In my previous article I wrote about the fact that, from the perspective of political science, the evidence shows that the so-called “economic elite” dominate a “biased pluralist” system of governance.
This a Substack comment thread freely open to all. It is intended to provide a space for productive dialogue.
Everyone is free to comment. Please be civil and courteous to each other. Have a laugh, use irony, whit, sarcasm, whatever you like. Argue your point, show your evidence. But please do not be personal, abusive, or accusatory just because someone disagrees with or questions you.
Personal abuse will result in one warning. If abuse persists, after the warning, the abusive account will be blocked and permanently barred from commenting on my Substack posts.
Please, only reply to this message if you wish to alert me to abusive behaviour.
Are you aware that Dr Andrew Charlton, a former Managing Director of Accenture (from 2020 to 2022), is now a member of the Australian parliament?
He was also Founder and Managing Director of AlphaBeta from 2015 to 2020, a data-driven strategy consulting firm in Australia, acquired by Accenture in 2020.
I agree that we do have a choice but the problem as I see it is that many, if not most people, have already become addicted or seduced by the 'convenience' of tech and do not want to give up using it as they are doing now. There is also an element I believe of wanting to appear tech 'savvy' and adaptable to the many changes inherent in technology. Because they do not want to give up the 'convenience' of tech they seem unable or unwilling to realize that they do in reality have a choice but one which involves having to put more effort into doing things than at present and where instant answers and solutions are not forthcoming as they are now. Hasn't it been said several times that an over-reliance on tech creates ever shorter attention spans and lack of patiece? I think this is clearly seen in daily life.
Another problem is that the subject of the ever-encroaching digital prison is just not part of the mainstream conversation. Mention even vaguely something about it and many people will look at you with a blank stare or monotonous and programmed comment of "conspiracy theory", regardless of how often we hear that more and more people are "waking up". I wish I could believe that but I do not see much evidence of anything more than a deep slumber. I don't know what the answer is except that those who do see the dangers continue to try and mainstream it in the hope that there is still time to turn things around.
It's interesting this scene below from Network in 1976
Board Chair's Description of the Corporate "New World"
Angered UBS Chairman of the Board, corporate pitchman and business magnate Arthur Jensen (Ned Beatty) summoned Beale into his imposing conference room ("Valhalla"): "They say I can sell anything. I'd like to try to sell something to you." In one of the best-acted scenes in the film, Jensen devastated "mad-hatter" Beale with an evangelical lecture - a hypnotic, spell-binding, convincing, God-like oratorical speech (mocking Beale's own style) about the facts of international business and commerce - the corporate mentality. He described the unimportance of individuals and the overarching omnipotence of currency as the center of the universe:
You have meddled with the primal forces of nature, Mr. Beale, and I won't have it! Is that clear?! Do you think you've merely stopped a business deal? That is not the case. The Arabs have taken billions of dollars out of this country, and now they must put it back! It is ebb and flow, tidal gravity! It is ecological balance! You are an old man who thinks in terms of nations and peoples. There are no nations. There are no peoples. There are no Russians. There are no Arabs. There are no third worlds. There is no West. There is only one holistic system of systems, one vast and immane, interwoven, interacting, multi-variate, multi-national dominion of dollars. Petro-dollars, electro-dollars, multi-dollars, reichmarks, rins, rubles, pounds, and shekels. It is the international system of currency which determines the totality of life on this planet. That is the natural order of things today. That is the atomic and sub-atomic and galactic structure of things today! And you have meddled with the primal forces of nature, and You Will Atone!
Am I getting through to you, Mr. Beale? You get up on your little twenty-one inch screen and howl about America and democracy. There is no America. There is no democracy. There is only IBM and ITT and AT&T and DuPont, Dow, Union Carbide, and Exxon. Those are the nations of the world today. What do you think the Russians talk about in their councils of state - Karl Marx? They get out their linear programming charts, statistical decision theories, minimax solutions, and compute the price-cost probabilities of their transactions and investments, just like we do. We no longer live in a world of nations and ideologies, Mr. Beale. The world is a college of corporations, inexorably determined by the immutable by-laws of business. The world is a business, Mr. Beale. It has been since man crawled out of the slime. And our children will live, Mr. Beale, to see that perfect world in which there's no war or famine, oppression or brutality. One vast and ecumenical holding company, for whom all men will work to serve a common profit, in which all men will hold a share of stock, all necessities provided, all anxieties tranquilized, all boredom amused. And I have chosen you, Mr. Beale, to preach this evangel. (Beale: "Why me?") Because you're on television, dummy. Sixty million people watch you every night of the week, Monday through Friday. (Beale: "I have seen the face of God.") You just might be right, Mr. Beale.
