Just International

Anticlerical Rule is on the Rise in Iran

By Akbar E Torbat

The women-led anti-hejab movement that began after the death of Mahsa Amini on September 16, 2022, in Iran, is ongoing. Even though the street protests have subsided, many Iranian women defy to comply with wearing Islamic hejab in public. Nonetheless, the Islamic government is fighting to enforce hejab by various means, including closing stores that admit women without headscarves and preventing women without wearing hejab from entering metros and other public service places such as schools and universities. The government has also installed cameras in various places to monitor hejab enforcement. The enforcement of Islamic hejab has led to many anticlerical protests throughout Iran. The government has dealt with people’s protests by crackdowns, arrests, imprisonments, and executions. Consequently, a violent anticlerical wave has started in Iran.

Several clerics have been killed or injured in various places in Iran in the past few weeks. A senior Islamic cleric Abbas-Ali Suleimani was assassinated by a security guard on April 26, 2023, inside Bank Meli in Babolsar in the Mazandaran Province. Suleimani had previously served for 17 years as the representative of the Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei in the province of Sistan-Baluchestan. This province has been the site of many anti-government protests in recent months. According to people who knew Suleimani, he was pro-gender separation in all public places. On the same day, a junior mullah was purposely run over by a car, and on April 29, another cleric was stabbed in the city of Qum. On April 30, Lieutenant Alireza Shahraki, the head of the Saravan District Awareness Police Department, was assassinated. On May 5, the body of a mullah, Ibrahim Fazel, who had been missing for four days, was dragged out of the water in the coastal village of Goldasht in the Province of Mazandaran. On May 7, a mullah was injured after a young man attacked him with a knife in Ahmedabad village of Saveh city in the Central province.

The clerical oligarchy has claimed that the anticlerical incidents have been instigated by the reformists and celebrities inside Iran who are supported by the Western powers. The pro-clerics daily newspaper Kayhan wrote: “These [terrors] and dozens of other examples are just a small part of the efforts of the pro-reform media or domestic-westernization process to complete the puzzle of the enemy in creating hatred in society and social disintegration of the country.”[1]

In recent years, the ruling clerics’ political base has shrunk tremendously. The Middle class is feeling resentment and has turned against the ruling clerics. The clerics and their family members have moved up to the wealthy upper class by accumulating wealth. They engage in rent-seeking activity under the guise of Islamic and anti-imperialist slogans. In contrast, the high rate of inflation has pushed down the middle class to become a part of the dispossessed underpaid laborer, and that has further intensified the anticlerical feelings.

The clerics opiate the masses with promises of rewards in another world after death. They preach to people to pray five times a day to be rewarded by God to go to heaven. Even so, most Iranians have turned against the ruling clergy, as they feel they have been deprived of basic living standards. The young generation of Iranians does not listen to the clerics’ superstitious preaching. Two Iranian political prisoners, Yousef Mehrdad and Sadrollah Fazeli Zari, who had managed a cable channel called “Critique of Superstition and Religion,” were sentenced to death for the charges of “insulting the Prophet and religious sanctities,” “promoting atheism,” and “apostasy.” They were hanged on May 8, 2023. Many other people have been executed on various charges. According to Abdorrahman Boroumand Center for Human Rights in Iran, there have been 798 executions in Iran since the beginning of 2022 to this date.[2]

Ebrahim Raisi became president in a low-turnout election engineered by Khamenei. The results of Raisi’s two years in office include the fastest decline in the national currency’s value, the highest growth of money supply, the highest historical rate of inflation, and the biggest historical collapse of Tehran’s stock indexes in a day. The high rate of inflation has pushed down real wages, which has brought teachers and factory workers to the street to demand higher pay for their work. The country is struggling through the collapse of the nation’s currency, the rial. President Raisi has used printed money borrowed from the Central Bank of Iran (Bank Markazi) to spend on promises he had made two years ago during his presidential campaign. Inflation and financial corruption caused by the clerical leadership and their cronies have intensified anticlerical feelings throughout Iran.

The Islamic regime in Iran has become a Shi’a dictatorship by reactionary clerics. The clerics’ only concern is to remain in power. The Supreme Leader, Ali Khamenei, controls all three branches of the government directly or indirectly. The ruling clerics have used nepotism and marriage schemes to limit the important positions to themselves and their family members. For example, the current head of the parliament (Majles) Mohammad Bagher Qalibaf is a nephew of the Supreme Leader’s wife. The Supreme Leader’s daughter is married to the son of Ayatollah Mohamad Golpayegani, who is the chief of the Supreme Leader’s office. The Supreme Leader’s son Mujtaba Khamenei is married to a daughter of Gholam-Ali Haddad-Adel, the former head of the parliament. President Ebrahim Raisi is the son-in-law of Ayatollah Ahmad Alamolhoda, the Friday Prayer leader in Mashhad, the hometown of Khamenei. Alamolhoda is also the city’s representative in the Assembly of Experts.

On April 30, 2023, Reza Fatemi Amin, the minister of Industry, Mines, and Trade, was impeached in the parliament to be questioned for providing wrong statistics and prioritizing the interests of two major Iranian automobile companies. The minister was dismissed by the Majles due to the high prices of automobiles and rent-seeking corruption.

So far, the mullahs have not given up their enforcement of hejab, believing that yielding on that issue will open the door to other demands, and those could pave the way for ending the clerical rules, which they are unwilling to accept.

Akbar E. Torbat (atorbat@calstatela.edu) is the author of “Politics of Oil and Nuclear Technology in Iran.”

14 May 2023

Source: countercurrents.org

The On-Going Palestinian Nakba

By Jafar M Ramini

May 15th, is the 75th anniversary of the Palestinian Nakba (Catastrophe). And counting. I say ‘and counting’ because the theft of our land, the occupation, the siege on Gaza, the disposition of our people, the ethnic cleansing of Palestine and replacement of the Palestinian nation, with Jews, often of dual nationality, from around the world, continues more aggressively than ever. So does the building of illegal settlements to house those interlopers. They too are still going on apace with no end in sight.

Add to that toxic mix, the total indifference of western leaders and the conniving and betrayal of some Arab leaders, not to mention the shameful capitulation and collaboration of the Palestinian Authority and the picture is complete.

Try as I may to look for the infamous light at the end of the long, dark tunnel, I can’t find even the tiniest glimmer.

And I haven’t even got around to mentioning the Israeli prisons which are full of Palestinian men, women and children, tortured and held in disgusting conditions without charge or legal recourse. As if all of this was not enough to emphasise the cruelty and inhumanity of the occupation of our land, the longest in history, the Israeli Occupation Forces continue to raid, unhindered, cities, towns and villages all over Palestine. And what does the ‘free, democratic world’ do about it? This is but a small example of what they do.

The President of the European Commission, Madame Ursula Von der Leyen lauded Israel’s democracy and its ties to Europe.

“Today, we celebrate 75 years of vibrant democracy in the heart of the Middle East,” the German politician said. “We also celebrate 75 years of friendship between Israel and Europe,” pointing out that; “We have more in common than geography would suggest: our shared culture, our values and hundreds of thousands of dual European-Israeli citizens have created a deep connection between us.”

Really, Mme Von der Leyen? Shared values? Is the European Union proud to share with the Israeli Government the concentration camps and the ghettos Israel created for us Palestinians, in our own land? Is Israel’s ‘Administrative Detention policy’ which allows the imprisonment of Palestinians, men, women and children, indefinitely, without charge or legal representation, or even family visits, one that Europe might embrace? Is this what you might call a shared value?

Mme Von der Leyen continued to regurgitate Israeli propaganda by claiming that “you truly made the desert bloom”. I wonder if she is aware of the geography of Palestine and where the ‘land of milk and honey’, mentioned in the bible actually is? I venture to say it was not Berlin.

In the last 75 years there were many attempts to settle the so-called Israeli/Palestinian conflict. Yet, to put it in those terms is misleading. A conflict is between two opposing powers and their armies. Israel has the power, has the army, has the airforce, has the navy. Not to mention three hundred nuclear warheads and the total and complete support of the United States of America. The Palestinians have none of these. So how can we call it a conflict?

It is genocide. It was designed to ethnically cleanse all of Palestine and turn it into a state for Jews only, rubber-stamped by the Nation State Bill that was passed in 2018, which emphatically states that the right of self-determination in Israel is exclusively a Jewish prerogative.

Yet all of this has been just a starter for a much more ambitious, well-planned and financed settler-colonial project, which was started back in 1882, under the Ottoman Empire.

First: Facilitate the immigration of Jews from around the world into Palestine. Get rid of the Palestinians, or corral them in bins, euphemistically referred to as ‘cantons,’ and keep them on a strictly limited diet and under tight military rule.

Second: Present to the world that Jews are the only victims and Israelis are the biggest victims of all.

Third: Blackmail friends and allies to support Israeli ambitions, come what may. Steal their technology. Kill their sailors. Blame it on others. Those who do not submit, smear them as ‘anti-semitic’.

This is how Mr Benjamin Netanyahu has kept his grip on power since the 1990s. He has lied, he has waged wars, he has inflicted more death and suffering on the Palestinians and he has pretended to make peace. What he was actually trying to do, and is still trying to do is establish a legacy as the man who put the Greater Israel project on a higher level than any other leader before him. This is why Israel, until now, does not have a declared constitution or a declared, definitive border.

The opposition to these expansionist, racial plans in Israel is minimal, as was clearly illustrated recently by the Israeli electorate choosing to vote in the most fascist, far-right government ever in the State of Israel.

So, dear reader, as the thundering juggernaut of power and destruction by Israel rolls on, waved through by international indifference, what do you think? Can this inhumanity and murder in Palestine really continue unabated for anniversary after anniversary? Hope is still there, fluttering bravely. But it is all we have.

