categoryMenu_new
 
  Home
  EXTRAORDINARY AH Teaching from Spiritual Hierarchy
  AbundantHope
  NEW READERS! Read Here First
  Supporting AH
  Leadership of AbundantHope
  Announcements
  Regional AH Sites
  Other Sites with AH material
  Contact Us
  Becoming A Messiah
  OUR PUBLIC FORUM IS OPEN TOO ALL
  Mission Ideas
  System Busting
  Cleric Letter/English
  Translations of Cleric Letter
  AH Member Writings
  Candace
  Ron
  Rosie
  Jess
  Brian's Poetry
  James
  Giuseppe
  Esteban
  Telepathic Messages
  Candace
  Jess Anthony
  Vince
  Leonette
  John
  Adam
  Bela
  Joyce
  Hazel
  Kibo
  Peter
  Rosie
  Johan
  Lucia
  Lucia G
  Rubens
  Shellee-Kim
  Ben
  Dorothea
  Solon
  Others
  Targeted Messages
  Hano
  Light Flower
  Changing The Face Of Religion
  - Phoenix Journals - PDF in German
  Candace on Religion
  Other Spiritual Pieces
  Spiritual Nuggets by the Masters
  Phoenix Journals
  Phoenix Journals - PDF
  Telepathic Messages PDF books
  Selections from the Urantia Book
  CMGSN Pieces
  THE WAVE
  David Crayford and the ITC
  Environment/Science
  Health and Nutrition
  Podcasts, Radio Shows, Video by AH
  Political Information
  True US History
  Human/Animal Rights
  The Miracle That Is Me
  Education
  Resources
  911 Material
  Books - eBooks
  government email/phone #'s
  Self Reliance
  Video
  Websites
  Alternative News Sources
  Art and Music
  Foreign Sites
  Health and Healing
  Human/Animal Rights
  Scientific
  Spiritual
  Vegan Recipes
  Translated Material
  Dutch
  Gekanaliseerde berichten Jess
  Gekanaliseerde berichten Candace
  Gekanaliseerde berichten Anderen
  Artikelen/berichten
  French
  Canal Jess
  Par Candace
  Other Channels
  Articles
  German
  Telepathische Nachrichten (Candace)
  Telepathische Nachrichten (Jess)
  Telepathische Nachrichten (div.)
  AH Mitgliederbeiträge (Candace)
  AH Mitgliederbeiträge (Jess)
  Spirituelle Schätze
  Italian
  Translations - Candace
  Translations - Jess
  Translations - Others
  Portuguese
  by Candace
  By Jess
  By Others
  Spanish
  Anfitriones Divinos
  Bitácoras Fénix
  Creadores-de-Alas (WingMakers/Lyricus)
  Escritos de Candace
  Escritos de Otros
  Monjoronsón
  Telemensajes de Candace
  Telemensajes de Jess Anthony
  Telemensajes de Otros
  Chinese
  By Candace
  By Jess
  By Others
  Korean Translations
  Hungarian Translations
  Swedish Translations

Search
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
AH Member Writings : Ron Last Updated: Jan 15, 2018 - 6:46:38 AM


THE MONKEY OR THE ORGAN GRINDER?
By Ron Chapman
Apr 9, 2009 - 9:46:00 AM

Email this article
 Printer friendly page Share/Bookmark
Ron: Some people criticise me for focusing too heavily on US affairs and say that I ought to seek to fix Australia's corruption problems by critiquing "bashing and trashing" the people of Australia and New Zealand or some such. So I explained my attitude in an article (#5157) on the AHS forum on 12 September 2008. To me the relative irrelevance of Australia and its leaders in the global scheme of things is obvious. But for those who fail to understand the US hegemonic power structure and its global effects on Amerikka's "Allies" I reproduce that essay here.

THE MONKEY OR THE ORGAN GRINDER?