I recommend you to listen to your work via Substack's audio service. You will easily find all the terrible typos..... there are far too many for me to list them.
I have already given my opinion on the content of this article in a comment in support of Evelyn K Brunswick. She nails the problem squarely.
“So, no, the OSA (Online Safety Act) does not protect children at all. ... the OSA effectively increases the risks to children....Having to verify their identities will deter them, which will reduce their “safety,” thereby benefitting paedophiles and other abusers.”
The OSA as a total hypocritical confidence trick whose effect produces the opposite of what it claims. But then the aim of safety was always a lie. The true aim is to keep tabs on everyone. The increased vulnerability of children is merely the “cherry on the cake” for these ghouls.
As far as I’m concerned, the bottom line is that, if I was truly in a position where I was forced to accept digital ID, I’d just totally withdraw. I lived without the net for forty years and I could do it again.
The trouble is that we would become so isolated from one another - which is another aim of the whole exercise. Past avenues of communication are being cut off. Landlines (which are already not private) are being phased out, and postage stamps cost a fortune already. We've already gone too far down the digital path, unsuspecting as many of us were. We're going to have to build strong local communities again and face the fact we'll struggle to communicate with loved ones further away...
I have an increasingly strong impression that the media is deliberately dumbing down at a hell of a rate as if to acclimatize everyone to this moronic level. And all conversation is being directed to this infantile mode. Sometimes I think the only decent conversations I have are face-to-face. Present company excepted. But it may be healthy to turn more and more to the real life interaction.
"Give me control over a nation's intelligence services and I care not which gilded Rothschild sits on the money supply".
In my opinion, these so-called oligarchs are not in charge at all. They are just front men. Why? Because they don't have armies and especially intel agencies to constitute a genuine material threat/power. Without that, they are completely vulnerable: 'you and whose army, Rothschild?!' etc.
Who is pushing the idea of nefarious oligarchs being at the top of the pyramid? Oh, it's the cognitive infiltration agents, and who do they work for? Not the oligarchs, that's for sure. It's a misdirection, this 'grand conspiracy theory'. It is quite possibly the most successful long-running psyop in the history of the once-and-never-again truth movement.
To all you agents responsible for this psyop - I salute you!
Having said that, that's no reason not to resist, for sure. Except one has to at least know who your enemy actually is. That does, after all, quite evidently help...
Ah - the other point (I'm just starting your newest article which prompted this remembrance) - it becomes clearer who's in charge in a truly technocratic situation, because it's those who control the surveillance/social control technology who therefore, plainly, have the logistical control. Historically, that's been the intel services. The oligarchs may be constructing that panopticon/control structure, but I think the intel services would get a little miffed if they were denied access. So my guess is the oligarchs are developing it all 'on behalf of' either those at the top, or, if they are a homogenous social group, the group itself as a whole. I think that nuance is important to point out.
I was making a more generalised implication that those at the top are - logically - the ones with the logistical power to preserve their position of dominance. People whose only asset is a bank, but have no other logistical means of maintaining actual material/physical control over others do not have any real power at all, because they can be logistically (i.e. physically) threatened, removed, and/or controlled by others. Hence my statement ‘you and whose army?’. It’s a vitally important statement.
If you think the ‘oligarchs’ are in charge, then you have to show me their control over the armies and the intelligence services and anyone else who possesses the real-world logistical control. The oligarchs, for example, do not have the logistical ability to rig elections - the intelligence services do. That’s just one example. If the oligarchs, or any other group, for that matter, want to carry out some agenda-related operation, they have to turn to the intelligence services to do it - if there is any conflict of interest, the intel services win.
So the most you can say is it’s a nuanced statement - if both the oligarchs (or anyone else - political class, for example, media etc.) and the intel services are singing from the same hymn sheet, then fine - they work together. But nothing logistical in this top-down world can happen without the complicity and agreement of the intelligence services. That is simply a logical statement about logistics. The implication being, if the agencies have the logistical mastery, then they are effectively at the top.