Jafar M Ramini is a Palestinian writer and political analyst.

9 May 2023

Source: countercurrents.org

Brazilian President Lula Calls For The Release Of Julian Assange

By Countercurrents Collective

Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva has criticized the UK for its treatment of Julian Assange. He said the WikiLeaks founder has been imprisoned for his professional activities as a journalist and called on the government to release him.

“It is an embarrassment that a journalist who denounced trickery by one state against another is arrested, condemned to die in jail and we do nothing to free him. It is crazy thing,” Lula told journalists after attending the coronation of King Charles III in London on Saturday.

He also told reporters that Assange’s is a case of freedom of expression, adding that the Australian national is behind bars merely “because he denounced wrongdoing.” Lula also lambasted the media for failing to back their colleague.

Australian PM

Media reports said:

While speaking to Australia’s ABC broadcaster from London on Thursday, the country’s prime minister, Anthony Albanese, argued that “there is nothing to be served’ by keeping Assange behind bars.

“This needs to be brought to a conclusion,” he stated, adding that Canberra is “working through diplomatic channels, we are making very clear what our position is on Mr. Assange’s case.”

Albanese, who has previously denounced Assange’s imprisonment on several occasions, acknowledged that the process is “frustrating.”

Assange’s Letter To The UK King

Another media report said:

On Friday, the WikiLeaks founder, who has been languishing in London’s Belmarsh high security prison since 2019, wrote a letter to King Charles III. Among other things, he invited the monarch to visit the facility.

“As a political prisoner, held at Your Majesty’s pleasure on behalf of an embarrassed foreign sovereign, I am honored to reside within the walls of this world-class institution,” the journalist wrote.

Assange was arrested by British authorities after Ecuador revoked his asylum status and allowed the UK police to remove him from the country’s embassy in London. The WikiLeaks founder had been sheltering in the diplomatic mission’s premises since 2012.

On the day of his arrest, the U.S. Department of Justice served Assange with 17 charges under the Espionage Act, which could potentially put him behind bars for 175 years. His defense team is currently fighting a US extradition request.

The charges stem from his publication of classified material obtained by whistleblowers, including classified documents alleging U.S. war crimes in Iraq and Afghanistan. Although Assange did not personally hack these materials, he was still charged for his role in publishing them.

Biden Rival Pledges To Pardon Assange

A media report said:

U.S. presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has vowed to pardon “brave truth-tellers” including WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, who is currently being held in a British high security prison as he fights extradition to America.

The U.S. “actively persecutes journalists and whistleblowers” instead of championing free speech, Democratic contender Kennedy tweeted on Tuesday.

The Australian-born Assange is effectively facing a lifetime sentence for his role in the leaks by US military whistleblower Chelsea Manning. Assange was arrested in Britain in 2019 after Ecuador revoked his political asylum, allowing police to enter its embassy in London, where he had been holed up for seven years.

Assange was then sent to Belmarsh prison, a facility ordinarily used to house some of the most dangerous criminals in the UK.

Kennedy, who is seeking the Democratic Party’s nomination for the 2024 presidential election, said he would pardon both Assange and Manning. The latter spent seven years in US custody after leaking troves of classified materials to WikiLeaks in 2010, but had her sentence commuted by then-President Barack Obama in 2017.

The U.S. government has accused Assange of encouraging and facilitating Manning and is aiming to extradite him for trial. Assange’s defenders have argued that his trial would set a dangerous precedent, and that his actions were no different from other publishers of classified documents who sought to protect their sources.

Kennedy named a number of “other brave truth-tellers” who deserve similar exoneration, including Edward Snowden, who now resides in Russia. Instead of prosecuting them, the presidential hopeful pledged he would “investigate the corruption and crimes exposed.”

Kennedy is among three people to have formally announced their bids for the Democratic nomination. While incumbent President Joe Biden is the frontrunner, Kennedy is polling at 19%, with author Marianne Williamson trailing at 9%, according to a recent Fox News survey.

The Biden administration has said it has no plans to drop the charges against Assange, despite calls by media freedom advocates. Critics have accused Washington of hypocrisy, citing its habit of lecturing other nations over press freedoms.

Democrats Urge Biden To Drop Assange Charges

Several Democrats in the U.S. House have penned a letter calling for the immediate release of WikiLeaks co-founder Julian Assange, urging the Department of Justice to drop its charges against the publisher and halt extradition proceedings aiming to bring him to the US to face prosecution under the World War I-era Espionage Act.

The group of progressive lawmakers, known as ‘the Squad’, addressed their letter to Attorney General Merrick Garland on Tuesday to mark the fourth anniversary since Assange’s 2019 arrest, saying the charges against him represent a serious threat to the free press.

“We write you today to call on you to uphold the First Amendment’s protections for the freedom of the press by dropping the criminal charges against Australian publisher Julian Assange and withdrawing the American extradition request currently pending with the British government,” the lawmakers said.

They went on to cite warnings from a long line of human rights, civil liberties, and press freedoms groups – among them the ACLU, Amnesty International, Reporters Without Borders, the Committee to Protect Journalists, Defending Rights and Dissent, and Human Rights Watch – which have argued Assange’s case poses “a grave and unprecedented threat to everyday, constitutionally protected journalistic activity.”

Assange was arrested by the British authorities in 2019 after losing political asylum status at the Ecuadorian Embassy in London, where he was holed up for more than seven years for fear of prosecution by the US due to WikiLeaks’ publication of large amounts of classified material. Under then-President Donald Trump, the U.S. Department of Justice unsealed a multi-count indictment against Assange on April 11, 2019 – the same day of his arrest – slapping him with 17 charges under the Espionage Act, which can potentially carry the death penalty.

He has been held at the UK’s maximum-security Belmarsh Prison in the years since, as Washington presses an extradition request to bring Assange to the U.S. to face his charges. The publisher’s legal team has appealed a prior ruling in favor of extradition on the grounds of Assange’s declining health, a process which continues to play out in the British courts.

The Democratic lawmakers argued that Assange’s prosecution would “greatly diminishes America’s credibility” as a defender of human rights around the globe and set a dangerous legal precedent “whereby journalists or publishers can be prosecuted.”

“In the future the New York Times or Washington Post could be prosecuted when they publish important stories based on classified information. Or, just as dangerous for democracy, they may refrain from publishing such stories for fear of prosecution,” they continued.

Assange’s charges stem from the 2010 publication of a massive trove of classified documents obtained by US army intelligence analyst Chelsea Manning, including material suggesting U.S. forces committed war crimes in Iraq and elsewhere. Manning was charged and sentenced to 35 years in prison, but was later released after President Barack Obama commuted Manning’s sentence.

CIA’s Surveillance Methods On Assange Revealed

The CIA used private Spanish security company UC Global to secretly install microphones inside the Ecuadorian Embassy in London to monitor WikiLeaks co-founder Julian Assange, El Pais reported recently, citing the company’s internal communications.

UC Global was hired to provide security for the embassy. Assange, who was granted asylum by Ecuador at the time, resided in the diplomatic compound from 2012 to 2019, before he was forcibly removed by British police. The Spanish company’s alleged links to U.S. intelligence agencies were first reported by El Pais in 2019.

According to the newspaper, UC Global founder and head David Morales first came into contact with the CIA in 2017. Around that time, Morales informed his employees that the company would have to provide a new American client named ‘X’ with remote access to the server that collected the data from the Ecuadorian Embassy in London, which was referred to as the ‘Hotel’.

“Regarding the Hotel work, I would like to offer our information collection and analysis capability to the American client,” Morales wrote in a September 2017 email. “We must try to make it attractive and easy to interpret.”

The information shared reportedly included profiles of Assange’s visitors, including lawyers and diplomats, as well as cell phone data. Morales was quoted as saying in a chat message that “the people in control are our friends in the USA.”

One of microphones that Morales’ team secretly planted inside the embassy was hidden in the base of a fire extinguisher in order to listen in despite Assange’s habit of using a white noise machine to prevent surveillance, El Pais said. Stickers were attached to window corners to avoid vibrations and allow sound to be recorded through laser microphones. “I know it is of the utmost interest and that the USA wants to do it,” Morales reportedly wrote to his employees.

According to El Pais, UC Global’s work helped Washington foil a plan to sneak Assange out of the embassy in December 2017. Lenin Moreno, Ecuador’s president at the time, allegedly wanted to grant the WikiLeaks co-founder Ecuadorian citizenship and get him out of Britain in a diplomatic car.

Morales’ team reportedly recorded a conversation between Assange and Ecuadorian officials and then quickly sent it to the U.S. Washington responded by issuing an arrest warrant for Assange to Britain, which apparently prompted organizers to abort the plan.

In 2019, the Spanish authorities launched an investigation into Morales’ company and briefly detained him. He has since been released on bail.

9 May 2023

Source: countercurrents.org

King Charles III: Policing the Republican Protests

By Dr Binoy Kampmark

In Britain, pageantry has always been a palliative and plaster for the dark and dismal.  Be it in times of crisis, the chance to put on an extravagant show, usually at vast expense, is not something to forego.  Central to this entertainment complex is the Royal family, that archaic vestige of an era that refuses to pass into history.

The Coronation of King Charles III was yet another instance of that complex in action.  It was a spectacle, redolent of ancient ceremony, aged ritual, punctuated by the monarch’s statements of “I do”.

While this delighted a goodly number of punters, the whole affair also presented Republic and others of like mind to avail themselves of the chance to protest. Republic is one of the key groups attempting to stir the waters of change, running petitions, arranging protests and selling merchandise for the cause. On this occasion, the group was promising some of the biggest protests against the monarchy, with demonstrators sporting “Not my King” placards.

