency following the attacks of September 11, 2001.
“We must continue to insist that the methods we employ in this fight for peace and freedom must always — always — be as right and honorable as the goals and ideals we fight for,” said McCain, the current chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee.
“Our enemies act without conscience. We must not.”#

[video=youtube;RVS9uHLee1c]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RVS9uHLee1c[/video]


The measure would also require that the Army Field Manual be updated every three years so that it is consistent with US law and "reflects current evidence-based best practices for interrogation designed to elicit reliable and voluntary statements that do not involve the use or threat of force.”
The Army Field Manual does allow interrogation methods such as stress positions and sleep deprivation that are “cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment,” according to a group of medical ethicists who wrote to the Obama administration calling for changes to the Manual in 2013.

Read moreTorture broke CIA’s own ‘human experimentation’ rules - report
Human rights advocates applauded the amendment even though it is based on future prevention of torture – already illegal under domestic and international law – and not the prosecution of those responsible for torture following September 11, 2001.
“This is the U.S. Senate’s first vote on torture in years, and it’s a clear and necessary legislative repudiation of the CIA’s horrific abuses,” said Amnesty International USA’s Executive Director Steven W. Hawkins in a statement.
“Without this amendment, abuses committed in the name of national security, such as forced rectal feeding and mock burials, would be all too easy for the CIA to repeat in a climate of fear-mongering about terrorism.”

Kenneth Roth @KenRoth
US Senate overwhelmingly reaffirms ban on torture. Now to prosecute the Bush CIA torturers. http://bit.ly/1FkPqoe pic.twitter.com/rpTBq2169G
6:04 PM - 16 Jun 2015

The US House must now vote on the amendment within the larger defense authorization bill, which sets budget and expenditure limits for the US Department of Defense.
READ MORE: 'Capture, detain, interrogate': CIA ‘propaganda’ fed to US public examined in documentary
McCain, a prisoner of war in Vietnam, spoke out against torture on the Senate floor prior to Tuesday's vote.
“I know from personal experience that abuse of prisoners does not provide good, reliable intelligence,” he said. “I firmly believe that all people, even captured enemies, are protected by basic human rights.”
McCain previously sponsored the 2006 Detainee Treatment Act, which included a ban on waterboarding. President George W. Bush's administration effectively ignored the measure. Another effort to ban CIA torture in 2008 was vetoed by Bush.
"This is no time for Congress to abandon practices that have a proven track record of keeping America safe," Bush said in March 2008.
In December, the Senate Intelligence Committee's released a 480-page executive summary of the roughly 6,000-page secret report on CIA practices. The summary contained the committee’s conclusions concerning post-9/11 tactics deployed by the CIA under the administration of US President George W. Bush in an attempt to gain intelligence from suspected terrorists. The panel’s probe lent to “critical questions about intelligence operations and oversight” and showed that the CIA undermined "societal and constitutional values that we are very proud of," according to then-committee chairwoman Feinstein.

Read moreCIA torture report won’t be released to public, judge rules
“Whether one may think of the CIA’s former detention and interrogation program, we should all agree that there should be no turning back to the era of torture,” Sen. Feinstein said Tuesday.
Torture techniques “corrode our moral standing, and ultimately they undermine any counterterrorism policies they are intended to support,” she added.
Earlier this month, it was revealed that a detainee currently held at the US military detention center at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba was allegedly subject to forms of "enhanced interrogation techniques" beyond what was disclosed in the Senate report.
Majid Khan, now a government cooperating witness, was captured in Pakistan and held in a CIA "black site" from 2003 to 2006. Khan said interrogators poured ice water on his genitals, twice videotaped him naked, and repeatedly touched his "private parts," according to accounts recorded by his lawyers.
The American Psychologists Association, meanwhile, was accused in April of being complicit in the torture tactics used against US-held detainees. APA officials were in cahoots with members of the Bush administration, including CIA employees and contractors, as the government struggled to codify policies for its torture program, according to the report released by anti-torture critics including psychoanalyst and anti-war activist Stephen Soldz as well as Nathaniel Raymond and Steven Reisner, two members of the group Physicians for Human Rights.