And given the psychology of all these people, in whichever group, is about that pathetic need for domination, the group who is in the logistically dominant position will be dominant. Over time, it’s that group which selects all the members of the other groups so that then, and only then, do they constitute a homogenous social group with no conflict of interest (what you call the PPP). But it’s important to remember this doesn’t happen suddenly - there is an evolution to it starting off with competing factions/groups. Tracing the history of that evolution is the interesting question as far as I am concerned. Aside from anything else, it tells you the true lineage of who is truly in charge.
I agree, however, that for ‘normal people’ it doesn’t matter who’s in charge. Maybe for conspiracy theorists it does, but it’s still academic. But even academics need to be accurate and comprehensive. Because ultimately it’s all about education.
I agree with you. Certain aristocratic international organised criminals can conjure up an army of mercenaries in no time flat. They have done it regularly since Rome fell.
They are also expert at exploiting NATO as if it were their possession. It probably is.
Playing countries off against each other is a favourite game which disregards the gory costs as if the world were merely a chess tournament between them.
I have been telling Iain this for more than a decade.....
Frances, I think you are actually disagreeing with Evelyn. I have listened to what you have said about the Black Nobs. That's why I linked to your piece in my previous article.
So she said. I read her comment several times and can only assume that it is ambiguously expressed enough for me to think we were coming from the same ballpark. It happens.
Edit: I did not see your previous post so I went snooping, Your idea of "linking" is too easily overlooked. When I reference another Substack writer I make sure that the link is "in yer face". Respectful like.
Hmm. You may have misunderstood me a little Frances. You'd have to show that the BN are in total control of the world's intelligence agencies, and have been historically throughout the 20th century (especially the CIA, SIS, KGB). If they haven't been, then those agencies would have long-since eliminated them - but maintained the fiction that they still exist. Pinpointing a time when they did this elimination operation is an intriguing historical enquiry, but I wouldn't be surprised if they used the fog of WW1 to do it.
And they'd have to control the majority of members of these intel agencies, not just the people at the top, because there's no way the lower ranks would not find out. And they'd deal with the situation and take back control. Remember, it's the intelligence agencies who have all the necessary logistical capabilities for social control (and they who benefit most from stuff like digital ID, incidentally - I can't see how the oligarchs benefit, actually). The agencies can also control politicians and the media and the freemasons and so on. And they can certainly conjure up mercenary armies - but in this day and age, mercenary armies don't count for much against an advanced national army.
Having said all of that, it is possible to consider the 'we're all in it together' aspect in terms of adherence to a homogenous supranational ideology - meaning they can work together. Although ultimately, the intel agencies would still be at the top of the pyramid, and the Black Nobility, the bloodlines and so on, would only have 'permitted' survival, under strict conditions. But ultimately, I do not believe that psychologically this somewhat removed (impersonal) supranational ideology could have a more important influence on personal identity (and therefore loyalty) than nationalist identity.
It is important to consider social group psychology in all this - social group identity for the likes of SIS and the KGB and suchlike is largely governed by nationalism, meaning they would see the likes of the BN as 'foreigners', and would simply not tolerate them being in superior social positions to them, let alone taking possession of a country which SIS see as their own possession.
So I guess that what I'm really saying here is that it's important to study the relationship between the likes of the BN and the intel services. Unless they are, and have always been, consistently sharing the exact same social group identity, and that psychologically trumps all other identity-related concerns/loyalties, then there is a natural conflict of interests between them. And in any below-the-radar fight, my money would be on the intel services.
The earliest intel agency and espionage network was known as the Entity It operated for 500 years appearing to report to the Pope. See a book of that name by Eric Frattini.
Bear in mind that the Roman Catholic Church was a construct of the Roman Empire and most Popes were appointed from among the ranks of the Black Nobility and lesser associated families.
The OSS operated during WW2 and that developed into the CIA which is PAID FOR by the USA but is entirely dedicated to the Church - hence every senior executive being Jesuit educated - without exception.
All other intelligence agencies are linked through from those basic beginnings.
In the 1990s I worked in the City of London for a German inventor who was selling satellite intel to all the world's intelligence agencies for billions under a corporate pseudonym - Inmarsat. The company has been absorbed in recent decades but still operates its private internet for islands, superyachts and other remote locations such as Epstein's desert "retreat".