Unfortunately for the protesters, and for the right to assemble in general, the UK Parliament made sure to pass laws for that precise eventuality.  Nothing would be left to chance.  Security Minister, Tom Tugendhat, explained away the coincidental nature of the Public Order Act 2023 and it coming into effect just days before the Coronation.  “We’re not just thinking of our own security but the security of heads of states, and we’re dealing with protest groups who have nothing to do with the UK but to do with foreign leaders visiting the UK.”

The 2023 statute builds on measures that were already used against anti-monarchy protests following the death of Queen Elizabeth II.  As human rights legal academic David Mead noted at the time, the right to protest peacefully is protected in domestic law, while free expression is also protected by the European Convention on Human Rights via the Human Rights Act.  But this did not prevent the police from making adventurous use of various countering provisions, though it was not clear what they were.  Attention was paid to the possible use of section 5 of the Public Order Act 1986, public nuisance, or arrest to prevent a breach of the peace.

Evidently, the Tory government did not feel these measures adequate in their severity.  The 2023 Act specifically outlines such offences as “locking on” and “being equipped for locking on”, in addition to expanding stop and search powers.  Police making use of such powers may, provided they are of or above the rank of inspector, authorise stop and search without the need for suspicion.

The locking on offence covers instances where a people “attach themselves to another person, to an object or to land”, do the same with other people, and “attach an object to another object or to land”.  Such acts must also cause, or be capable of causing, serious disruption to two or more individuals or an organisation in a place other than a dwelling, and be accompanied with the requisite intent.

As for the offence of being equipped for locking on, a person is in breach “if they have an object with them in a place other than a dwelling with an intention that it may be used in the course of or in connection with the commission by any person of an offence under section 1(1) (offence of locking on).”

The government would have also delighted in the High Court’s decision to reverse a District Judge’s ruling to acquit a protester for allegedly breaching a police direction made under the Public Order Act 1986.  In 2020, the protester in question sat down in Parliament Street, adjacent to Parliament Square.  According to the police, the protest had stay within the confines of Parliament Square

The decision, handed down the same week the new Public Order Act received Royal assent, held that the judge applied the wrong test in assuming that a defendant’s conviction had to be proportionate relative with their rights to free expression and assembly.  It was a remarkable decision, and abysmal in the context of assembly and free expression.

In a statement from Commander Karen Findlay of the London Metropolitan Police, a fat finger of accusation was pointed at the Coronation protestors.  There had “been a significant police operation after we received information protestors were determined to disrupt the Coronation procession.”  It was “targeted at those we believed were intent on taking this action. It was not our intention to prevent protest”.

All in all, 64 arrests were made on May 6.  Of these, 52 “related to concerns people were going to disrupt the event, and arrests included to prevent a breach of the peace and conspiracy to cause a public nuisance.”  Eight arrests were also “made for other offences, including possession of an offensive weapon, drugs offences, and breaching a sexual harm prevention order.”

In the arrest count were six demonstrators from the Republic campaign group, suspected of having items among their placards that “could be used as lock on devices.”  The Met investigation that followed proved otherwise.  “Those arrested stated the items would be used to secure their placards, and the investigation has been unable to prove intent to use them to lock on and disrupt the event.”  There was “regret that those six people arrested were unable to join the wider group of protesters in Trafalgar Square and elsewhere on the procession route.”

One of the arrestees, Republic head Graham Smith, subsequently revealed that three embarrassed officers, one with the rank of chief inspector, personally apologised to him and handed “the straps [for the placards] back to me.”

Such actions did little to douse the fire.  “This,” fumed Smith, “has been a disgraceful episode and we will be speaking to lawyers about taking legal action. I also expect a full inquiry into why they repeatedly lied to us and who authorised the arrests.”  The newly crowned King will be hoping that interest in the matter will be quick to die down.  But even the attractive glossiness of pageantry won’t last.

Dr. Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge.

9 May 2023

Source: countercurrents.org

The Debt Ceiling Debate Is a Massive Deception Against the Public

By Richard D Wolff

Future historians will likely look back at the debt ceiling rituals being reenacted these days with a frustrated shaking of their heads. That otherwise reasonable people would be so readily deceived raises the question that will provoke those historians: How could this happen?

The U.S. Congress has imposed successive ceilings on the national debt, each one higher than the last. Ceilings were intended to limit the amount of federal borrowing. But the same U.S. Congress so managed its taxing and spending that it created ever more excesses of spending over tax revenues (deficits). Those excesses required borrowing to cover them. The borrowings accumulated to hit successive ceilings. A highly political ritual of threats and counterthreats accompanied each rise of the ceiling required by the need to borrow to finance deficits.

It is elementary economics to note that if Congress raised more taxes or cut federal spending—or both—there would be no need to borrow and thus no ceiling on borrowing to worry about. The ceiling would become irrelevant or merely symbolic. Further, if taxes were raised enough and spending cut enough, the existing U.S. national debt could be reduced. That situation has happened occasionally in U.S. history.

The real issue then is that when borrowing approaches any ceiling, the policy choices are these three: raise the ceiling (to borrow more), raise taxes, or cut spending. Of course, combinations of them would also be possible.

In contrast to this reality, U.S. politics deceives by constricting its debate. Politicians, the mainstream media, and academics simply omit—basically by refusing to admit or consider—tax increases. The GOP demands spending cuts or else it will block raising the ceiling. The Democrats insist that raising the ceiling is the better choice than cutting spending. Democrats threaten to blame the GOP for the consequences of not raising the debt ceiling. They paint those consequences in lurid colors depicting U.S. bondholders denied interest or repayment, Social Security recipients denied their pensions, and government employees denied their wages. The unspoken agreement between the two major parties is to omit any serious discussion of raising taxes to avoid hitting the debt ceiling. That omission entails deception.

Here are some tax increases that could help solve the problem by avoiding any need to raise the debt ceiling. The social security tax could be applied to all wage and salary incomes, not only those of $160,000 or less as is now the case. The social security tax could be applied to nonwage income such as interest dividends, capital gains, and rents. The corporate profits tax could be raised back to what it was a few decades ago: near or above 50 percent versus the current 37 percent rate. A property tax could be levied on property that takes the form of stocks and bonds. The current property tax in the United States (levied mostly at the local level) includes land, houses, automobiles, and business inventories, while it excludes stocks and bonds. Perhaps that is because the richest 10 percent of Americans own roughly 80 percent of stocks and bonds. The current property tax system in the United States is very nice for that 10 percent. Another logical candidate is the federal estate tax which a few years ago exempted under $1 million of an estate from the tax, but now exempts over $12 million per person (over $25 million per couple). That exemption makes a mockery of the idea that all Americans start or live their lives on a level playing field where merit counts more than inheritance. The U.S. could and should go back from that tax giveaway to the richest. There are many more possible tax increases.

Of course, there are strengths and weaknesses entailed in raising every tax, positive and negative consequences. But the exact same is true of raising the debt ceiling and thereby increasing the U.S. national debt. Likewise cutting spending has its pluses and minuses in terms of pain and gain. There is no logical or reasonable basis for excluding tax increases from the national debate and discussion about raising the debt ceiling and thereby the national debt.

It is rather the shared political commitments of both major parties that require and motivate the exclusion. There is no reason for U.S. citizens to accept, tolerate, endorse, or otherwise validate the debt ceiling deception perpetrated against us.

Nor is the debt ceiling deception alone. The previous national debate over responding to inflation by having the Federal Reserve raise interest rates provides another quite parallel example. That debate proceeded by debating the pros and cons of interest rate increases as if no other anti-inflationary policy existed or was even worth mentioning. Once again elementary economics teaches that wage-price freezes and rationing have been used against inflations in the past—including in the United States—as alternatives to raising interest rates or alongside them. U.S. President Nixon in 1971 used wage-price freezes. U.S. President Roosevelt used rationing during World War II. But the government, Federal Reserve, major media, and major academic leaders carried on their recent policy debates as if those other anti-inflationary tools did not exist or were not worth including in the debate.

Wage-price freezes and rationing have their strengths and weaknesses—just as tax increases do—but once again the same applies to raising interest rates. No justification exists for proceeding as if alternative options are not there. The U.S. national debate over fighting inflation was deceptive in the same way that the debate over the debt ceiling is.

Nor is the deception any less if it is covered by a claim of “realism.” Those who grasp elementary economics enough to know that tax increases could “solve” the debt ceiling issue become complicit in the deception by invoking “realism.” Since the two major parties are jointly subservient to corporations and the rich, they rule out tax increases on them. It thus becomes “realistic” to exclude that option from the debt ceiling debate. What is best for corporations and the rich thus gets equated to what is “realistic.” It is worth remembering that throughout history ruling classes have discovered, to their shock and surprise, that the ruled can and often do quickly alter what is “realistic.”

The debt ceiling deceptions favor corporations over individuals and the richest individuals over the rest of us. In our thinking and speaking too, the nation’s class structure and class struggles exhibit their influential power. The mainstream debt ceiling debate deceives by lying by omission rather than commission.

Richard D. Wolff is professor of economics emeritus at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst, and a visiting professor in the Graduate Program in International Affairs of the New School University, in New York. Wolff’s weekly show, “Economic Update,” is syndicated by more than 100 radio stations and goes to 55 million TV receivers via Free Speech TV.

9 May 2023

Source: countercurrents.org

South Korea Pivots to Conflict

By Dae-Han Song and Alice S. Kim

South Korea’s far-right President Yoon Suk Yeol is rushing South Korea headlong into the middle of the new Cold War that the United States is waging against China. Yoon’s aspiration to position South Korea as a “global pivotal state” is turning South Korea into a bigger cog in the U.S. war machine and stakes South Korea’s security and economic future on a declining U.S.-led global order. Yoon’s support of the U.S. global order has taken him on a flurry of visits and meetings around the world from the virtual Indo-Pacific Economic Framework (IPEF) summit to the NATO summit in Madrid to high-level meetings in Japan and the United States.

