Friday, January 25, 2008

[research] following the scent to one's doom

Gustave Doré’s illustration of Lord Alfred Tennyson’s “Idylls of the King”, 1868 [courtesy of Wiki]

There are no great revelations here but this post just charts the thinking which takes place once you start researching something. It's an insight into fragmented circumstantial snippets and how they are sometimes enough when checked against previously accumulated data.

I started researching Hans-Gert Pöttering:

From 1984 to 1994 he was chairman of the Subcommittee on Security and Defence. Hans-Gert Pöttering is known as an enthusiastic European federalist and an ally of Angela Merkel. He has stated that his priority will be to rejuvenate the European Constitution. He lives in Bad Iburg near Osnabrück. He has been a member of the European Parliament since 1979, one of only 14 members of the European Parliament who have served continuously since the first elections.

This is what he's about, from the Euro-News soft interview:
"We are not expecting the Treaty to fail, because if we assume it could falter, failure is either guaranteed or very probable. That is why we must do everything in order to make the Treaty a success, and get it ratified - whether it is by referendum, like in Ireland, or by national parliaments, both procedures are equally democratic. The choice of one method or another is down to the traditions in each member state. Each country decides how to ratify the Treaty, be it by referendum or by parliamentary ratification - both are democratic. And we want to do everything possible to ensure the Treaty is ratified so it can come into force from 2009.

And here are his tactics in achieving his goals:

Last week a group of more than 60 MEPS from all over Europe tried to demonstrate against refusals to hold referendums on the treaty. The group, including MEPS from the UK Independence Party and the Tories, had protest banners forcibly removed from the chamber and their calls for points of order ignored. Now Mr Poettering has asked the Parliament’s Constitutional Affairs Committee to give him the power to stifle all protest moves.

If we can put to one side Wonko's understandably emotive language, the gagging action itself has certainly been mentioned in a few places and his closeness to Merkel and her closeness to the Bertlesman Foundation and its closeness to the Bavarian Bruderheist are interesting. This sort of thing comes out of such an association:

“In the EU itself we must move closer to a common European army.” The Federal Chancellor announced, “We should not take peace and democracy for granted. The ideal of European unification is still today a question of war and peace.” [Bild 23.03.2007]

Increased powers of political decision should be conferred on those states which have adopted the euro currency. “The euro group should have a special role in designing the future of the EU”. [zur Zukunft der Europaeischen Union; Guetersloh 21.02.2007]

The Bertelsmann Foundation [which] publicised [the conference], claimed that “the hand-picked circle of participants … covered all the great geographical areas of today’s European Union, EU candidate states and the USA.” The theme was the “strategic reorientation” of the EU.

The nature of the language is indicative of the mindset. Incidentally, this group is active in seeking to "ethically" regulate the internet. You only get into their funding sources indirectly.

For example, the awards to New York students were partly funded by Carl and Lily Pforzheimer and Carl H. Pforzheimer Jr. was an intergenerational investment banker with an oil and gas family background. He's connected with Citybank/Group which in turn brings you back to J.P. Morgan, which brings you to the New York Fed and the F.O.M.C. and the current fun the western world is having. this brings you to Morgan Stanley, which then takes you back to Europe to the Round Table [can anyone remember the shape of the Arthurian Table?], which in turn takes you back to the Bertelsmann foundation.

Now, against this, I have, somewhere down in the vaults, other data of a different kind. Example - for years, the U.S. government denied there was a thing called MK Ultra. Now, under the 30 year rule, it is public knowledge. It involved the covert experimentation and psychological trauma training of human subjects. Much of the expertise came into America under Operation Paperclip and others.

So far, that's safe ground.

Where the ground becomes less safe is placing weight on the tenuous testimony of one such San Diego based "trainer" who said the following in an interview with HJ Springer, Chief Editor in 2000:

When I was in San Diego, human experimentation was still going on. Jonathan and I were investigating the effects of certain drugs on inducing trance states and assisting with programming. We would take the data, and download it into a database ... and then send it to Langley.

Russian, German, French, British, Canadian, and US trainers all worked together ... There is also a lot of trading back and forth of members in these groups. A Russian trainer might come to the US for a while, complete a job, then go back, or vice-versa.

How much evidence has come out? Or the MK-Ultra documents that have been declassified, shown as real, and people still ignore it.

All you can do in this situation is hope other corroborating evidence comes out, which it fortunately has. Now MK Ultra is out in the open, books like Trance Formation of America start to make more sense. And the battery of institutions mentioned in psychologist Dr. Colin Ross's keynote address at the 9th Annual Western Clinical Conference on Trauma and Dissociation, April 18, 1996, on dissociative techniques, suggests that there is little accident in what is going on:

Orange County, California, Columbia University, Cornell, Denver, Emory, Florida, George Washington, Harvard, Houston, Illinois, Indiana Universities, Johns Hopkins, University of Minnesota, New Jersey Reformatory, Bordentown in Tennessee ... Ohio, University of Pennsylvania, Penn State, Princeton, Stanford, a couple of universities in Texas, Wisconsin, the Bureau of Narcotics. Eli Lilly was the big supplier of LSD to the CIA. McGill, NIH, NIMH, National Philosophical Society ...