Thank you for this Iain. I'm convinced and want to ditch my "smart" phone for a "dumb" phone, but not sure how to replace the functionality of many apps. Is there any resource that helps people with making this switch and finding alternatives?
The Skull & Bones Boys are not all NRx and they are the ones calling the shots actually (Pentagon, DoD, Heritage Foundation). City of London is falling down, but there´s the great danger of Pax Silica in the Boyz´s hands. We are not at all sure of where this is going to lead, are we?
Have you ever read Christopher Bollyn´s "Solving 9/11: The Deception That Changed the World?" Being such a great investigator, why don´t you start there? And, on the way, just listen to the 8 hour interview of Kay Griggs still on YT?
A malevolent cartel of corrupt politicians, complicit bureaucrats, and obscenely wealthy parasites are steadily recreating the failed experiment of the Soviet Empire, where language and facts were grossly manipulated to create a false history.
It failed then, it will fall again.
But how many will disappear into brutal gulags along the way?
NOPE... The herds of modern moron slaves already demonstrated during OPERATION COVIDIUS that they are UNABLE to CHOSE. The herds are only good at OBEYING.
Trolls and bots are not welcome!
********************************
This a Substack comment thread freely open to all. It is intended to provide a space for productive dialogue.
Everyone is free to comment. Please be civil and courteous to each other. Have a laugh, use irony, whit, sarcasm, whatever you like. Argue your point, show your evidence. But please do not be personal, abusive, or accusatory just because someone disagrees with or questions you.
Personal abuse will result in one warning. If abuse persists, after the warning, the abusive account will be blocked and permanently barred from commenting on my Substack posts.
Please, only reply to this message if you wish to alert me to abusive behaviour.
Thank you.
Iain, you refer to Accenture.
Are you aware that Dr Andrew Charlton, a former Managing Director of Accenture (from 2020 to 2022), is now a member of the Australian parliament?
He was also Founder and Managing Director of AlphaBeta from 2015 to 2020, a data-driven strategy consulting firm in Australia, acquired by Accenture in 2020.
References
1. https://www.aph.gov.au/Senators_and_Members/Parliamentarian?MPID=I8M
2. https://newsroom.accenture.com/news/2020/accenture-acquires-boutique-australian-consultancy-alphabeta-advisors-bolstering-analytics-led-strategy-services
Re: "So-called “age verification” can only work if everyone, not just children, verify their identities online."
Exactly...
And the social media ban for children kicked off in Australia, a very sinister and controlling state... See my article: The moral wedge: How fear for children is being used to expand state control: https://elizabethhart.substack.com/p/the-moral-wedge-how-fear-for-children
Re the social media ban in Australia - Julie Inman Grant is the eSafety Commissioner overseeing this ban.
Here's Inman Grant mentioned on the World Economic Forum website: https://www.weforum.org/stories/authors/julie-inman-grant/
More about social media age restrictions here: https://www.esafety.gov.au/about-us/industry-regulation/social-media-age-restrictions
And if you try to name them, they call you AntiSeptic.
Thank you for your work
I agree that we do have a choice but the problem as I see it is that many, if not most people, have already become addicted or seduced by the 'convenience' of tech and do not want to give up using it as they are doing now. There is also an element I believe of wanting to appear tech 'savvy' and adaptable to the many changes inherent in technology. Because they do not want to give up the 'convenience' of tech they seem unable or unwilling to realize that they do in reality have a choice but one which involves having to put more effort into doing things than at present and where instant answers and solutions are not forthcoming as they are now. Hasn't it been said several times that an over-reliance on tech creates ever shorter attention spans and lack of patiece? I think this is clearly seen in daily life.
Another problem is that the subject of the ever-encroaching digital prison is just not part of the mainstream conversation. Mention even vaguely something about it and many people will look at you with a blank stare or monotonous and programmed comment of "conspiracy theory", regardless of how often we hear that more and more people are "waking up". I wish I could believe that but I do not see much evidence of anything more than a deep slumber. I don't know what the answer is except that those who do see the dangers continue to try and mainstream it in the hope that there is still time to turn things around.
Great series of articles, Thanks.