Most recently on his April 26 U.S. visit, President Yoon and U.S. President Joe Biden announced the “Washington Declaration” to deploy U.S. nuclear-armed submarines to South Korea—reintroducing U.S. nuclear weapons to South Korea for the first time in over 40 years. When viewed against North Korea’s development of nuclear weapons as a strategic deterrent, these weapons in South Korea will more likely fuel a nuclear arms race rather than check North Korea’s nuclear program. As former South Korean Unification Minister Jeong Se-hyun observed, four out of North Korea’s six nuclear tests occurred in response to the hardline stance of conservative South Korean administrations that refused to dialogue with North Korea.

Ultimately, Yoon’s actions are putting South Korea on a dangerous path that further destabilizes inter-Korean relations and antagonizes China, its biggest trading partner. All the while, the move also forsakes the Korean government’s duty to advocate for reparations from Japan for Koreans exploited under Japanese colonialism and to prevent the discharge of radioactive waste from the Fukushima nuclear reactor, which lies upstream from South Korea.

Yoon’s ‘Global Pivotal State’

The alarming return of U.S. nuclear weapons to South Korea follows Yoon’s posturing to develop nuclear weapons in South Korea this past January as part of his evolving extremist hardline North Korea policy. More broadly, it forms part of Yoon’s greater foreign policy agenda of inserting South Korea in the security architecture of the U.S.’s anti-China Asia-Pacific grand strategy. The Yoon administration’s “Strategy for a Free, Peaceful and Prosperous Indo-Pacific Region,” like Yoon’s recent activities, follows closely from the U.S. Indo-Pacific Strategy, with the goal of building and enforcing a U.S.-led “rules-based order” in the region with “like-minded allies” to contain China.

For all its declarations of fairness and playing by the rules, this U.S.-dominated “rules-based order” is at odds with the actual multipolar world taking shape around the world as well as the multilateral nature of the internationally agreed-upon UN-based order. The United States has been leading the creation of regional minilateral bodies such as the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (Quad) or the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework as part of its “hybrid war against China” and engaging in unilateral aggression toward China in the form of “military, economic, information, and military warfare.”

For example, the United States is setting the stage to dispute China’s actions in the South China Sea not through the UN “Law of the Sea Convention,” which the United States has not signed onto, but rather through the Indo-Pacific security framework. This allows the United States to target China’s actions while exempting its own naval operations from the oversight of “global bureaucrats”—i.e., the UN. Furthermore, despite calling for an “open” and “free” Indo-Pacific, the United States is waging a “chip war” by pressuring its Indo-Pacific allies to impede China’s access to semiconductor chips, one of the world’s most critical high-tech resources today.

The Yoon administration has been contributing to the buildup and reinforcement of this “rules-based order” through its participation in the Indo-Pacific framework, global NATO, and by consolidating the U.S.-Japan-South Korea trilateral military alliance. In May 2022, a few weeks into his term, Yoon participated virtually in the IPEF meeting. In December, the administration adopted its own Indo-Pacific Strategy which committed to “stabilize supply chains of strategic resources” and “seek cooperation with partners with whom we share values,”—i.e., IPEF states. South Korea is now being recruited into the U.S. chip war against China.

In June 2022, the participation of South Korea (including Yoon’s establishment of a NATO diplomatic mission) and three other Asia-Pacific states in the NATO meeting expanded NATO’s reach from the North Atlantic into the Pacific. This year, Yoon paved the way toward consolidating the U.S.-Japan-South Korea trilateral alliance by forgoing demands that Japan take responsibility for its colonial exploitation of Korean workers. Then, during his March visit with Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida, he resumed the controversial 2016 General Security of Military Information Agreement (GSOMIA) intelligence-sharing pact, laying the groundwork for direct military coordination between South Korea and Japan.

In April, U.S., Japan, and South Korean officials met and agreed to hold missile defense and anti-submarine exercises to counter North Korea and “promote peace and security in the Indo-Pacific region,” with special emphasis on “peace and security in the Taiwan Strait.” As a further show of commitment to the U.S. global war strategy, in an April 19 Reuters interview, Yoon reversed his position on Ukraine and raised the possibility of sending weapons, and exacerbated the U.S.’s provocations in Taiwan vis-a-vis the One China principle, to the ire of Chinese officials.

A Pivot Toward Peace

Activists in South Korea and abroad have been ceaselessly working toward peace on the peninsula, with key struggles waged along the very sites of U.S. military installations in the Asia-Pacific region encircling China, such as the construction of the military naval base in Gangjeong village. They have also been part of long-standing transnational activism to procure a peace treaty for the Korean War. As these activists and U.S. scholar Noam Chomsky have recently reiterated in the face of the April 26 U.S.-South Korea nuclear weapons deal, only a peace treaty ending the Korean War would lay the basis for denuclearizing the Korean peninsula, bring an end to the U.S. military occupation of South Korea, and move toward peace and stability in Northeast Asia. To continue building greater exchange, dialogue, and solidarity, and pivot the region toward peace, this May 16, Justice Party National Assemblymembers along with the International Strategy Center and other civil society organizations in South Korea, the United States, and Japan will be organizing an International Forum for Peace in Northeast Asia and Against a New Cold War Order.

Dae-Han Song is in charge of the networking team at the International Strategy Center and is a part of the No Cold War collective.

Alice S. Kim received her PhD from the Rhetoric Department at UC Berkeley and is a writer, researcher, and translator living in Seoul.

9 May 2023

Source: countercurrents.org

Protests erupt in Pakistan cities after Imran Khan arrest

Thousands take to the streets in the capital Islamabad, Karachi, Lahore, Peshawar and other cities.

Police have fired water cannon and tear gas to quell protests that erupted in several cities across Pakistan hours after former Prime Minister Imran Khan was arrested in connection with a corruption case.

Thousands of Khan’s supporters took to the streets on Tuesday in the capital Islamabad, Karachi, Lahore, Peshawar and other cities to protest against his arrest.

At least one worker for Khan’s party was killed in Quetta, Shireen Mazari, former minister and senior leader of the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) party told media.

In Islamabad, hundreds of PTI activists blocked the main Kashmir Highway, which suspended traffic on either side of the road.

Reporting from Islamabad, Al Jazeera’s Kamal Hyder said “a precarious situation” is developing following Khan’s arrest.

“As the reports of Imran Khan’s arrest went across the country, protesters [took] to the streets and arrests are being made,” Hyder said. “There is considerable anger as far as Imran Khan’s supporters are concerned and the situation is escalating by the hour.”

Hyder added that officials anticipated the protests and have warned the public against participating in them.

“The inspector general of Islamabad police has said that anybody coming out to protest should be arrested,” he said.

Local broadcaster Geo News reported that police have arrested over a dozen of PTI workers after the two sides clashed at several points in the city.

“We will block the entire country and protest until Khan is released,” Waseem Qayyum, a protester, told dpa news agency.

In Lahore, the country’s second-largest city, protesters gathered outside the former prime minister’s Zaman Park residence and blocked the adjacent roads by burning tyres. Police used water cannon to disperse the protesters.

In the southern port city of Karachi, PTI supporters gathered outside the local party office located along the city’s busiest Shahrah-e-Faisal Road. Both tracks of the road near the PTI office were closed to traffic as heavy contingents of police cordoned off the area.

Police also hurled tear gas canisters to disperse the protesters when they tried to block the road.

A group of protesters pelted stones and burned tyres at Burns Road, the city’s famous food street, suspending traffic and forcing shopkeepers to pull their shutters downs.

In northwestern Landi Kotal town, which borders neighbouring Afghanistan, protesters blocked the Pak-Afghan highway at two points, Dawn News reported.

Khan’s arrest followed months of political crisis and came hours after the country’s powerful military rebuked the former international cricketer for alleging a senior officer had been involved in a plot to kill him.

“Imran Khan has been arrested in the Qadir Trust case,” the official Islamabad police Twitter account said, referring to a corruption case.

Video broadcast on local TV channels showed Khan – who has a pronounced limp since being shot during an assassination attempt last year – being manhandled by dozens of paramilitary rangers into an armoured car inside the Islamabad High Court premises.

It was not immediately clear where he was taken.

Anticipating his arrest, party officials later released a pre-recorded video by Khan in which he urged supporters to come out in support of “true freedom”.

“My Pakistanis, by the time these words reach you, I would have been detained under an illegitimate case,” he says in the video.

“One thing should become clear for all of you from this is that fundamental rights in Pakistan, the rights given to us by our constitution and democracy, have been buried.”

Pakistan is deeply mired in an economic and political crisis, with Khan pressuring the struggling coalition government for early elections.

9 May 2023

Source: www.aljazeera.com

Global Britain and King Charles’s Great Reset

By Matthew Ehret-Kump

This week, the world was exposed to a disturbing, archaic and bizarre bit of pageantry not seen in over 70 years with the coronation of King Charles III as head of the Global British Commonwealth, head of the Anglican Church, and spokesman for a program dubbed Global Britain that was brought online as the official mandate of the Conservative party in 2021.

From managing a global empire of economic enslavement and having invaded nearly every nation on Earth at one time or another[2], Britain continues to exert vast control over the mining concessions of Africa with over $1 trillion of direct mining interests controlled by British and/or British Commonwealth-based corporations. According to the 2016 report produced by War on Want[3]: “101 companies listed on the London Stock Exchange (LSE) — most of them British — have mining operations in 37 sub-Saharan African countries. They collectively control over $1 trillion worth of Africa’s most valuable resources. The UK government has used its power and influence to ensure that British mining companies have access to Africa’s raw materials. This was the case during the colonial period and is still the case today.”