 
The trade agreements Obama is trying to push through are designed to take away the power of nation states and hand those powers to a centralised corporate authority thereby ending democracy and creating a corporate dictatorship

http://rinf.com/alt-news/featured/how-obamas-trade-deals-are-designed-to-end-democracy/


How Obama’s ‘Trade’ Deals Are Designed to End Democracy

June 18th, 2015

Eric Zuesse
U.S. President Barack Obama has for years been negotiating with European and Asian nations — but excluding Russia and China, since he is aiming to defeat them in his war to extend the American empire (i.e, to extend the global control by America’s aristocracy) — three international ‘trade’ deals (TTP, TTIP, & TISA), each one of which contains a section (called ISDS) that would end important aspects of the sovereignty of each signatory nation, by setting up an international panel composed solely of corporate lawyers to serve as ‘arbitrators’ deciding cases brought before this panel to hear lawsuits by international corporations accusing a given signatory nation of violating that corporation’s ‘rights’ by its trying to legislate regulations that are prohibited under the ’trade’ agreement, such as by increasing the given nation’s penalties for fraud, or by lowering the amount of a given toxic substance that the nation allows in its foods, or by increasing the percentage of the nation’s energy that comes from renewable sources, or by penalizing corporations for hiring people to kill labor union organizers — i.e., by any regulatory change that benefits the public at the expense of the given corporations’ profits. (No similar and countervailing power for nations to sue international corporations is included in this: the ‘rights’ of ‘investors’ — but really of only the top stockholders in international corporations — are placed higher than the rights of any signatory nation.)
This provision, whose full name is “Investor State Dispute Resolution” grants a one-sided benefit to the controlling stockholders in international corporations, by enabling them to bring these lawsuits to this panel of lawyers, whose careers will consist of their serving international corporations, sometimes as ‘arbitrators’ in these panels, and sometimes as lawyers who more-overtly represent one or more of those corporations, but also serving these corporations in other capacities, such as via being appointed by them to head a tax-exempt foundation to which international corporations ‘donate’ and so to turn what would otherwise be PR expenses into corporate tax-deductions. In other words: to be an ‘arbitrator’ on these panels can produce an extremely lucrative career.
These are in no way democratic legal proceedings; they’re the exact opposite, an international conquest of democracy, by international corporations. This “ISDS” sounds deceptively non-partisan, but it’s really a grant to the controlling international investors giving them a ‘right’ against the taxpayers in each of the signatory nations, a ‘right’ to sue, essentially, those taxpayers; and ISDS includes no countervailing ‘right’ to those taxpayers, to sue those international corporations; it’s an entirely one-sided provision, and it even removes the authority of the democratically elected national government to adjudicate the matter. It even removes the appeals-court system: once a decision is reached by the ‘arbitrating’ panel, it is final, it cannot be appealed. And no nation may present a challenge to the constitutionality of the ‘arbitrators’ decision. These treaties, if signed, will override the signatory nation’s constitution, on those matters.
This idea started after World War II and the defeat of the fascist nations on the military battlefields, and it moved this great fascist-v.-democratic war to a different type of battlefield. It’s round 2 of WW II.
Unlike many wars, WW II was an ideological war. On the one side stood the Allies; on the other, the fascist powers. The first fascist leader, Italy’s Benito Mussolini, said in November 1933 that his ideal was “corporatism” or “corporationism,” in which the state, or the national government, serves its corporations (see page 426 there):
“The corporation plays on the economic terrain just as the Grand Council and the militia play on the political terrain. Corporationism is disciplined economy, and from that comes control, because one cannot imagine a discipline without a director.
Corporationism is above socialism and above liberalism. A new synthesis is created. It is a symptomatic fact that the decadence of capitalism coincides with the decadence of socialism. All the Socialist parties of Europe are in fragments.
Evidently the two phenomena—I will not say conditions—present a point of view which is strictly logical: there is between them a historical parallel. Corporative economy arises at the historic moment when both the militant phenomena, capitalism and socialism, have already given all that they could give. From one and from the other we inherit what they have of vitality. …
There is no doubt that, given the general crisis of capitalism, corporative solutions can be applied anywhere.”