As I see it though, the geo-political problems Australians and New Zealanders face are essentially created elsewhere and always have been. In terms of governance and leadership we are servile, colonialist countries. We were the colonial creatures of Britain for over a century before being given pseudo independence although, to this day our leaders pretend that they (we) are beholden to the Queen of England for political authority and legal governance. (1)

Of course, legal formalities are one thing, real power is another. After WWII the UK lost its military and economic power to the US and the Australia and New Zealand leadership elite turned to the US and became symbiotically attached to the US entity (Corp US) a powerful financial corporatocracy centred on Wall Street wtih its military and security services nexus centred in Washington DC. Why? Because they were seemingly afraid to stand alone but in reality were always subject to the threat of duress. However, as is the case in the US political and judicial systems, our leaders and through them both Australia and New Zealand are essentially puppet entities controlled by huge money interests (the secret shadow government) domiciled in the City of London and in New York. Those interests are represented by Central Banks operating in both countries and in their security services, and especially in what can be generically described as foreign "secret services".

The power and control exercised by the secret government comes in two forms. First the VELVET GLOVE, as exemplified by fiat US dollar hegemony, the World Bank and the IMF, and Central Banks creating fiat currencies and licensing commercial banks to create money out of thin air using the fractional reserve system. This subtle control system manipulates economies using fluctuations in money supply and interest rates. When these mechanisms are not enough because governments or their electorates decide they want something else, the system produces the IRON FIST. The Iron Fist as described by John Perkins, the Economic Hit Man (2) has three aspects. First  the US economic hit men move in and make key political leaders offers which they cannot, in safety, refuse. Second,  if that fails to get results the CIA and other Black Ops or US Special Operations Forces covertly move in and kill leaders and other people and/or destabilise the political equilibrium of the country. If that also  fails the US military invades and occupies the country as has been done in Korea, Vietnam, Panama,  Haiti, Somalia,  Iraq, Afghanistan and other places.

A mild form of covert CIA influence and coercion seems to have been the method used to execute the bloodless coup that ousted the Whitlam government in Australia on 11 November 1975. Whitlam was initially very popular (shades of Salvador Allende in Chile in 1973) and he carried out many needed reforms. His government and party demanded a new way for Australia which included eliminating US military bases and especially Pine Gap. The bankers and the US must have decided that Whitlam and his government had to go. So the bankers combined with local and US secret services soon created the needed destabilising economic conditions to enable a "constitutional" coup to be mounted by the Governor General, Sir John Kerr, and Malcolm Fraser the "conservative" ie Liberal Party Opposition Leader. (3) John Perkins outlines how these things are done.(2)

In the ensuing federal election Whitlam rightly told Australians that: "The whole future of Australian democracy is in your hands." But by then it was too late the newly installed puppet Liberal government, amply assisted by the media, was elected and the rest, as they say, is history. The Labor Party learnt its lesson and ever since 1975 it has vied with the Liberal Party to give the US economic Empire what it wants. Thus, as with the US, UK and many other so-called democratic countries Australia now has one set of professional politicians divided into two differently branded and labelled teams who pretend to differ but never do on major issues of interest to the secret global shadow government.  

The removal of the Australian Whitlam government in 1975 explains why there is little chance of effectively changing the current governance and societal control systems in Australia or New Zealand until the current Anglo-US shadow government control system is removed.(4) As in the US, both major parties (and most minor parties) are controlled by shadow government  money and other mechanisms so that Tweedlum is simply replaced by Tweedledee.  The whole point of having a permanent set of professional politicians  (often electorates are handed from father to son) is to ensure that they understand the hidden rules of the so-called democratic political process.

Interestingly, there is the beginnings of Light at the end of the tunnel here in OZ in that only last week the New South Wales premier and some five
of his Cabinet Ministers were rejected by the rest of their party which then elected a 40 year old cleanskin, newby with only 18 months parliamentary experience AS PREMIER!  I suspect this is the first substantial sign that the incoming energies are indeed positively affecting attitudes in OZ. Similarly, a by election in South Australia for the seat of ex-Foreign Minister Downer nearly created an upset in that a Green candidate polled 48% of the vote! Also a state election in Western Australia last Saturday nearly resulted in a hung parliament, though really the two major parties still just seem to be acting out their roles.