The City

As outlined in my new book The Anglo Venetian Roots of the Deep State, the “square mile” dubbed The City of London (a separate legal entity from London itself) is the nerve center of world finance, with the Bank of England and Commonwealth offshore tax havens directing trillions of dollars of drug money laundering, terrorist financing and other corrupt practices globally. The City’s sovereignty beyond all national jurisdiction was enshrined in the oligarchist ‘Magna Carta’ of 1214 which established the financial hub as a supranational corporation capable of running its own police force and judicial system… which it continues maintain 800 years later.

During the 183 years between 1763 to 1946 which saw the greatest direct influence of British unipolar supremacy over the world, the impoverished nations of the world found themselves more impoverished, less capable of acquiring means of industrial production and more at war with themselves and their neighbors via divide-to-conquer tactics. Since this empire took the form of the Anglo-American “special relationship” after 1945, this trend was only exacerbated.

The Causal Hand of British Intelligence

From the standpoint of global intelligence operations, Britain is the creator and central command structure of the Five Eyes intelligence apparatus and has also been dubbed “Londonistan” for having provided safe havens for international terrorist groups who have found sanctuary under the liberal surface ideology of tolerant Britain[4].

British intelligence has also been found to have either helped create and/or continued to support terror groups internationally as outlined by EIR researcher Michael Billington in the 2020 reportBritish Creation and Control of Islamic Terror: Background to China’s Defeat of Terror in Xinjiang[5].

While nurturing global terrorism and radical Islam, British intelligence also lost no time cultivating the most rabid variants of political zionism, and crafted the state of Israel itself out of the Roundtable/Fabian program that came to be called ‘The Balfour Accords’. The story of Britain’s creation of political zionism and rapturist Christianity too is outlined in a 2021 episode of The Great Game here:

The Strategic Hour: Wuhan Labs, Zionism, Rapture and the Creation of Synthetic Cults

While China has provided large scale loans for transport corridors, new industrial zones, and coal, oil, natural gas, hydro and nuclear power investments to countries desperately in need of real development, Global Britain and her American/EU cohorts have spent decades only providing conditionality-laced loans with strings attached and “appropriate” green technologies that will forever prevent Africa or other poor nations from ever standing on their own two feet.

The idea of Global Britain has always had at its heart the concept of an integrated British Commonwealth with the Five Eyes at the head of intelligence, City of London at the head of finance and the hereditary structures of power centered around the Crown as the titular fount of all honors through which all branches of the international deep state derive their powers.

Crown Agents

Since 1833, Global Britain has been managed by a pseudo private system of Crown Agents today named Crown Agents for Overseas Government and Administration. This vast body exists as a semi-official status and describes itself as “an emanation of the crown” and is extremely active in Central and Eastern Europe with its greatest focus on Ukraine’s economic, energy and health management system. The agency is partnered with the World Bank, UN and Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and acts as a giant holding company with one shareholder called the Crown Agents Foundation based in Southwark London.

Having been set up in the 1930s as the new face of the British Empire, today’s British Commonwealth occupies 12.2 million square miles of territory, holds 2.4 billion people and represents 21% of the world’s land area. For those who still believe in the myth that the British Empire disappeared after WW2, it is worth contrasting both Commonwealth and Empire maps.

The fact is that the British Empire continues to exert a vast top-down influence over world affairs. Despite having nominally disappeared after WWII, giving way for an “American Empire”, Global Britain is simply an attempt to make explicit what has always been true. Today’s strategists managing the Global Britain agenda “coming out party” are in a desperate attempt to position the Commonwealth as the center of a new post-reset age.

Being an institution organized entirely around hereditary institutions, the centrepiece for the continuity of this reform is hinged upon a ruling family occupying the position of official Prima inter pares around which the entire structure of controls can exert its influence.

In today’s age, this role has fallen onto a certain inbred creature by the name of Charles.

“Long Live the King”

“London Bridge is Down” were the code words delivered by the Queen’s Private Secretary Edward Young to high-ranking officials upon the death of Queen Elisabeth II.

This code was selected as part of a larger protocol dubbed strangely enough “operation Unicorn” for reasons beyond the wildest imagination of this author and which sets into motion a set of actions culminating in the anointing of Prince Charles as the new King of Britain and the Commonwealth.

For Canadians who had thought they would no longer be forced to endure watching their Prime Minister slavishly declare his oaths of fealty (and oaths of secrecy) to an inbred monarch sitting on the other side of the ocean as had occurred in 2017 they will be very disappointed.

Justin Trudeau takes oath of office

Canada’s Parliamentary Oaths Act of 1866 demands that both houses of Parliament are required to take pledges of allegiance after the deaths of all sitting monarchs. That’s right, every single member of the supposedly “elected and democratic” government of Canada must declare their oaths of fealty not to the people or non-existent constitution, but to some inbred family bloodline on the other side of the world.

Similar oaths were read by elected officials across every other Commonwealth Five Eyes member state.

It is thus worth asking, is this institution of hereditary powers which Charles has inherited just a ceremonial gig with no real substance or influence behind it?

Although the majority of citizens including British subjects believe this to be the case, the facts point to a very different reality.

Prince Charles: World’s Largest Property Owner

This may surprise you, but the British Crown happens to be the world’s largest property owner clocking in possessions amounting to 6.6 billion acres across Australia, New Zealand, Northern Ireland, Canada, Great Britain and the Falkland Islands[6].

On top of the “Crown Lands” and “Crown Corporations” which are legally owned by the monarch of Britain, an organization called ‘The Crown Estate’ is one of the world’s largest property groups. Describing the institution which sends 25% of its earnings directly into the Monarch’s purse every year, Die Welt Business had this to say[7]:

“The Crown Estate owns property all across the UK, from castles and cottages to agricultural land and forests plus retail parks and shopping centers. It owns more than half the UK’s entire seashore, giving it hugely valuable auction rights for offshore commercial activity, such as wind farms.”

The Crown controls nearly the entire seabed (and half the seashore) around the UK with any business wishing to build offshore windmills as part of the Green New Deal forced to rent their sea beds from the Crown Estate. It was noted by Byline Times that the Crown will stand to become “the biggest beneficiary of UK’s Green Agenda” which recently unveiled a 10 point plan for a “green revolution” and full decarbonization by 2050. For anyone confused about the exploding prices of inefficient energy sources across England, they wouldn’t get far without appreciating the tax-payer subsidized boondoggle of windmill farms.

Prince Charles himself has demonstrated that he certainly doesn’t see the Crown as a symbolic entity and was accused of “incontinent lobbying” in 2013 when dozens of personal letters (dubbed the “Black Spider Memos”) to MPs and the Prime Minister were made public after an intense legal fight to keep them secret. Charles’ official biographer Jonathan Dimbleby even wrote in 2013 that upon Charles’ succession to the Crown that things would become much more hands on, and “that a quiet constitutional revolution is afoot.”[8]

Prerogative Powers Are Real

Although much effort goes into portraying the Crown’s prerogative powers as merely symbolic, they cover nearly every branch of governance and have occasionally been used… although those British spheres of influence where they most apply are usually so self-regulating that they require very little input from such external influence to keep them in line.

These powers were first revealed publicly in 2003 and in an article titled ‘Mystery Lifted on the Prerogative Powers’[9], the London Guardian noted that these powers include (but are not limited to):

“Domestic Affair, the appointment and dismissal of ministers, the summoning, prorogation and dissolution of Parliament, Royal assent to bills, the appointment and regulation of the civil service, the commissioning of officers in the armed forces, directing the disposition of the armed forces in the UK (and other Commonwealth nations), appointment of Queen’s Counsel, Issue and withdrawal of passports, Prerogative of mercy. (Used to apply in capital punishment cases. Still used, eg to remedy errors in sentence calculation), granting honours, creation of corporations by Charter, foreign Affairs, the making of treaties, declaration of war, deployment of armed forces overseas, recognition of foreign states, and accreditation and reception of diplomats.”

When a 2009 bill was introduced into parliament proposing that these powers be limited, a Privy Council-led Justice Ministry review concluded that such limitations would ‘”dangerously weaken” the state’s ability to respond to a crisis’ and the bill was promptly killed[10].

Acting on Provincial levels, we find Lieutenant Governors who (in Canada) happen to be members of the Freemasonic Knights of St John of Jerusalem.

King Charles and the Great Reset

Charles demonstrated this “more hands on” approach to governance on June 3, 2020 when he became the official patron of the World Economic Forum’s Great Reset and even officially launched the project Tweeting out #TheGreatReset. 

On his official website, the Prince launched the project saying “Today, through HRH’s Sustainable Markets Initiative and the World Economic Forum, The Prince of Wales launched a new global initiative, The Great Reset”.

Eco-Warrior King of a New Crusade

Charles has demonstrated the sort of enthusiasm for decarbonization of the world which one tends to only find in a religious fanatic setting himself up as the eco-warrior of monarchs, a Crusader King of a new religion, except instead of Muslims in the Holy Land, our new Davos-connected eco-crusaders have targeted carbon dioxide and the industrial civilization, farming and useless eaters who cause it, to be the poisonous threat that must be destroyed. Charles appears to see himself walking in the footsteps of his WWF-founding father as the new leading spokesman for a total transformation of society under a WEF-green governance priesthood.

July 2022 edition of Australia’s Spectator aptly characterized Charles’ misanthropic activism in the following terms:

“The environmentalism that the Prince has decided to occupy himself with while he awaits to ascend the throne is not a harmless sort of apolitical tree-planting or rainforest-saving activity. He’s not hugging pandas or funding wildlife sanctuaries. Instead, he has engaged himself in a hybrid business and political uprising that threatens the survival of the political system which he is meant to oversee. In addition to being a betrayal of the ordinary citizen, his actions represent a failure to his sole duty as future king – to protect the constitutional monarchy from rising climate fascism and globalism.”