It's interesting this scene below from Network in 1976
Board Chair's Description of the Corporate "New World"
Angered UBS Chairman of the Board, corporate pitchman and business magnate Arthur Jensen (Ned Beatty) summoned Beale into his imposing conference room ("Valhalla"): "They say I can sell anything. I'd like to try to sell something to you." In one of the best-acted scenes in the film, Jensen devastated "mad-hatter" Beale with an evangelical lecture - a hypnotic, spell-binding, convincing, God-like oratorical speech (mocking Beale's own style) about the facts of international business and commerce - the corporate mentality. He described the unimportance of individuals and the overarching omnipotence of currency as the center of the universe:
You have meddled with the primal forces of nature, Mr. Beale, and I won't have it! Is that clear?! Do you think you've merely stopped a business deal? That is not the case. The Arabs have taken billions of dollars out of this country, and now they must put it back! It is ebb and flow, tidal gravity! It is ecological balance! You are an old man who thinks in terms of nations and peoples. There are no nations. There are no peoples. There are no Russians. There are no Arabs. There are no third worlds. There is no West. There is only one holistic system of systems, one vast and immane, interwoven, interacting, multi-variate, multi-national dominion of dollars. Petro-dollars, electro-dollars, multi-dollars, reichmarks, rins, rubles, pounds, and shekels. It is the international system of currency which determines the totality of life on this planet. That is the natural order of things today. That is the atomic and sub-atomic and galactic structure of things today! And you have meddled with the primal forces of nature, and You Will Atone!
Am I getting through to you, Mr. Beale? You get up on your little twenty-one inch screen and howl about America and democracy. There is no America. There is no democracy. There is only IBM and ITT and AT&T and DuPont, Dow, Union Carbide, and Exxon. Those are the nations of the world today. What do you think the Russians talk about in their councils of state - Karl Marx? They get out their linear programming charts, statistical decision theories, minimax solutions, and compute the price-cost probabilities of their transactions and investments, just like we do. We no longer live in a world of nations and ideologies, Mr. Beale. The world is a college of corporations, inexorably determined by the immutable by-laws of business. The world is a business, Mr. Beale. It has been since man crawled out of the slime. And our children will live, Mr. Beale, to see that perfect world in which there's no war or famine, oppression or brutality. One vast and ecumenical holding company, for whom all men will work to serve a common profit, in which all men will hold a share of stock, all necessities provided, all anxieties tranquilized, all boredom amused. And I have chosen you, Mr. Beale, to preach this evangel. (Beale: "Why me?") Because you're on television, dummy. Sixty million people watch you every night of the week, Monday through Friday. (Beale: "I have seen the face of God.") You just might be right, Mr. Beale.
I recommend you to listen to your work via Substack's audio service. You will easily find all the terrible typos..... there are far too many for me to list them.
I have already given my opinion on the content of this article in a comment in support of Evelyn K Brunswick. She nails the problem squarely.
Hopefully fixed I was in a bit of a rush. Soz.
Yeah, I noticed the typos. Even if I wasn't qualified as a proofreader.
Adding a plea to Iain to sort the typos! Verrrrrrrrifiction!
And the Orwellian reversal continues.
“So, no, the OSA (Online Safety Act) does not protect children at all. ... the OSA effectively increases the risks to children....Having to verify their identities will deter them, which will reduce their “safety,” thereby benefitting paedophiles and other abusers.”
The OSA as a total hypocritical confidence trick whose effect produces the opposite of what it claims. But then the aim of safety was always a lie. The true aim is to keep tabs on everyone. The increased vulnerability of children is merely the “cherry on the cake” for these ghouls.
As far as I’m concerned, the bottom line is that, if I was truly in a position where I was forced to accept digital ID, I’d just totally withdraw. I lived without the net for forty years and I could do it again.
The trouble is that we would become so isolated from one another - which is another aim of the whole exercise. Past avenues of communication are being cut off. Landlines (which are already not private) are being phased out, and postage stamps cost a fortune already. We've already gone too far down the digital path, unsuspecting as many of us were. We're going to have to build strong local communities again and face the fact we'll struggle to communicate with loved ones further away...
I have an increasingly strong impression that the media is deliberately dumbing down at a hell of a rate as if to acclimatize everyone to this moronic level. And all conversation is being directed to this infantile mode. Sometimes I think the only decent conversations I have are face-to-face. Present company excepted. But it may be healthy to turn more and more to the real life interaction.