The problem for Australians, New Zealanders and the peoples of most other nations is that their countries are not big and strong enough to stand up to the power of the Anglo-US-Zionist shadow entity that has ruled the world since the USSR collapsed.  And so, by and large they don't. Thus Australasian governments are hostage to the globalisation economic hegemony policies espoused by the US sooo, we go along to get along. We contribute military forces to invade and occupy countries like Korea, Vietnam, Somalia, Iraq and Afghanistan (5) because our leaders know they have to, in order to stay in power, regardless of the fact that a majority of Australians do not support such activities. In effect our leaders are the sub-puppets of the foreign political puppets of the secret global government.

In other words, there is no point trying to change the monkey, you have to change the organ grinder if you want the global dance to change. That is why the US is so important as regards seeking to change our world. Because the US spends as much money on its military as the rest of the world combined AND it uses that military to subjugate any country that tries to break free of US economic hegemony, no substantial change can happen globally until the people of the US become aware of just what their leaders are doing and cease to support them. That is what is at issue and that is why CM and the Celestials are so heavily focussed on seeking change in the US. Currently it looks as if the US will have to experience a substantial economic, military or Earth change disaster before USans or Australasians and their governments will seek to radically change their habits.

Namaste
Ron
******************************:D****************************
END NOTES

(1)    Australia's current constitutional and legal situation is absurd. See *The ENTIRE Australian Government is NOW OFFICIALLY ILLEGAL!* (1/7/04) (camside article) by John Lamont & Wayne Levick
See http://www.alphalink.com.au/~noelmcd/liberty/govern.htm

Lamont and Levick say:
`In the words of the late Professor G. Clements (an eminent UK QC and
emeritus Professor in law at Cambridge):

"The continued usage of the Australian Constitution Act (UK) by the Australian Governments and the judiciary is a confidence trick of monstrous proportions played upon the Australian people with the intent of maintaining power. It remains an Act of the United Kingdom. After joining the League of Nations in 1919 Australia became a sovereign nation. It had no further legal power to use, alter or otherwise tamper with another nation's legislation. Authority over the Australian Constitution Act lies not with the Australian government nor with the Australian people, it rests solely with the UK. Only they have the authority to repeal this legislation ...".

The 'Australian' Constitution is United Kingdom law.

In "An Act to Constitute the Commonwealth of Australia", the 9th clause of which is usually referred to as the 'Australian Constitution' was, is, and remains conditional upon the first 8 covering clauses of that Act, a current Act of domestic law of the United Kingdom Parliament.

Under Section 128 of Clause 9, minor alterations to the Constitution may be made by the Australian people. However, the Australian people may not alter, in any way, Clauses 1 to 8 of the Imperial Act. Since the Australian people have only ever had the right to change sections 1 to 128 of clause 9 of that Act, it follows that covering clauses 1 to 8 remain law in Australia.

The Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act passed through the UK Parliament in June 1900, to commence as law in Australia on the 1st of January 1901. Since the people of Australia have only ever had the right to change Sections 1 to 128 of Clause 9 of this Act, it follows that covering clauses 2, 6 and 8 remain law in Australia. (See Joosse v ASIC HCA 1998 159 ALR 260 or go to
http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/other/hca/transcripts/1998/M35/1.html  )
This means that British colonial law still operates in Australia and that Australia is a self governing colony of the United Kingdom as stated in that Act (see clause 8). However, the High Court of Australia has ruled that the United Kingdom is a foreign power, and that the UK Parliament cannot have any effect on the Governments of Australia (Sue v Hill HCA 30 of 1999 or see
http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/high_ct/1999/30.html  ). Hence, if British colonial law continues to operate in Australia, then this constitutes a clear breach of international law, along with the duties and responsibilities of the Australian and the United Kingdom governments, as both were Foundation Members to the League of Nations, and the United Nations. The Covenant and the Charter of both bodies, respectively, bind these nations.