Nazi Roots of House of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha

The role of the Crown in leading a revival of practices of global totalitarianism, population control and fascism is not unprecedented. An uncomfortable fact which has recently unveiled by the documentary Edward VIII: Britain’s traitor King on Britain’s Channel 4, this fascist heart of the Crown was alive during the darkest years before and during World War 2.

This film, based upon a soon-to-be released book by historian Andrew Lownie, uses recently declassified reports from the Royal Archives to tell the story of Britain’s Nazi King Edward VIII who not only desired a Nazi victory in WWII, but actively worked towards said goal from the moment he was forced to abdicate the throne in 1936 (allegedly to marry an American divorcée Wallis Simpson) throughout the darkest days of the war itself.

While in exile in Portugal where the royal hob knobbed with Germany’s elite, the documentary cites diplomatic cables sent by Edward to German officials demanding that the Nazis relentlessly bomb England into submission in 1940 encouraging the deaths of millions of innocent civilians.

The film also cites a little-known speech where Edward called for Britain’s surrender to the Nazis in 1939 which the BBC refused to air. Even after being sent to the Bahamas by imperial officials who had decided it more expedient to put down their Frankenstein monster than continue with their earlier plans for a fascist New World Order, the Nazi would-be king had cabled Hitler’s officials indicating his willingness to return to Europe when needed and retake his rightful seat on the throne as an Aryan king.

Beyond the case of Edward VIII, there are many other embarrassing Nazi connections to the house of Windsor (formerly Saxe-Coburg-Gotha) which the film failed to mention, some of which implicate the late Prince Consort Philip Mountbatten (aka: Duke of Edinburgh) directly.

Philip himself maintained the family tradition, when founding the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) with fellow one-time Nazi Party member Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands, a lifelong eugenicist and Bilderberg Group founder, in 1961. Philip and Bernhard were joined by Sir Julian Huxley (then president of the Eugenics Society of Britain) as WWF co-founder.

In an August 1988 interview with Deutsche Press Agentur, Prince Philip proclaimed his desire to return in the next life as a deadly virus to help “solve overpopulation”.

Prince Philip exuded cold misanthropic “musings” throughout his life as he contemplated the human zoo asserting:

“You cannot keep a bigger flock of sheep than you are capable of feeding. In other words conservation may involve culling in order to keep a balance between the relative numbers in each species within any particular habitat. I realize this is a very touchy subject, but the fact remains that mankind is part of the living world. Every new acre brought into cultivation means another acre denied to wild species.”

It should be noted King Charles continued his fathers’ legacy as president of the British World Wildlife Foundation which he has headed for over 30 years.

The Nazi pedigree of the royal family and its loyal managers raises the question: Why has their continuation of Nazi eugenics doctrine in the form of the euthanasia and zero-growth movements not become more widely known? What type of world do we live in, that such startling facts could not be general knowledge?

The true Empire has always been a financial oligarchy which is used by a vast network of power structures to advance the interests of the aristocracy of Europe; The current epicenter of power is the Anglo-Dutch monarchies.

It is this power that controls the Bilderberg Group, its junior appendage the World Economic Forum, and steers American policy through the New York-based Council on Foreign Relations (the American version of Chatham House).

It was to leading Chatham House member Lord Lothian in 1937 that Hitler laid out his concept for the Anglo-German New World Order saying:

“Germany, England, France, Italy, America and Scandinavia… should arrive at some agreement whereby they would prevent their nationals from assisting in the industrializing of countries such as China, and India. It is suicidal to promote the establishment in the agricultural countries of Asia of manufacturing industries.” 

Any number of technocrats pushing a “Build Back Better for the World” scheme or “Global Green New Deal” could have said the same thing.

Today, the Canadian Institute for International Affairs has been renamed the Canadian International Council (CIC). The CIC is Chaired by Oxford-trained regime change specialist Ben Rowswell who worked closely with Privy Councillor Chrystia Freeland in attempting to overthrow the government of Maduro in favor of WEF-puppet Juan Guaido which continues to this day.

A key pillar in the control over colonies of Anglo-Dutch influence remains the Privy Council system, which is centered in Britain, but has secondary branches in select Commonwealth countries. It is under the Privy Council’s influence that lower-level operatives are instituted in the form of deputy ministers, the Treasury Board, Select Committees, and other appointed officials in the Civil Service. Other key nodes in the public and private sector manage the interests of the Crown. All cabinet members of government are made Privy Councillors and all Privy Councillors are sworn to an oath of secrecy and allegiance to the Queen including oaths to keep secret those things spoken of in privy council meetings.

The Crown as the Key to the Continuity of Empire

Of course, it would be silly to believe that Charles (or any previously reigning monarch) were their own person, while ignoring the armada of handlers, courtiers and deeper Byzantine grand strategists who revolve around the Crown as an institution sometimes dubbed “the Fount of All Honors”. The Fount of All Honors is an official term which denotes the legal idea that all authority for the public and private affairs emanates from the single source of the Crown and its unbroken bloodline.

Continuity is everything for empire, and the importance of maintaining institutions that transcend individual lifetimes has always been a point of high concern.

In a post-1776 world that began to get a taste for self-government, freedom and democracy as a new mode of self-organization, the “stability” of hereditary institutions came under grave threat.

It would not be an exaggeration to say that the past 250 years has been shaped by the clash of these two opposing paradigms of organizing society. Where one paradigm assumes as self-evident the existence of inalienable rights of all people, the other system presumes that the only inalienable rights are those held by an oligarchical master class who wish to rule over subjects (aka: useless eaters) whose population levels must be periodically culled for easier management.

The supposition that rights cannot be granted or withheld by a superior bloodline is truly anathema to any system of oligarchism even if it masquerades behind the costume of a species of democracy designed to placate plebs but not allow them or their representatives the means of influencing anything truly meaningful about their reality.

Matthew Ehret is the Editor-in-Chief of the Canadian Patriot Review, and Senior Fellow at the American University in Moscow.

Notes

[2] There Are Only 22 Countries in the World That the British Haven’t Invaded By Matt Soniak, Mental Floss, Nov 7, 2012

[3] The New Colonialism: Britain’s Scramble for Africa’s Energy and Mineral Resources by Mark Curtis, published by War on Want, 2016

[4] The ’emirs of Londonistan’ and the alleged UK-jihadist collaboration

By Nawaf al-Tamimi, New Arab, Aug. 11, 2015

[5] British Creation and Control of Islamic Terror: Background to China’s Defeat of Terror in Xinjiang by Mike Billington, EIR, Jan. 10, 2020

[6] The World’s 15 Biggest Landowners Thornton McEnery, Business Insider, Mar 18, 2011

[7] The mysterious property empire behind the Queen

Arthur Sullivan. Die Welt, June 9, 2021

[8] Prince Charles at 65: a pensioner waits for the job of his life by Jonathan Dimbleby, The Guardian, Nov. 13, 2013

[9] Mystery lifted on Queen’s powers, Clare Dyer, The Guardian, Oct. 2003

[10] Royal powers review warns against further reform, by Alan Travis, The Guardian, October 2009

9 May 2023

Source: www.globalresearch.ca

Act Now To Reverse Humanity’s Fast-Approaching Thermonuclear Self-Extinction!

Schiller Institute Leaflet on Drone Attack on the Kremlin

https://www.laroucheorganization.com/article/2023/05/08/act-now-reverse-humanitys-fast-approaching-thermonuclear-self-extinction

May 7—The explosion of drones over the Kremlin on Wednesday, May 3, means the world is closer to thermonuclear war than at any time in history, including October 1962. Absurd stories in the American and European media have appeared (like those that covered up American and NATO responsibility for blowing up the Nord Stream pipelines) that assert, without any evidence, that “the Russians flew and blew up the drones themselves.” But think: even if that lying absurdity were true, shouldn’t that also cause extraordinary alarm? If the United States flew and blew up drones over the White House, and then blamed Russia for supporting, say, Cuba, in a drone-weapon assassination attempt against the President of the United States, wouldn’t that mean the world was on the verge of a shooting war between Russia and America, a war potentially deploying thermonuclear weapons that would wipe out life on the planet?

Do you really think that it is sane to be more concerned about “saving the planet from man-made global warming” than saving humanity from madmen-made thermonuclear war? Citizens, wake up! It’s time to take back the United States government from the intelligence agencies that now dominate it, whether in the Congress, State Department, Pentagon or White House, as well as the “informal intelligence agency” called the “mainstream media.”

In each of the 435 Congressional legislative districts, individual American citizens have to stand up for sanity. Go to local meetings of your Congressional and state representatives, to city councils, to university lectures, to state fairs and public gatherings, and demand an immediate shut-off of funds to Ukraine; an emergency audit of American funds already disbursed; the immediate passage of the Glass-Steagall Act, to shut down the speculators that use debt to drive the war machine; and demand support for and discussion of the peace initiatives coming from the Vatican, Brazil and China.

While changing U.S. policy clearly requires Congressional and Presidential action, both these institutions are presently dysfunctional. “Average Americans,” that is, free citizens, have to now stand up, intervene, and be publicly seen and heard both advocating real solutions and implementing them. No partisan party politics! Thermonuclear weapons don’t distinguish between Republicans, Democrats, or Independents. This is a time for solidarity.

The people of Russia, China, and the world recognize, just as do Americans, that “War Is A Racket!” Now, it’s time that we dismantle that racket, and finally deliver on the promise made by President John F. Kennedy on January 20, 1961 to “forge … a grand and global alliance, North and South, East and West” to “struggle against the common enemies of man: tyranny, poverty, disease and war itself.” In this most dangerous period in the history of the world, we are charged in these days ahead to act in such a way that it may be said, in future generations, that this generation proved that humanity, with all its faults, is greater than its presumed destiny.

8 May 2023

The Federal Reserve Cartel: The Eight Families

Part I of a five-part series

By Dean Henderson

Of relevance to the current crisis, this carefully researched article was first published by Global Research more than ten years ago on June 1, 2011.