After World War II, the ‘former’ Nazi, Prince Bernhard, took up the fascist (lower-case f, indicating the ideology, instead of Mussolini’s Fascist political party; Bernhard had belonged instead to Hitler’s Nazi Party) cudgel, when he created in 1954 his then-secret (and still secretive today) Bilderberg group, which brings together the leaders, and the advisers to the leaders, of international corporations, meeting annually or bi-annually, near the places where major national leaders or potential future leaders have pre-scheduled to congregate, such as this year’s G-7 meeting in Bavaria, so that even heads-of-state (and/or their aides) can quietly slip away unofficially to join nearby the Bilderbergs and communicate privately with them, to coordinate their collective international fascist endeavor (and decide which presidential candidates to fund), to institute a fascist world government that will possess a legal control higher than what’s possessed by any merely national government. Just as the anti-Russian, anti-Chinese, G-7 conference ended on 8 June 2015, the Bilderberg conference opened 15 miles away three days later (after a few days of vacation in the Bavarian Alps), and Britain’s Telegraph (as it does every year with extraordinary boldness for the Western press) issued the list of attendees, which included top advisors to many heads-of-state, plus major investors in ‘defense’ stocks, plus top propagandists against Russia (such as Anne Applebaum).
Bilderbergers have always been opposed to the old ideal of an emerging global federalism of democracies to constitute an ultimate world government; they instead favor a dictatorial world government, imposed by (the controlling owners of) international corporations. The major international corporations are controlled by perhaps fewer than a hundred people around the world; and, the other billions of people, the mere citizens, will, in this plan, as realized under Obama’s ‘trade’ deals, be fined if a three-person panel of servants (the ‘arbitrators’) to that perhaps fewer than 100 people, rule to say that the given nation has violated the ‘rights’ of those ‘investors,’ and assesses the ‘fine’ against those taxpayers.
The first Bilderberg meeting was called together by Bernhard in a personal invitation which proposed that, “I think that a ‘partnership for growth’ is a fine idea. A good deal has been said but very little has been done about trade policy, and this would be a good place to start the partnership.” (Note the ‘Partnership’ in “Trans Pacific Partnership,” and in “Transatlantic Trade & Investment Partnership”; but TISA doesn’t use that term.)
Among the leading Americans at the first (and perhaps each of the subsequent) Bilderberg meetings, were Wall Streeters David Rockefeller and George Ball, both of whom subsequently lobbied the U.S. Congress heavily to replace national standards with international standards, something that would be an improvement if done within a democratic framework (which would thus have electoral accountability to the public, and be appealable and amendable), but they didn’t even mention any proposed framework, and virtually everyone at that time was simply assuming that nobody in ’the West’ would have any dictatorial framework in mind; everybody assumed that, after the defeat of the fascist nations, any emerging world government could only be democratic. This isn’t what Bilderbergers actually had in mind, however.
Matt Stoller, on 20 February 2014, bannered, “NAFTA Origins, Part Two: The Architects of Free Trade Really Did Want a World Government of Corporations,” and he reported, from his study of the Congressional Record, that:
After the Kennedy round [international-trade talks] ended [in 1967], liberal internationalists, including people like Chase CEO David Rockefeller and former Undersecretary of State George Ball, began pressing for reductions in non-tariff barriers, which they perceived as the next set of trade impediments to pull down. Ball was an architect of 1960s U.S. trade policy — he helped write the Trade Act of 1962, which set the stage for what eventually became the World Trade Organization.
But Ball’s idea behind getting rid of these barriers wasn’t about free trade, it was about reorganizing the world so that corporations could manage resources for “the benefit of mankind”. It was a weird utopian vision that you can hear today in the current United States Trade Representative Michael Froman’s speeches. …
In the opening statement [by Ball to Congress in 1967], before a legion of impressive Senators and Congressmen, Ball attacks the very notion of sovereignty. He goes after the idea that “business decisions” could be “frustrated by a multiplicity of different restrictions by relatively small nation states that are based on parochial considerations,” and lauds the multinational corporation as the most perfect structure devised for the benefit of mankind.