The Australian people do not have ultimate control over the 'Australian' Constitution. In mid-July 1995 the Lord Chancellor of the UK in answer to a Parliamentary question asked in the UK Parliament about the Australian Constitution, stated:

"The British Constitution Act 1900 was for self government. It was never intended to be and is not suitable to be the basis for independence. The right to repeal this Act remains the sole prerogative of the United Kingdom. There is no means by which under United Kingdom or international law this power can be transferred to a foreign country or Member State of the United Nations. Indeed, the United Nations Charter precludes any such action". (This response was confirmed by letter from the UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office, dated 11th Dec 1997, under the hand of Mark Armstrong, Far Eastern and Pacific Dept)

Australia is an Independent sovereign nation.

As recently as November 1995, the Australian Parliament through the
release of a report by the 'Senate Legal and Constitutional References
Committee' restated the historical events leading up to the
achievement of independence, referring to the 1917 Imperial War
Conference Resolution IX at para. 4.12, and clearly stated at para.
4.13 that Australia was now a sovereign nation:

"Australia became an independent member of the League of Nations and
the International Labour Organisation in 1919."


and further in 4.13:

"This admission to the League and the International Labour Organisation involved recognition by other countries that Australia was now a sovereign nation with the necessary 'international personality' to enter into international relations ". ('Trick or Treaty? Power to Make and Implement Treaties, ISBN 0 642 24418 9 or see
http://www.aph.gov.au/senate/committee/legcon_ctte/treaty/index.htm

On July 14, 1996, investigators working in the archives of the League of Nations, held in Geneva by the Swiss Government, found the original copy of the Leaguer of Nations Covenant. Interspersed among the text is a commentary in italics by Sir Geoffrey Butler, KBE, Fellow in International Law and Diplomacy at Corpus Christie College, Cambridge University.

The discovery of the original copy of the Covenant revealed Sir Geoffrey's commentaries had been part of this crucial document from the beginning, not added later as historians had believed.

Full significance of Article I of the Covenant has never been widely understood by the people of Australia, whose future was irrevocably altered by the Treaty of Versailles of June 28, 1919.

Sir Geoffrey Butler's comments went to the heart of the events. His commentary on Article I states:

"It is arguable that this article is the Covenant's most significant measure. By it, the British Dominions, namely New Zealand, Australia, South Africa and Canada have their independent nationhood established for the first time. There may be friction over small matters in giving effect to this internationally acknowledged fact, but the Dominions will always look to the League of Nations Covenant as their Declaration of Independence. That the change has come silently about and has been welcomed in all corners of the British Empire is the final vindication of the United Empire Loyalists."

The law of one nation may not be used to govern over another nation.


From the moment people gain independence they have a claim to, and possess the right of, self-determination. They are sovereign over their affairs (see the Covenant of the League of Nations, Art. 10, and the Charter of the United Nations, Art. 2 paras 1 and 4; http://www.un.org/aboutun/charter/   , together with resolutions 2131 [xx] 1965 & 2625 [xxv] 1970).

From that moment, the laws of their former colonial master become ultra vires. For it to be otherwise is to offend both common sense and the first principle of international law - the right to self-determination! If this is not so, than the United States of America remains today as a collection of colonies of Great Britain! From October 1st 1919 'An Act to Constitute the Commonwealth of Australia' became ultra vires, with regard to Australia. Its continued use by political parties to claim the power to establish a parliament to govern over the Commonwealth of Australia, that is, the Australian people, (see Quick & Garran "The Annotated Constitution of the Australian Commonwealth" 1901 at page 366) constitutes an offence against international law. It represents political interference by the United Kingdom and a denial of Australian citizens' inalienable right to self-determination.