The Four Horsemen of Banking (Bank of America, JP Morgan Chase, Citigroup and Wells Fargo) own the Four Horsemen of Oil (Exxon Mobil, Royal Dutch/Shell, BP and Chevron Texaco); in tandem with Deutsche Bank, BNP, Barclays and other European old money behemoths. But their monopoly over the global economy does not end at the edge of the oil patch.

According to company 10K filings to the SEC, the Four Horsemen of Banking are among the top ten stock holders of virtually every Fortune 500 corporation.[1]

So who then are the stockholders in these money center banks?

This information is guarded much more closely. My queries to bank regulatory agencies regarding stock ownership in the top 25 US bank holding companies were given Freedom of Information Act status, before being denied on “national security” grounds. This is rather ironic, since many of the bank’s stockholders reside in Europe.

One important repository for the wealth of the global oligarchy that owns these bank holding companies is US Trust Corporation – founded in 1853 and now owned by Bank of America. A recent US Trust Corporate Director and Honorary Trustee was Walter Rothschild. Other directors included Daniel Davison of JP Morgan Chase, Richard Tucker of Exxon Mobil, Daniel Roberts of Citigroup and Marshall Schwartz of Morgan Stanley. [2]

J. W. McCallister, an oil industry insider with House of Saud connections, wrote in The Grim Reaper that information he acquired from Saudi bankers cited 80% ownership of the New York Federal Reserve Bank- by far the most powerful Fed branch- by just eight families, four of which reside in the US. They are the Goldman Sachs, Rockefellers, Lehmans and Kuhn Loebs of New York; the Rothschilds of Paris and London; the Warburgs of Hamburg; the Lazards of Paris; and the Israel Moses Seifs of Rome.

CPA Thomas D. Schauf corroborates McCallister’s claims, adding that ten banks control all twelve Federal Reserve Bank branches.

He names N.M. Rothschild of London, Rothschild Bank of Berlin, Warburg Bank of Hamburg, Warburg Bank of Amsterdam, Lehman Brothers of New York, Lazard Brothers of Paris, Kuhn Loeb Bank of New York, Israel Moses Seif Bank of Italy, Goldman Sachs of New York and JP Morgan Chase Bank of New York.

Schauf lists William Rockefeller, Paul Warburg, Jacob Schiff and James Stillman as individuals who own large shares of the Fed. [3]

The Schiffs are insiders at Kuhn Loeb. The Stillmans are Citigroup insiders, who married into the Rockefeller clan at the turn of the century.

Eustace Mullins came to the same conclusions in his book The Secrets of the Federal Reserve, in which he displays charts connecting the Fed and its member banks to the families of Rothschild, Warburg, Rockefeller and the others. [4]

The control that these banking families exert over the global economy cannot be overstated and is quite intentionally shrouded in secrecy. Their corporate media arm is quick to discredit any information exposing this private central banking cartel as “conspiracy theory”. Yet the facts remain.

The House of Morgan

The Federal Reserve Bank was born in 1913, the same year US banking scion J. Pierpont Morgan died and the Rockefeller Foundation was formed. The House of Morgan presided over American finance from the corner of Wall Street and Broad, acting as quasi-US central bank since 1838, when George Peabody founded it in London.

Peabody was a business associate of the Rothschilds. In 1952 Fed researcher Eustace Mullins put forth the supposition that the Morgans were nothing more than Rothschild agents. Mullins wrote that the Rothschilds, “…preferred to operate anonymously in the US behind the facade of J.P. Morgan & Company”. [5]

Author Gabriel Kolko stated, “Morgan’s activities in 1895-1896 in selling US gold bonds in Europe were based on an alliance with the House of Rothschild.” [6]

The Morgan financial octopus wrapped its tentacles quickly around the globe. Morgan Grenfell operated in London. Morgan et Ce ruled Paris. The Rothschild’s Lambert cousins set up Drexel & Company in Philadelphia.

The House of Morgan catered to the Astors, DuPonts, Guggenheims, Vanderbilts and Rockefellers. It financed the launch of AT&T, General Motors, General Electric and DuPont. Like the London-based Rothschild and Barings banks, Morgan became part of the power structure in many countries.

By 1890 the House of Morgan was lending to Egypt’s central bank, financing Russian railroads, floating Brazilian provincial government bonds and funding Argentine public works projects. A recession in 1893 enhanced Morgan’s power. That year Morgan saved the US government from a bank panic, forming a syndicate to prop up government reserves with a shipment of $62 million worth of Rothschild gold. [7]

Morgan was the driving force behind Western expansion in the US, financing and controlling West-bound railroads through voting trusts. In 1879 Cornelius Vanderbilt’s Morgan-financed New York Central Railroad gave preferential shipping rates to John D. Rockefeller’s budding Standard Oil monopoly, cementing the Rockefeller/Morgan relationship.

The House of Morgan now fell under Rothschild and Rockefeller family control. A New York Herald headline read, “Railroad Kings Form Gigantic Trust”. J. Pierpont Morgan, who once stated, “Competition is a sin”, now opined gleefully, “Think of it. All competing railroad traffic west of St. Louis placed in the control of about thirty men.”[8]

Morgan and Edward Harriman’s banker Kuhn Loeb held a monopoly over the railroads, while banking dynasties Lehman, Goldman Sachs and Lazard joined the Rockefellers in controlling the US industrial base. [9]

In 1903 Banker’s Trust was set up by the Eight Families. Benjamin Strong of Banker’s Trust was the first Governor of the New York Federal Reserve Bank. The 1913 creation of the Fed fused the power of the Eight Families to the military and diplomatic might of the US government. If their overseas loans went unpaid, the oligarchs could now deploy US Marines to collect the debts. Morgan, Chase and Citibank formed an international lending syndicate.

The House of Morgan was cozy with the British House of Windsor and the Italian House of Savoy. The Kuhn Loebs, Warburgs, Lehmans, Lazards, Israel Moses Seifs and Goldman Sachs also had close ties to European royalty. By 1895 Morgan controlled the flow of gold in and out of the US. The first American wave of mergers was in its infancy and was being promoted by the bankers. In 1897 there were sixty-nine industrial mergers. By 1899 there were twelve-hundred. In 1904 John Moody – founder of Moody’s Investor Services – said it was impossible to talk of Rockefeller and Morgan interests as separate. [10]

Public distrust of the combine spread. Many considered them traitors working for European old money. Rockefeller’s Standard Oil, Andrew Carnegie’s US Steel and Edward Harriman’s railroads were all financed by banker Jacob Schiff at Kuhn Loeb, who worked closely with the European Rothschilds.

Several Western states banned the bankers. Populist preacher William Jennings Bryan was thrice the Democratic nominee for President from 1896 -1908. The central theme of his anti-imperialist campaign was that America was falling into a trap of “financial servitude to British capital”. Teddy Roosevelt defeated Bryan in 1908, but was forced by this spreading populist wildfire to enact the Sherman Anti-Trust Act. He then went after the Standard Oil Trust.

In 1912 the Pujo hearings were held, addressing concentration of power on Wall Street. That same year Mrs. Edward Harriman sold her substantial shares in New York’s Guaranty Trust Bank to J.P. Morgan, creating Morgan Guaranty Trust. Judge Louis Brandeis convinced President Woodrow Wilson to call for an end to interlocking board directorates. In 1914 the Clayton Anti-Trust Act was passed.

Jack Morgan – J. Pierpont’s son and successor – responded by calling on Morgan clients Remington and Winchester to increase arms production. He argued that the US needed to enter WWI. Goaded by the Carnegie Foundation and other oligarchy fronts, Wilson accommodated. As Charles Tansill wrote in America Goes to War, “Even before the clash of arms, the French firm of Rothschild Freres cabled to Morgan & Company in New York suggesting the flotation of a loan of $100 million, a substantial part of which was to be left in the US to pay for French purchases of American goods.”

The House of Morgan financed half the US war effort, while receiving commissions for lining up contractors like GE, Du Pont, US Steel, Kennecott and ASARCO. All were Morgan clients. Morgan also financed the British Boer War in South Africa and the Franco-Prussian War. The 1919 Paris Peace Conference was presided over by Morgan, which led both German and Allied reconstruction efforts. [11]

In the 1930’s populism resurfaced in America after Goldman Sachs, Lehman Bank and others profited from the Crash of 1929. [12] House Banking Committee Chairman Louis McFadden (D-NY) said of the Great Depression, “It was no accident. It was a carefully contrived occurrence…The international bankers sought to bring about a condition of despair here so they might emerge as rulers of us all”.

Sen. Gerald Nye (D-ND) chaired a munitions investigation in 1936. Nye concluded that the House of Morgan had plunged the US into WWI to protect loans and create a booming arms industry. Nye later produced a document titled The Next War, which cynically referred to “the old goddess of democracy trick”, through which Japan could be used to lure the US into WWII.

In 1937 Interior Secretary Harold Ickes warned of the influence of “America’s 60 Families”. Historian Ferdinand Lundberg later penned a book of the exact same title. Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas decried, “Morgan influence…the most pernicious one in industry and finance today.”

Jack Morgan responded by nudging the US towards WWII. Morgan had close relations with the Iwasaki and Dan families – Japan’s two wealthiest clans – who have owned Mitsubishi and Mitsui, respectively, since the companies emerged from 17th Century shogunates. When Japan invaded Manchuria, slaughtering Chinese peasants at Nanking, Morgan downplayed the incident. Morgan also had close relations with Italian fascist Benito Mussolini, while German Nazi Dr. Hjalmer Schacht was a Morgan Bank liaison during WWII. After the war Morgan representatives met with Schacht at the Bank of International Settlements (BIS) in Basel, Switzerland. [13]

The House of Rockefeller

BIS is the most powerful bank in the world, a global central bank for the Eight Families who control the private central banks of almost all Western and developing nations. The first President of BIS was Rockefeller banker Gates McGarrah- an official at Chase Manhattan and the Federal Reserve. McGarrah was the grandfather of former CIA director Richard Helms. The Rockefellers- like the Morgans- had close ties to London. David Icke writes in Children of the Matrix, that the Rockefellers and Morgans were just “gofers” for the European Rothschilds. [14]

BIS is owned by the Federal Reserve, Bank of England, Bank of Italy, Bank of Canada, Swiss National Bank, Nederlandsche Bank, Bundesbank and Bank of France.