"Give me control over a nation's intelligence services and I care not which gilded Rothschild sits on the money supply".
In my opinion, these so-called oligarchs are not in charge at all. They are just front men. Why? Because they don't have armies and especially intel agencies to constitute a genuine material threat/power. Without that, they are completely vulnerable: 'you and whose army, Rothschild?!' etc.
Who is pushing the idea of nefarious oligarchs being at the top of the pyramid? Oh, it's the cognitive infiltration agents, and who do they work for? Not the oligarchs, that's for sure. It's a misdirection, this 'grand conspiracy theory'. It is quite possibly the most successful long-running psyop in the history of the once-and-never-again truth movement.
To all you agents responsible for this psyop - I salute you!
Having said that, that's no reason not to resist, for sure. Except one has to at least know who your enemy actually is. That does, after all, quite evidently help...
How are the armies and intel agencies funded without those who created and control the financial system, Evelyn?
Because the intel agencies control the people who control the banks.
Do they? Care to elaborate?
Ah - the other point (I'm just starting your newest article which prompted this remembrance) - it becomes clearer who's in charge in a truly technocratic situation, because it's those who control the surveillance/social control technology who therefore, plainly, have the logistical control. Historically, that's been the intel services. The oligarchs may be constructing that panopticon/control structure, but I think the intel services would get a little miffed if they were denied access. So my guess is the oligarchs are developing it all 'on behalf of' either those at the top, or, if they are a homogenous social group, the group itself as a whole. I think that nuance is important to point out.
I was making a more generalised implication that those at the top are - logically - the ones with the logistical power to preserve their position of dominance. People whose only asset is a bank, but have no other logistical means of maintaining actual material/physical control over others do not have any real power at all, because they can be logistically (i.e. physically) threatened, removed, and/or controlled by others. Hence my statement ‘you and whose army?’. It’s a vitally important statement.
If you think the ‘oligarchs’ are in charge, then you have to show me their control over the armies and the intelligence services and anyone else who possesses the real-world logistical control. The oligarchs, for example, do not have the logistical ability to rig elections - the intelligence services do. That’s just one example. If the oligarchs, or any other group, for that matter, want to carry out some agenda-related operation, they have to turn to the intelligence services to do it - if there is any conflict of interest, the intel services win.
So the most you can say is it’s a nuanced statement - if both the oligarchs (or anyone else - political class, for example, media etc.) and the intel services are singing from the same hymn sheet, then fine - they work together. But nothing logistical in this top-down world can happen without the complicity and agreement of the intelligence services. That is simply a logical statement about logistics. The implication being, if the agencies have the logistical mastery, then they are effectively at the top.
And given the psychology of all these people, in whichever group, is about that pathetic need for domination, the group who is in the logistically dominant position will be dominant. Over time, it’s that group which selects all the members of the other groups so that then, and only then, do they constitute a homogenous social group with no conflict of interest (what you call the PPP). But it’s important to remember this doesn’t happen suddenly - there is an evolution to it starting off with competing factions/groups. Tracing the history of that evolution is the interesting question as far as I am concerned. Aside from anything else, it tells you the true lineage of who is truly in charge.
I agree, however, that for ‘normal people’ it doesn’t matter who’s in charge. Maybe for conspiracy theorists it does, but it’s still academic. But even academics need to be accurate and comprehensive. Because ultimately it’s all about education.
Cyber is the real domain of power.....are you aware of Pax Silica?
I agree with you. Certain aristocratic international organised criminals can conjure up an army of mercenaries in no time flat. They have done it regularly since Rome fell.
They are also expert at exploiting NATO as if it were their possession. It probably is.
Playing countries off against each other is a favourite game which disregards the gory costs as if the world were merely a chess tournament between them.
I have been telling Iain this for more than a decade.....
https://francesleader.substack.com/p/black-nobility-101
Frances, I think you are actually disagreeing with Evelyn. I have listened to what you have said about the Black Nobs. That's why I linked to your piece in my previous article.
So she said. I read her comment several times and can only assume that it is ambiguously expressed enough for me to think we were coming from the same ballpark. It happens.
Edit: I did not see your previous post so I went snooping, Your idea of "linking" is too easily overlooked. When I reference another Substack writer I make sure that the link is "in yer face". Respectful like.