From October 1st, 1919 the British Monarch became irrelevant to Australia. From October 1st 1919 Australia became a republic. From October 1st, 1919 it has been necessary to create a political and judicial system capable of bridging the legal void created when sovereignty changed from the Parliament of the United Kingdom to the people of Australia. That necessity still exists.

If confirmation of this change in Australia's status from a "colony" to being "accepted fully into the community of nations of the whole world" is required, the Balfour Declaration 1929
( see http://www.foundingdocs.gov.au/places/cth/cth11.htm ), the Report of the Inter-Imperial Relations Committee 1926 - Extracts at page 348, ( see 'II.3⁄4 STATUS OF GREAT BRITAIN AND THE DOMINIONS' describing the Dominions as "autonomous communities within the British Empire, equal in status, in no way subordinate one to another in any aspect of their domestic or external affairs"), and Article 2 of the Charter of the United Nations make interesting reading.

By using UK law to claim power, parliamentarians and others become agents of a foreign power.

By relying on this current Act of domestic law of the Parliament of the United Kingdom the Australian Parliament is definable as an extension of the Parliament of the UK. The Governor-General, State and Territory Governors, individual parliamentarians, Senators and all others involved in government, including members of the judiciary, are definable as agents of the UK. That is, agents of a power foreign to the Nation State, the Commonwealth of Australia. This scenario manifests right down to the policeman on the beat!

The much-vaunted Statute of Westminster Act 1931 (UK) (see http://www.foundingdocs.gov.au/places/cth/cth12.htm  ) was a thinly veiled attempt to patch up a broken legal system for the Dominions. Since it was designed to operate beyond the shores of the UK, it failed the requirement under Article XVIII of the Covenant of the League of Nations as it was not registered with the Secretariat, and therefore never became a valid international instrument. It had no operational effect beyond the shores where it was created, the United Kingdom.

Every Member and Senator has committed an Act of treason by swearing and subscribing to an oath to serve the government of a power foreign to Australia.

To underline this, the Constitution (embraced by Australian parliamentarians) at section 42, dictates that they must all swear and subscribe an oath of allegiance to the current Monarch in the sovereignty of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland. (Confirmed by letter from the Parliament of Australia, House of Representatives dated 10th June 1999 and signed by Robyn Webber, Director, Chamber Research Office). But because the Monarch is appointed under the provisions of UK legislation and is therefore subordinate to the UK legislature (i.e. 'the Queen in Parliament') in point of legal fact, Parliamentarians, Senators and others have actually sworn an oath of allegiance to the Parliament of the United Kingdom. Quite clearly this constitutes an act of treason against the sovereign people of Australia. The Oath appears as the schedule to the Act and being outside 'The Constitution' is beyond the reach of Section 128, and thus, may not be altered by any authority outside the UK Parliament.

Further, The 'Queen of Australia' is purely titular. If indeed such an Office exists at all it does so without legal authority.

Since the Bill of Rights of 1688, the Act of Settlement of 1701, and the Act of Union 1706, the Monarch has been appointed, first by the English Parliament and then, by the UK Parliament. The Queen is a `Statutory Monarch'. As such she has no powers separate from the UK Parliament. In fact the official, descriptive title is `The Queen in Parliament'. In her Office, the `Queen' has no legal power to make decisions. She may only endorse and/or carry out decisions made by the Ministers that appointed her. (see http://www.royal.gov.uk/today/parlia.htm  ) Further, the monarch has not executive function within the Commonwealth, her role being purely titular. (see http://www.fco.gov.uk/news/keythemehome.asp?8   )

In 1973, in her private life as Mrs Elizabeth Guelph (for she had no authority from the UK Parliament which possessed no power with regard to matters relating to an independent Australia), she chose to amuse Gough Whitlam, the then Prime Minister of Australia, by signing the Royal Styles and Titles Act 1973, which repealed the Royal Styles and Titles Act 1953, and `created' the "Queen of Australia". Such an Office does not exist in UK law or, in particular, under the 'Australian' Constitution.