.. and some of the personalities involved, either knowingly or unwittingly:

James Hamilton, Harold Abramson, Carl Pfeiffer, Louis Jolyon West at UCLA, Ewen Cameron at McGill,Carl Rogers, Martin Orne, Maitland Baldwin [work on monkey brains], George White, Harold Wolff was at Cornell, Raymond Prince, R. Gordon Watson, John Mulholland, G.H. Estabrooks, J. Edgar Hoover, Allen Dulles and hallucinogen research by Daniel Friedman, connected with Loretta Bender, Paul Hawk and Ewen Cameron.

And if you need victims, you can start with Frank Olson and Mary Ray.

Where to go next?

As a researcher, if one is to accept any of the above as having substance, then one really must follow up on the other, less orthodox, parts of the testimony. In the end, one must decide if we're dealing with imaginative loonies or people who know what they're talking about. I mean, if they've been shown to be right on one aspect, when all around have been knee-jerk reacting like one commenter on my site:
Got to laugh. This is how conspiracy theories start.

Key here is to read reader comments, put the "kneejerkers" and "sweeping generalization trotter-outers" to one side and to zero in on those who specifically comment on the grounds that they're involved in this field. Emotion must be excised here and conclusions must not be preempted.

So I neither accept or reject the following from the CentrExNews interview but simply bear it in mind:

The Rothschild family in England, and in France, have ruling seats. A descendant of the Hapsburg dynasty has a generational seat. A descendant of the ruling families of England and France have a generational seat. The Rockefeller family in the US holds a seat.

The Hanoverian / Hapsburg descendants rule in Germany over the Bruderheist. They are considered one of the strongest lines
The British line is just under them, with the royal family, even though parliament rules the country openly. The U.S. is considered lower, and younger, than the European branches.

Germany, France, and the UK form a triumvirate that rules in the European ... The USSR is considered important, and has the strongest military groups. But a lot of the current U.S. leadership will be in Europe when the change occurs, and many have homes there.

The Bruderheist is the ruling council of Germany. It meets in the black forest region, which is considered the center of the earth, and ... they are some of the most vicious people I have ever known in my life, and make the Nazis (who they encouraged) look like fun people. They are still there, manipulating people, running banks, and channeling their dirty money to Brussels, Switzerland, and Cairo, Egypt.

On America: One reason that our economy continues limping along is the artificial support that the Federal Reserve had given it, manipulating interest rates, etc. But one day, this won't work (or this leverage will be withdrawn on purpose) and the next great depression will hit.

They [the old money] run the porn industry, along with other groups such as the Mafia, together with drug smuggling, gun running, and human slavery.

I think you have to approach this now with an open mind and a sense of logic. Why wouldn't the people who funded the nutter Hitler to achieve a pan-European Reich dedicated to eliminating inferior humans from the earth still be around? The motif is exactly the same and involves the same descent into human bestiality which is going on today. Why wouldn't these people still be funding it?

Why would the old money concern itself with local matters only when they can ensure their hegemony through the instruments of state? It would stand to reason. And what do these people look like in the flesh? Are they likely to be wickedly chuckling, disfigured monsters in cloaks or would they be the Armani suited, clinically clean, plush powered wheelers and dealers of Europe, Britain and the U.S.A.? Which is more likely to be the truth?

Churchill was able to see it in 1920:

"From the days of Spartacus-Weishaupt to those of Karl Marx, to those of Trotsky, Bela Kun, Rosa Luxembourg, and Emma Goldman, this world wide conspiracy for the overthrow of civilization and for the reconstitution of society on the basis of arrested development, of envious malevolence and impossible equality, has been steadily growing.

It played a definitely recognizable role in the tragedy of the French Revolution. It has been the mainspring of every subversive movement during the nineteenth century, and now at last this band of extraordinary personalities from the underworld of the great cities of Europe and America have gripped the Russian people by the hair of their heads, and have become practically the undisputed masters of that enormous empire."

Now just by living over here and observing the legacy, as well as listening to many Russians of all walks of life on the topic, nothing they say undercuts Churchill's words. And that's the thing in all the above, before we even start getting into the seriously sick, insane stuff these people are allegedly into.

I see no specific fisking, no debunking other than character assassination and off the cuff remarks like "got to laugh". I'm waiting patiently to read a serious piece which addresses how the old money cannot be held accountable for any of it.

And if the old money can't be exonerated, then one has to look at the current Millibrandish rush to war [Iran is the current starter but that might change over time]. And people must wake up and start researching these things properly instead of constantly returning to the same sources of a certain bent and ignoring other sources which run contrary to their mindset.