As for David Rockefeller, he wrote in the 1 February 1999 Newsweek an essay “Looking for New Leadership,” in which he stated (p. 41) the widely quoted (though the rest of the article is ignored): “In recent years, there’s been a trend toward democracy and market economies. That has lessened the role of government, which is something business people tend to be in favor of. But the other side of the coin is that somebody has to take governments’ place, and business seems to me to be a logical entity to do it.” He meant there that international corporations should have supreme sovereignty, above that of any nation. He always emphasized what he proudly called “internationalism.” To him, like to Ball, governments — that is, national governments — were the problem, and democracy is not the solution. The solution is, to exact the contrary: provide supreme sovereignty to international corporations, as an international authority higher than any democracy, or than any nation.
A two-minute video succinctly states the case for UK citizens against ISDS regarding Obama’s proposed TTIP or Transatlantic Trade & Investment Partnership with Europe, but the case equally applies for all citizens, regarding Obama’s TPP with Asia, and his TISA with all countries for “Services,” including financial services and the ‘rights’ that international financial corporations such as banks have to transfer their billionaires’ gambling (‘investment’) losses onto the taxpayers (via megabank bailouts). Obama’s ‘trade’ deals will thus internationalize the system to bail out billionaires on their losses. Furthermore, (as that linked source on TISA explained): if TISA passes, then the United States, which is virtually the only industrialized country that hasn’t socialized the health-insurance function, would be prohibited from ever socializing it. (This, mind you, from the very same Barack Obama who, while he was running against Hillary Clinton in 2008 to win the Democratic Presidential nomination, told the AFL-CIO, “I happen to be a proponent of single-payer universal healthcare coverage.” He didn’t just lie: he’s now fighting to make socialization of health insurance absolutely impossible in the United States. No wonder why as President, Obama’s White House argued to the Supreme Court that no state may limit lying in political campaigns — that lying in politics is Constitutionally protected ‘Free Speech.’ Obama sets the record for phoniness.)
The world is already almost completely fascistic. As I previously reported, it really, truly, is the case that the “World’s Richest 80 People Own Same Amount as World’s Bottom 50%.” And, furthermore, the only rigorous scientific study that has ever been done of the extent to which a recognized ‘democratic’ country actually is a democracy found that that nation definitely is not. The nation was the United States. The U.S. was discovered to be, and long to have been, a dictatorship, in which the people who are not in the richest 10% have no impact whatsoever on the nation’s policies. A brief video accurately summarized that study (by Gilens and Page) and explained why its findings are that way. This 6-minute video is a crash course on political reality. That Gilens and Page study noted at the end, that, “Our findings also point toward the need to learn more about exactly which economic elites (the ‘merely affluent’? the top 1%? the top 0.01%?) have how much impact upon public policy.” However, the most detailed study of the flow of economic benefits and costs in the United States since 2000 has found that all of the economic benefits from ‘America’s economic recovery’ and ‘the end of the recession,’ etc., have gone only to the top 1%. (The ‘news’ media try to say it’s not ‘really’ so, but the finding is based on the most solid of all data, and that’s the most reliable way to calculate anything.) Another study, which I did, also based on the best available data, “The Top 1% of America’s Top 1%,” has shown that the reason for the immense power that’s within the top 10% is the soaring wealth-boost to only the top 0.01%, the very top end of the top end. Comparing the boost to incomes at America’s top 0.1% to that of the top 0.01%, one sees that most of the income of the top 0.1% is actually going to merely the top 0.01%, so that, as I summed it up, “the wealthiest of the billionaires are getting almost everything.” And, this is the situation even before the Bilderberg plan is fully in force. Obama’’s ‘trade’ deals wouldn’t just lock this in; they’d vastly increase the power, and also the wealth, of the perhaps 100 or fewer people who control the largest international corporations.
The fact that these ‘trade’ deals are being pushed right now, means that the people who are in power have concluded that, already, ‘the free world’ is so dictatorial, that the chances that their plan can now be imposed globally are about as good as is likely ever to be the case again. The time is ripe for them to establish a global corporate dictatorship. The political money this year will be flowing like never before.
———-
Investigative historian Eric Zuesse is the author, most recently, of They’re Not Even Close: The Democratic vs. Republican Economic Records, 1910-2010, and of CHRIST’S VENTRILOQUISTS: The Event that Created Christianity, and of Feudalism, Fascism, Libertarianism and Economics.
 