`An Act to Constitute the Commonwealth of Australia' is UK law and by definition (clause 2 of the Act) the only Monarch that the Constitution (clause 9 of the Act) recognises is the Queen of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland. Thus, even if it could be established that the Constitution has valid application, any law made under the Constitution cannot be given valid Royal assent by a Governor-General or Governor appointed by and representing a purely titular "Queen of Australia" (see the Royal Styles and Titles Act 1973 (Cth) http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/rsata1973258/

Further, taking into account the full content of the Act, even if it were possible to alter the Constitution so that it recognised the "Queen of Australia", a referendum under S128 relating to the adoption of such an Office would be necessary. Such a referendum has never been conducted!

Attempts to "patch up the Constitutional mess" continued the concealment of the truth from the Australian people.

Adopting the Statute of Westminster 1931 (UK) in 1942, and making it commence retroactively from the 3rd September 1939, was an attempt to rule out any illegality of involvement in WWII by not having formally declared war on Germany 3 years earlier. The Statute was adopted at the time the newly appointed Prime Minister was declaring war on Japan, and the Australian Parliament needed to be sure of it's power to do so.

The concealment continues with 2 more documents. The first being "The Letters Patent Relating to her Office of Governor-General of the Commonwealth of Australia" which was gazetted on the 24th August 1984 after being signed 3 days earlier at Balmoral in the United Kingdom. Under UK law, the writs of the sovereign die with the sovereign. But when Queen Victoria died on the 21st January, 1900, no new Letters Patent were issued until August 1984! This was 4 (not 5) monarchs later. These Letters Patent also had a clause to cover any 'invalid' Commission or appointment or any action taken by someone so commissioned or appointed without authority. This is the effect of clause VII.

… Recent confirmations establish invalidity of the political and judicial system currently being applied in Australia.

While all of this is relevant and pertinent, it is as well to be aware that on, 19th December 1997 the Office of Legal Council of the General Secretariat of the United Nations volunteered and thus confirmed that Australia has been a sovereign State from the 24th October 1945 at the latest. This was confirmed by letter dated 19th December 1997, from the Acting Director and Deputy to the Under-Secretary-General, Office of the Legal Counsel, under the hand of Paul C. Szasz.

On the 5th November 1999, the UK Government through their High Commission in Canberra, volunteered and thus confirmed that the UK British Nationality Act 1948 legislated that Australia was not a protectorate of the United Kingdom, so both the UN and the UK have confirmed that for at least 53 years [as at 2001] Australia has been an independent sovereign nation State. This was confirmed by letter dated 5th November 1999, from the Chief Passport Examiner, British High Commission, Canberra, under the hand of Mrs Carole Turner.

As a consequence, under both international and UK law the UK Parliament's `An Act to Constitute the Commonwealth of Australia' has been ultra vires in relation to Australia for at least 53 years. So, for purposes of definition and resolution there is no fundamental need to look any further back into history.

It is also most pertinent to note that on the 6th November 1999 the entire people of Australia, by referendum had for the first time, the opportunity to have their say regarding the acceptance or otherwise of the Constitution under which they are governed. They overwhelmingly rejected the 'Preamble to the Constitution' question which included,

"We the Australian people commit ourselves to this Constitution"

This proposition was rejected in every State and Territory of Australia on a national basis of 60.66% to 39.34%.

Thus the question must now be asked: "How can present Australian parliaments possibly continue to exist under the terms of a Constitution to which the people have refused to be committed?"

So it is that the Australian Parliament; relying for its existence, as it does, on a law which can no longer have application in Australia, remains a puppet, in legal terms, of the United Kingdom Parliament. Currently, the only way Australian Commonwealth Bills can be allegedly passed into Acts of law is by having them assented to in the name of a Monarch, who has no legal standing in any forum anywhere in the world. Clause 2 of the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act rules that, for the purposes of that Act, all references to the Queen lie in the sovereignty of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland. However, the Anglo-Irish Treaty of December 1921, which was ratified on 15th January 1922, brought into existence the Irish Free State. In 1937 the Irish Free State became the Republic of Erie. Hence, "Ireland" ceased to exist as a legal entity on 15th January 1922…

Clearly the Commonwealth Government of Australia is invalid.