Hmm. You may have misunderstood me a little Frances. You'd have to show that the BN are in total control of the world's intelligence agencies, and have been historically throughout the 20th century (especially the CIA, SIS, KGB). If they haven't been, then those agencies would have long-since eliminated them - but maintained the fiction that they still exist. Pinpointing a time when they did this elimination operation is an intriguing historical enquiry, but I wouldn't be surprised if they used the fog of WW1 to do it.
And they'd have to control the majority of members of these intel agencies, not just the people at the top, because there's no way the lower ranks would not find out. And they'd deal with the situation and take back control. Remember, it's the intelligence agencies who have all the necessary logistical capabilities for social control (and they who benefit most from stuff like digital ID, incidentally - I can't see how the oligarchs benefit, actually). The agencies can also control politicians and the media and the freemasons and so on. And they can certainly conjure up mercenary armies - but in this day and age, mercenary armies don't count for much against an advanced national army.
Having said all of that, it is possible to consider the 'we're all in it together' aspect in terms of adherence to a homogenous supranational ideology - meaning they can work together. Although ultimately, the intel agencies would still be at the top of the pyramid, and the Black Nobility, the bloodlines and so on, would only have 'permitted' survival, under strict conditions. But ultimately, I do not believe that psychologically this somewhat removed (impersonal) supranational ideology could have a more important influence on personal identity (and therefore loyalty) than nationalist identity.
It is important to consider social group psychology in all this - social group identity for the likes of SIS and the KGB and suchlike is largely governed by nationalism, meaning they would see the likes of the BN as 'foreigners', and would simply not tolerate them being in superior social positions to them, let alone taking possession of a country which SIS see as their own possession.
So I guess that what I'm really saying here is that it's important to study the relationship between the likes of the BN and the intel services. Unless they are, and have always been, consistently sharing the exact same social group identity, and that psychologically trumps all other identity-related concerns/loyalties, then there is a natural conflict of interests between them. And in any below-the-radar fight, my money would be on the intel services.
The earliest intel agency and espionage network was known as the Entity It operated for 500 years appearing to report to the Pope. See a book of that name by Eric Frattini.
Bear in mind that the Roman Catholic Church was a construct of the Roman Empire and most Popes were appointed from among the ranks of the Black Nobility and lesser associated families.
The OSS operated during WW2 and that developed into the CIA which is PAID FOR by the USA but is entirely dedicated to the Church - hence every senior executive being Jesuit educated - without exception.
https://churchandstate.org.uk/2012/10/cia-and-the-vaticans-intelligence-apparatus/
All other intelligence agencies are linked through from those basic beginnings.
In the 1990s I worked in the City of London for a German inventor who was selling satellite intel to all the world's intelligence agencies for billions under a corporate pseudonym - Inmarsat. The company has been absorbed in recent decades but still operates its private internet for islands, superyachts and other remote locations such as Epstein's desert "retreat".
https://francesleader.substack.com/p/origins-of-total-surveillance
I have tried to be brief here.... there is a lot more to all this, obviously.
Thank you for this Iain. I'm convinced and want to ditch my "smart" phone for a "dumb" phone, but not sure how to replace the functionality of many apps. Is there any resource that helps people with making this switch and finding alternatives?
❤️
The Skull & Bones Boys are not all NRx and they are the ones calling the shots actually (Pentagon, DoD, Heritage Foundation). City of London is falling down, but there´s the great danger of Pax Silica in the Boyz´s hands. We are not at all sure of where this is going to lead, are we?
Have you ever read Christopher Bollyn´s "Solving 9/11: The Deception That Changed the World?" Being such a great investigator, why don´t you start there? And, on the way, just listen to the 8 hour interview of Kay Griggs still on YT?
A malevolent cartel of corrupt politicians, complicit bureaucrats, and obscenely wealthy parasites are steadily recreating the failed experiment of the Soviet Empire, where language and facts were grossly manipulated to create a false history.
It failed then, it will fall again.
But how many will disappear into brutal gulags along the way?
NOPE... The herds of modern moron slaves already demonstrated during OPERATION COVIDIUS that they are UNABLE to CHOSE. The herds are only good at OBEYING.
https://voza0db.substack.com/p/morons-just-dont-get-it
Lastminute.com offer a £20 voucher if you give some company the rights to your YouTube/Google history.
The price is too low and anyway google can sell it and we wouldn't even know.