What is the 'media' and who owns and controls it?

[video=youtube;HbdFw-RJdIc]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HbdFw-RJdIc[/video]
 
Mainstream media now acknowledging that the conspiracy theorists were onto something all along....

now come on.....if you are a journalist in the mainstream....you have seen enough by now....there are no excuses anymore for ignorance......its time to stop talking about 'conspiracy theories' and realise that these are not 'therories' but FACT

It's time to start talking about conspiracy fact

Even mainstream journalists must now realise that freedom of speech is under threat and that governments eg the UK government with its 'snoopers charter' are going to basically act as the nazis did and suppress any dissenting voices

They are going to hack peoples computers and plant incriminating evidence and try and stitch people up who are critical of the government; peoples data is not secure and the government can make it look like you have done anything they want to claim you have done (see the ritchie allan show episode i posted earlier in the thread looking at this threat to freedom of speech that is now emerging under the tory government)

They are going to fight dirty...it's what they do

The snoopers charter is not about fighting 'terrorism' it is about destroying freedom of speech

So PLEASE get past the false stigma that has been created by the system about talking about so called 'conspiracy theories' and lets start getting down to brass tacks and taking a critical and adult view at what is CLEARLY going on in the world around us

Its time to speak out now while we still can

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/men/thin...racy-theorists-have-been-right-all-along.html

[h=1]Perhaps the world's conspiracy theorists have been right all along[/h] [h=2]We used to laugh at conspiracy theorists, but from Fifa to banking scandals and the Iraq War, it seems they might have been on to something after all, says Alex Proud[/h]
By Alex Proud
12:18PM BST 15 Jun 2015


Conspiracy theories used to be so easy.
ADVERTISING


You’d have your mate who, after a few beers, would tell you that the moon landings were faked or that the Illuminati controlled everything or that the US government was holding alien autopsies in Area 51. And you’d be able to dismiss this because it was all rubbish.

Look, you’d say, we have moon rock samples and pictures and we left laser reflectors on the surface and... basically you still don’t believe me but that’s because you’re mad and no proof on earth (or the moon) would satisfy you.

It’s true that there was always the big one which wasn’t quite so easily dismissed. This was the Kennedy assassination - but here you could be fairly sure that the whole thing was a terrible, impenetrable murky morass. You knew that some things never would be known (or would be released, partially redacted by the CIA, 200 years in the future). And you knew that whatever the truth was it was probably a bit dull compared to your mate’s flights of fantasy involving the KGB, the Mafia and the military-industrial complex. Besides, it all made for a lot of very entertaining films and books.

[SUP]
moon_2166749b.jpg
Photo: Reuters[/SUP]


This nice, cozy state of affairs lasted until the early 2000s. But then something changed. These days conspiracy theories don’t look so crazy and conspiracy theorists don’t look like crackpots. In fact, today’s conspiracy theory is tomorrow’s news headlines. It’s tempting, I suppose, to say we live in a golden age of conspiracy theories, although it’s only really golden for the architects of the conspiracies. From the Iraq war to Fifa to the banking crisis, the truth is not only out there, but it’s more outlandish than anything we could have made up.

Our devotion to brands is a sickness of modern life

If you're under 30, bad luck. You're screwed

Of course, our real-life conspiracies aren’t much like The X-Files – they’re disappointingly short on aliens and the supernatural. Rather, they’re more like John Le Carre books. Shady dealings by powerful people who want nothing more than to line their profits at the expense of others. The abuse of power. Crazy ideologues who try and create their own facts for fun and profit. Corporations supplanting governments via regulatory capture.
So, what are some of our biggest conspiracies?
[h=3]The Iraq War[/h] The most disgusting abuse of power in a generation and a moral quagmire that never ends. America is attacked by terrorists and so, declares war on a country that had nothing whatsoever to do with the attacks, while ignoring an oil rich ally which had everything to do with them. The justification for war is based on some witches’ brew of faulty intelligence, concocted intelligence and ignored good intelligence. Decent people are forced to lie on an international stage. All sensible advice is ignored and rabid neo-con draft dodgers hold sway on military matters. The UK joins this fool’s errand for no good reason. Blood is spilled and treasure is spent.
The result is a disaster that was predicted only by Middle Eastern experts, post-conflict planners and several million members of the public. Thousands of allied troops and hundreds of thousands of blameless Iraqis are killed, although plenty of companies and individuals benefit from the US dollars that were shipped out, literally, by the ton. More recently, Iraq, now in a far worse state than it ever was under any dictator, has become an incubator for more terrorists, which is a special kind of geopolitical irony lost entirely on the war’s supporters.
Ten ways we could fix broken Britain
Is it OK for a man to keep partying in his 40s?