As a consequence, no law made in the Australian Parliament has valid application in Australia, or anywhere else. The only law that can be validly applied in Australia is international law, and possibly the common law of Australia.'

**************
(2)     See John Perkins – Confessions of an Economic Hit Man – Parts I, II & III
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article15830.htm  
www.informationclearinghouse.info/article1583
In this great series of short videos (and especially in the first two) Perkins tells us about what US economic hitmen do and how they threaten newly democratically elected presidents and government leaders in South and Central American and other countries. He also confirms that Hugo Chavez is the real deal and that South America is finally getting its act together and standing up to US threats and pressure.

Perkins puts the existential reality starkly:
 "what would you do if you were a newly elected democratic leader  and  US economic hitman walked into your office and told you (nicely) tha in one pocket s/he has 200 millions US dollars for you and your family if you renege on your election promises and give the US "corporatocracy" what it wants; AND in the other is "a gun" ie the  threat that you and your family will be killed …"
That's a very difficult question to answer …

Perkins just talks matter of factly about how Saddam Hussein was a CIA operative and the US's man who eventually stood up to his "mentors" and all the rest. Not much that's new for those who have been paying attention over the years but probably paradigm shattering and hence unbelievable for the average sleeping beauty. One of the irritating things about trying to tell people (even family) about the reality of the power exercised by US economic imperialism is that they always say
"How do you know that?" or "you just read it on the internet" etc.

At least when someone who represents himself as having done "stuff" and seen other "stuff" appears on video speaking to a crowd it's just that little bit more difficult for people to dismiss it out of hand.
 
Perkins' summary of how US imperialism escalates its responses is excellent. Starting with the urbane "hitman" – "iron fist in the velvet glove" - followed by the "jackals" who do the murdering and black ops (when persuasion and sweet reason have failed); and the finale (only when the jackals cannot kill their targets etc as with Noreiga in Panama and Saddam in Iraq) – sending in the military to kill and maim everyone in sight.
 
Having said all that, the charitable view is that Perkins doesn't  understand fractional reserve banking and the fact that ultimately it isn't greedy corporations generally that create our fundamental social  and environmental problems, it's the banksters! It's no good talking about getting corporations to put people before profit if the banks are squeezing the life out of both the people and the corporations! This has been happening since, at least 1979 when the so-called Washington Consensus formally ushered in the globalisation era which is intended to lay the ground work for the New World Order.

Perkins talks about democratising imperial capitalism and softening the face of what he calls "vulnerable" corporations which he reckons  he's pretty good at through organizations like `Rainforest Action Network'. He also talks about ozone change and seems to give Al Gore credit for his stance on CO2 and climate change. I don't think he's right about "transforming" corporations without even being aware of the wider picture; and certainly I can't see how Al Gore's efforts are going to turn back the Earth changes we are experiencing.

Perkins also reckons his associates have had a positive impact on companies like City Corp and Goldman Sachs!? REALLY!? This is where I begin to wonder whether Perkins is genuine – after all he reckons he's been an "economic hitman" so surely he must understand that Central Banks, fiat money creation out of thin air and fractional reserve banking has got the entire world by the throat and so getting banks and others to change some relatively superficial environmental policies  like not investing in or using rainforest timber isn't going to save the planet or us at this stage.
 
 Sometimes I wonder whether the powers that be give people like Perkins  a "licence" to write books and express seemingly outrageous Criticisms of some of the tentacles of the Beast (ie some that are already Well known and hence he's not doing any real damage to the matrix) especially as he's  mostly preaching to the converted. Perkins implies that he sees himself as an "Elder" leading us towards the promised lands of democratic corporate capitalism. That's bullshit. And we know it.