Now if we do finally end up with the old money, then why stop there? Any researcher worth his salt is going to look even beyond that and start asking certain questions. Such as why the fruits of covert groups must necessarily be negative. Why must Poettering's actions ultimately lead to war and the blighting of a regulated and numbered humanity? Why can't they, for example, lead to peace, human happiness and philanthropy?

All right, the old money is rich beyond imagining. So they plough those trillions into poverty relief, right? Into fresh water and food for the masses and into peace and mutual understanding, not into child prostitution, gun running and drugs. Or if they observe these things happening, they exert financial pressure to stop them and the Christian ideals reign supreme. No?

Well if not, why not? Have you ever thought why things tend one way [look at the concerns of the political blogosphere, for example here] and not the other? I think it's fairly obvious - they themselves are in thrall.

And it's an interesting phenomenon but the further down this path your investigation goes, the more seriously weird these people come across as, from the ceremonies of 1000 points of Light to Bohemian Grove's cremation of dull care - whatever slant they want to put on it, these are the supposed leaders of the world and that sort of language and burning crosses suddenly springing up around lakes is seriously weird too.

Look at Bush Snr's inauguration speech for a start. I didn't invent it - he did. I didn't start talking about splitting people's minds and taking them back to incontinence - that is on the record. I didn't start talking about the Skull and Bones drinking from Geronimo's skull - they did. I didn't introduce Mothers of Darkness - they did.

I didn't start talking about child prostitution rings with one of the exchange points Omaha Airport - they did. I didn't invent Abu Ghraib. And look at the nature of the games on the web which entrance the kids - now is that stuff normal? The sort of thing a normal, healthy kid should be into? I didn't start talking about Alexandria Temple in Philadelphia or wherever it is and Eastern Star or tearing people's hearts out if they ever speak of things [and then they laugh it off, saying it's just an ancient ritual]. And this is not the street tramps into this stuff - it's the dicers and slicers themselves.

Was it me who introduced Hiram Abif and Jubelo and brothers? And why the constant referenve to Egypt and Assyria? Why that business with the U.S. dollar note, for example? Why are full moons important? Why the 13th pillar of the Pont de l'Alma and do you know what that bridge represents? Why not Pillar 8 of a different bridge? And so on and so on. Why did Woodrow Wilson write of a power so interlocked that you'd better not speak of it above a whisper?

Why do wars really occur and how can they be known of in advance? Read Buchan.

Don't shoot the messenger - he's just following the trail.

Can't anyone see the footprint here?

I mean, sit back and look at the whole policy direction in Europe and the U.S. and the way these people conduct themselves, especially the arrogance, the untouchability. Look at Poettering. Look at any britpolit post in the last few days and ask who's the weirdo - Higham or them?

I'm starting to feel a little like Dr. Who now, at the mercy of Sutekh, who thunders that the doc is nothing but an ant. Well yes, he is an ant in himself but he didn't go into this thing alone, did he?


oestrebunny said...

An interesting post James...too much for me to properly comment on!

Though I will say, I did get lost in wiki for a while. It is indeed a most wonderful resource.

Anonymous said...


Good post. Woodrow Wilson appears to have been a prescient man; talking about the US but applicable anywhere

'We have, not one or two, but many, fields of endeavor into which it is difficult, if not impossible, for the independent man to enter. We have restricted credit, we have restricted opportunity, we have controlled development, and we have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated, governments in the civilized world — no longer a government by free opinion, no longer a government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a government by the opinion and the duress of small groups of dominant men. '

Your other references open up so much more, not so much of understanding what is going on but of the fear that where your imagination takes you these people have already walked.

Your(& Anonymous) last posts are slowly but surely illuminating (heh!) these monsters.

What is worth pondering is what are they so scared of that they never seem to break ranks? Even the lowliest of us knows we cannot be guaranteed a peaceful death or choose it's time.

Thereafter? But if we are to accept their allegiance this is a known, known.

How to break them, James?


Sean Jeating said...

Minic gur sia theíd an béag ná an fhirinne. - Falsehood often goes farther than truth.

That is why:

Tar éis a chítear gach beart. - It's afterwards events are understood.


And who is Sutekh?

WE are ALL Guinea pigs for our governments to exploit and experiment on. Just number crunching- nothing personal.

Bag said...

James, James, Very disappointed in you here. I did make that quote about conspiracy theories 'Got to laugh. This is how conspiracy theories start.' but it was in reference to a specific theory on the data breaches in the UK and had nothing to do with the subjects you talk about here.

Most people won't have followed the link to discover what it was actually about as you are probably aware.

So not a knee jerk reaction at all but a thought out position on an entirely different subject.

Now I'm actually wondering why you did it. It didn't make the article any better so it seems strange and out of place. You obviously had your reasons. I just don't see what they could be.

Rob said...

I'm glad you agree with the war issue. No one should think it will go away under a Democrat regime either.

This press briefing was interesting as well

Basically the current administration are willing to push the Iran issue right to the end.


Great post, James. I thought the same thing when Diana was killed. They have been killing royals for centuries, why is it so hard to imagine that a difficult one could be conveniently got rid of in our own times?