Historian Carroll Quigley wrote in his epic book Tragedy and Hope that BIS was part of a plan,

“to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole…to be controlled in a feudalistic fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert by secret agreements.”

The US government had a historical distrust of BIS, lobbying unsuccessfully for its demise at the 1944 post-WWII Bretton Woods Conference. Instead the Eight Families’ power was exacerbated, with the Bretton Woods creation of the IMF and the World Bank. The US Federal Reserve only took shares in BIS in September 1994. [15]

BIS holds at least 10% of monetary reserves for at least 80 of the world’s central banks, the IMF and other multilateral institutions. It serves as financial agent for international agreements, collects information on the global economy and serves as lender of last resort to prevent global financial collapse.

BIS promotes an agenda of monopoly capitalist fascism. It gave a bridge loan to Hungary in the 1990’s to ensure privatization of that country’s economy. It served as conduit for Eight Families funding of Adolf Hitler- led by the Warburg’s J. Henry Schroeder and Mendelsohn Bank of Amsterdam. Many researchers assert that BIS is at the nadir of global drug money laundering. [16]

It is no coincidence that BIS is headquartered in Switzerland, favorite hiding place for the wealth of the global aristocracy and headquarters for the P-2 Italian Freemason’s Alpina Lodge and Nazi International. Other institutions which the Eight Families control include the World Economic Forum, the International Monetary Conference and the World Trade Organization.

Bretton Woods was a boon to the Eight Families. The IMF and World Bank were central to this “new world order”. In 1944 the first World Bank bonds were floated by Morgan Stanley and First Boston. The French Lazard family became more involved in House of Morgan interests. Lazard Freres- France’s biggest investment bank- is owned by the Lazard and David-Weill families- old Genoese banking scions represented by Michelle Davive. A recent Chairman and CEO of Citigroup was Sanford Weill.

In 1968 Morgan Guaranty launched Euro-Clear, a Brussels-based bank clearing system for Eurodollar securities. It was the first such automated endeavor. Some took to calling Euro-Clear “The Beast”. Brussels serves as headquarters for the new European Central Bank and for NATO. In 1973 Morgan officials met secretly in Bermuda to illegally resurrect the old House of Morgan, twenty years before Glass Steagal Act was repealed. Morgan and the Rockefellers provided the financial backing for Merrill Lynch, boosting it into the Big 5 of US investment banking. Merrill is now part of Bank of America.

John D. Rockefeller used his oil wealth to acquire Equitable Trust, which had gobbled up several large banks and corporations by the 1920’s. The Great Depression helped consolidate Rockefeller’s power. His Chase Bank merged with Kuhn Loeb’s Manhattan Bank to form Chase Manhattan, cementing a long-time family relationship. The Kuhn-Loeb’s had financed – along with Rothschilds – Rockefeller’s quest to become king of the oil patch. National City Bank of Cleveland provided John D. with the money needed to embark upon his monopolization of the US oil industry. The bank was identified in Congressional hearings as being one of three Rothschild-owned banks in the US during the 1870’s, when Rockefeller first incorporated as Standard Oil of Ohio. [17]

One Rockefeller Standard Oil partner was Edward Harkness, whose family came to control Chemical Bank. Another was James Stillman, whose family controlled Manufacturers Hanover Trust. Both banks have merged under the JP Morgan Chase umbrella. Two of James Stillman’s daughters married two of William Rockefeller’s sons. The two families control a big chunk of Citigroup as well. [18]

In the insurance business, the Rockefellers control Metropolitan Life, Equitable Life, Prudential and New York Life. Rockefeller banks control 25% of all assets of the 50 largest US commercial banks and 30% of all assets of the 50 largest insurance companies. [19] Insurance companies- the first in the US was launched by Freemasons through their Woodman’s of America- play a key role in the Bermuda drug money shuffle.

Companies under Rockefeller control include Exxon Mobil, Chevron Texaco, BP Amoco, Marathon Oil, Freeport McMoran, Quaker Oats, ASARCO, United, Delta, Northwest, ITT, International Harvester, Xerox, Boeing, Westinghouse, Hewlett-Packard, Honeywell, International Paper, Pfizer, Motorola, Monsanto, Union Carbide and General Foods.

The Rockefeller Foundation has close financial ties to both Ford and Carnegie Foundations. Other family philanthropic endeavors include Rockefeller Brothers Fund, Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research, General Education Board, Rockefeller University and the University of Chicago- which churns out a steady stream of far right economists as apologists for international capital, including Milton Friedman.

The family owns 30 Rockefeller Plaza, where the national Christmas tree is lighted every year, and Rockefeller Center. David Rockefeller was instrumental in the construction of the World Trade Center towers. The main Rockefeller family home is a hulking complex in upstate New York known as Pocantico Hills. They also own a 32-room 5th Avenue duplex in Manhattan, a mansion in Washington, DC, Monte Sacro Ranch in Venezuela, coffee plantations in Ecuador, several farms in Brazil, an estate at Seal Harbor, Maine and resorts in the Caribbean, Hawaii and Puerto Rico. [20]

The Dulles and Rockefeller families are cousins. Allen Dulles created the CIA, assisted the Nazis, covered up the Kennedy hit from his Warren Commission perch and struck a deal with the Muslim Brotherhood to create mind-controlled assassins. [21]

Brother John Foster Dulles presided over the phony Goldman Sachs trusts before the 1929 stock market crash and helped his brother overthrow governments in Iran and Guatemala. Both were Skull & Bones, Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) insiders and 33rd Degree Masons. [22]

The Rockefellers were instrumental in forming the depopulation-oriented Club of Rome at their family estate in Bellagio, Italy. Their Pocantico Hills estate gave birth to the Trilateral Commission. The family is a major funder of the eugenics movement which spawned Hitler, human cloning and the current DNA obsession in US scientific circles.

John Rockefeller Jr. headed the Population Council until his death. [23] His namesake son is a Senator from West Virginia. Brother Winthrop Rockefeller was Lieutenant Governor of Arkansas and remains the most powerful man in that state. In an October 1975 interview with Playboy magazine, Vice-President Nelson Rockefeller- who was also Governor of New York- articulated his family’s patronizing worldview, “I am a great believer in planning- economic, social, political, military, total world planning.”

But of all the Rockefeller brothers, it is Trilateral Commission (TC) founder and Chase Manhattan Chairman David who has spearheaded the family’s fascist agenda on a global scale. He defended the Shah of Iran, the South African apartheid regime and the Chilean Pinochet junta. He was the biggest financier of the CFR, the TC and (during the Vietnam War) the Committee for an Effective and Durable Peace in Asia- a contract bonanza for those who made their living off the conflict.

Nixon asked him to be Secretary of Treasury, but Rockefeller declined the job, knowing his power was much greater at the helm of the Chase. Author Gary Allen writes in The Rockefeller File that in 1973, “David Rockefeller met with twenty-seven heads of state, including the rulers of Russia and Red China.”

Dean Henderson is the author of Big Oil & Their Bankers in the Persian Gulf: Four Horsemen, Eight Families & Their Global Intelligence, Narcotics & Terror Network and The Grateful Unrich: Revolution in 50 Countries.

Notes

[1] 10K Filings of Fortune 500 Corporations to SEC. 3-91

[2] 10K Filing of US Trust Corporation to SEC. 6-28-95

[3] “The Federal Reserve ‘Fed Up’. Thomas Schauf. www.davidicke.com 1-02

[4] The Secrets of the Federal Reserve. Eustace Mullins. Bankers Research Institute. Staunton, VA. 1983. p.179

[5] Ibid. p.53

[6] The Triumph of Conservatism. Gabriel Kolko. MacMillan and Company New York. 1963. p.142

[7] Rule by Secrecy: The Hidden History that Connects the Trilateral Commission, the Freemasons and the Great Pyramids. Jim Marrs. HarperCollins Publishers. New York. 2000. p.57

[8] The House of Morgan. Ron Chernow. Atlantic Monthly Press NewYork 1990

[9] Marrs. p.57

[10] Democracy for the Few. Michael Parenti. St. Martin’s Press. New York. 1977. p.178

[11] Chernow

[12] The Great Crash of 1929. John Kenneth Galbraith. Houghton, Mifflin Company. Boston. 1979. p.148

[13] Chernow

[14] Children of the Matrix. David Icke. Bridge of Love. Scottsdale, AZ. 2000

[15] The Confidence Game: How Un-Elected Central Bankers are Governing the Changed World Economy. Steven Solomon. Simon & Schuster. New York. 1995. p.112

[16] Marrs. p.180

[17] Ibid. p.45

[18] The Money Lenders: The People and Politics of the World Banking Crisis. Anthony Sampson. Penguin Books. New York. 1981

[19] The Rockefeller File. Gary Allen. ’76 Press. Seal Beach, CA. 1977

[20] Ibid

[21] Dope Inc.: The Book That Drove Kissinger Crazy. Editors of Executive Intelligence Review. Washington, DC. 1992

[22] Marrs.

[23] The Rockefeller Syndrome. Ferdinand Lundberg. Lyle Stuart Inc. Secaucus, NJ. 1975. p.296

[24] Marrs. p.53

—————————————————–

6 May 2023

Source: www.globalresearch.ca