I think that those interested in US imperialism and how it operates in practice will find these videos very interesting. Just don't believe the spin Perkins imparts towards the end. Also the videos just
might convince some who have no idea of the ruthless reality of economic rationalism that US globalism isn't all its cracked up to be.
*****************
Also the transcript of Amy Goodman's interview with John Perkins is worth a read:
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=04/11/09/1526251  

************************
[3] The Whitlam dismissal with covert CIA involvement is well if briefly covered in two short video see:
Whitlam Dismissal and the CIA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1JQ7-xvgcHA&feature=related  
And:
Whitlam Dismissal and the CIA. Part 2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=prV-Yae_5_g&feature=related 

This coup was executed in plain sight and given the (now) typical media spin by Murdoch's News Limited and Kerry Packers media empire so that all the electorate could focus on was problems with "the economy". Nothing new there. In the 1980 the CIA involvement even got some airing in the film `The Falcon and the Snowman' S&E ATM 1985. This clip is mostly about other stuff. Just watch the conversation from 2 minuted to 3 minutes 45 seconds.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mb85Kd0ujpc&feature=related 

OZ nostalgia buffs may want to listen to Paul Jones - It's Time – the famous Labor Party ad that helped Whitlam win the 1972 election:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QnLqC3f0nVY&feature=related  

******************************
(4) Dr Beter reported in his Audio Letter 74* that the Rockefeller Cartel arranged for a huge secret Black Ops US naval base to be built in the extreme southwest tip of the New Zealand South Island where the mountain range known as the Southern Alps comes down virtually to the water's edge. The other part of the installation is built into the northwest tip of Stewart Island, which is off the tip of South Island. The Stewart Island facility is hollowed out within a rise known as Mt. Anglem. This base was capable of building huge war ships and it did. Seven ships built by the Bolsheviks who replaced the Rockefellers as controllers of the shadow US government in the late 1970s were involved in the conflict associated with the Falklands War. According to Dr Beter all seven ships were sunk. What this means though, is that the New Zealand Government was closely associated with covert US naval matters in the period following the Whitlam Dismissal. The public stance of the NZ government during that period was that it would not allow US naval ships carrying nuclear weapons to enter its ports.B-)
* See http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/audioletters/audioletters_74.htm 
*******************

(5) I note though, that since the Whitlam Dismissal our governments are generally willing accomplices for the US Empire. For instance on 9 March 2008 I posted an excellent article by John Pilger about Australia's Hidden Empire. See # 3432, The net reference is: http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8265   


***************************:D************************



All writings by members of AbundantHope are copyrighted by
©2005-2018 AbundantHope - All rights reserved

Detailed explanation of AbundantHope's Copyrights are found here


Top of Page

Ron
Latest Headlines
Getting Off Money II
Getting Off Money
8 Reasons Young Americans Don't Fight Back: How the US Crushed Youth Resistance II
FDR, Pearl Harbor and the U.N.
Germany agrees to pay pensions to 66,000 Holocaust victims from around the world
Welfare Programs - Thoughts by "James"
"Looking Forward to a Gog and Magog FREE World."
Stand by for the transition phase.
Jonathon Blakeley: A guide to Hasbara trolls
The boys who cry “Holocaust”
David Icke 2011 - The Zion MainFrame
Reader responds about the term "Judeo-Christian"
"If you must post such rabid pseudo spiritual, neo-Pharisee pap, how about a bit of balance? "
Yvonne Fletcher: Murder In St. James' Documentary (it wasn't Libya)
UK and U.S. 'draw up joint plan to attack Iran'
Let Them Eat Cake: 10 Examples Of How The Elite Are Savagely Mocking The Poor
Halloween Celebrates Sex and Death
War with Iran? A Warning to Patriots and Globalists
The Return of Barbarism How imperialism corrupts the soul of America
America Suffered by Stigmatizing Germans