And yet, we can’t really bring ourselves to hold anyone accountable. Apportioning responsibility would be difficult, painful and inconvenient, so we shrug as the men behind all this enjoy their well-upholstered retirements despite being directly and personally responsible for hundreds of thousands of deaths and trillions of wasted dollars. And the slow drip, drip of revelations continues, largely ignored by the public, despite the horrendous costs which (in the UK) could have been spent on things like the NHS or properly equipping our armed forces.
[h=3]Fifa[/h] The conspiracy du jour. We always knew Fifa was shonky and bribey, but most of us thought the more outlandish claims were just that. Not so. As it turns out, Fifa is a giant corruption machine and it now looks like every World Cup in the last three decades, even the ones we were cool about, like South Africa, could have been fixes.
[SUP]
sepp-blatter_2713764b.jpg
Photo: AFP[/SUP]

On the plus side, it seems that something may be done, but it’ll be far too late to help honest footballing nations who missed their moment in the sun. For those who say "it’s only a stupid sport", well, recently we’ve heard accusations of arms deals for votes involving... wait for it... Saudi Arabia. The Saudi connection makes me wonder if, soon, we’ll be looking a grand unified conspiracy theory which brings together lots of other conspiracy theories under one corrupt, grubby roof.


[h=3]The banking crisis[/h] A nice financial counterpoint to Iraq. Virtually destroy the western financial system in the name of greed. Get bailed out by the taxpayers who you’ve been ripping off. And then carry on as if nothing whatsoever has happened. No jail, no meaningful extra regulation, the idea of being too big to fail as much of a joke as it was in 2005. Not even an apology. In fact, since the crisis you caused, things have got much better for you – and worse for everyone else. Much like Iraq, no-one has been held responsible or even acknowledged any wrongdoing. Again, this is partially because it’s so complicated and hard – but mainly because those who caused the crisis are so well represented in the governments of the countries who bailed them out. Oh, and while we’re at it, the banks played a part in the Fifa scandal. As conspiracy theorists will tell you, everything is connected.
[h=3]Paedophiles[/h] This one seems like a particularly dark and grisly thriller. At first it was just a few rubbish light entertainers. Then it was a lot more entertainers. Then we had people muttering about the political establishment – and others counter-muttering don’t be ridiculous, that’s a conspiracy theory. But it wasn’t. Now, it’s a slow-motion train crash and an endless series of glacial government inquiries. The conspiracy theorists point out that a lot of real stuff only seems to come out after the alleged perpetrators are dead or so senile it no longer matters. It’s hard to disagree with them. It’s also hard to imagine what kind of person would be so in thrall to power that they’d cover up child abuse.
[h=3]And the rest[/h] Where do you start? We could look at the EU and pick anything from its rarely signed-off accounts to the giant sham that let Greece join the Euro in the first place. We could look at UK defence procurement – and how we get so much less bang for our buck than France. We could peer at the cloying, incestuous relationship between the UK’s political class and its media moguls and how our leaders still fawn over a man whose poisonous control over so much of our media dates back to dodgy deal in 1981 that was denied for 30 years. We could look at the NSA and its intimate/ bullying relationship with tech companies. And we could go on and on and on.


But actually what we should be thinking is that a lot of this is what happens what you dismantle regulatory frameworks. This is what happens when you let money run riot and you allow industries to police themselves. This is what happens when the rich and powerful are endlessly granted special privileges, celebrated and permitted or even encouraged to place themselves above the law. And this is what happens when ordinary people feel bored by and excluded from politics, largely because their voices matter so little for the reasons above. Effectively, we are all living in Italy under Silvio Berlusconi. What’s the point in anything?

When did the rich become so utterly horrible?
The internet is now dominated by online lynch mobs

But actually, there is some hope. While the number of rich and powerful people who think they can get away with anything has undoubtedly grown, technology has made leaking much easier. Wikileaks may not be perfect, but it’s a lot better than no leaks at all. The other thing that gives me succour is the public’s view of the bankers. We still hate them, which is absolutely as it should be. And slowly this contempt is starting to hurt the masters of the universe. It’s notable that, recently, banking has started tumbling down the down the list of desirable careers. So, I suppose the solution is simple: we need more regulation, we need more transparency and we need more public shame and disgust. We might even get the last two; I’m less hopeful about the first.
In the X-Files, Fox Mulder’s famous catchphrase was, “I want to believe” but that’s because the conspiracy theories he dealt with were rather good fun. Ours, by contrast, tend to involve an endless procession of wealthy old men abusing their power. So I don’t want to believe any more. I want my kids to grow up in a world where conspiracy theories are something you laugh at.
Read more from Alex Proud