Friday, August 10, 2012
The Secrets of Global Domination: EXPLAINED!
I'll admit I'm fascinated by conspiracy theory. Most of it is unfortunately mundane--but some of it is brilliant. This is a brillant piece. After sitting through about an hour of Agenda21 nonsense a few months back, when I ran into this I decided it was worth reviving the Conspiracy tag for commentary.
What you see above is the indomitable Alex Jones of InfoWars who, today, exposes a "closely held" secret (closely held, it turns out, by the banksters and global corporate masters--and previously only exposed in fiction books and movies like 1976's The Network) about how they actually control us. That's right: he blows the doors off of how the Illuminati actually controls the world.
In order to explain it to us, he uses three games: Chess, Risk, and Monopoly.
Here's the theory: the corporate globalist masters understand war (Chess) not as a battle between two forces (that's what it's sold as)--but rather as a method of turning inner anger against the state outward (and reducing the population--especially of young men--and building debt). So what they do is finance "both sides" (or "all sides" by working through the central banks (Monopoly) so that whatever game you think you're playing ("I'm the top-hat! I own Park Place!") the game you're really playing is borrowing from the bank.
On the global scale (Risk) they use this power of war to destabilize any nation that gets in their way (the peaceful nation of Libya) by sending in externally financed enemy forces (Al Queada) to knock it down if it gets uppity (either destroy it--or drive it into debt). When they are finished there will be no nations--just corporate rulers--and the end game for us is sterilization through vaccines, eugenics, and death. They get all the assets and life extension.
What Do I Think?
I'm going to tell you that I loved his use of a lego chess-set but I want to be clear that it's not because I think he was talking down to his audience--but because its castle-like construction is so cool looking (and he had a righteous edition of Risk too. Man, I need a new set). I'll come down on the side that Alex really believes what he's saying ... which is too bad--because I bet he's constantly a bit nervous that exposing all these secrets is going to get him killed.
So let's look at this for a minute.
It is a reasonably well accepted that populations with low employment and too many young unmarried males tend to go to war. That's true--but the cause and effect is reversed: JP Morgan Chase isn't engineering a bunch of young, unmarried men--that happens demographically because of a number of forces. So he's got it backwards: the nation doesn't go "hey, I want to go to war so I'll get these unmarried men around."
It's also not usually a coldly calculated decision to make war: it's an explosion of ethnic or nationalist tensions that motivates populist movements. Oh, sure: someone may profit--but historically it isn't a central bank--it's whoever leads the Junta.
Net-Net: He's taking a real phenomena and ascribing planning to it. There's very little evidence of planning and NO evidence of global planning in that schema.
The idea that Libya was a solid, sane country until external financiers moved in Al Queada to destabilize it is actually Gadaffi's specific delusion--it isn't fact. He claimed the terrorists were putting LSD in milk. If you believe that, you're golden. While conflicts have been started for money--and certainly profiteered off of--the idea that large international banks have organs that pay off terrorist organizations to make them do their will is a view of the world that is way, way more cohesive (paranoid) than anything we see actual evidence for. In fact: we see the opposite (banks twisting themselves into knots trying to avoid processing terrorist money to the tune of major losses due to required overhead when opening accounts and moving funds).
Net-Net: The global control aspect is also wishful thinking. No one is paying Al Queada to attack targets and Libya was not a heroic self-determined actor anyway. It collapsed because its dictator consistently mistreated his subjects and, when they saw things could be better, they wanted in (see: Arab Spring).
Jones gins up most of his ire for the central banks and calls derivative instruments "counterfeit." Yes: central banks loan money. Yes: it's backed by fiat. Yes: this upsets a lot of people. Here's my question: who is controlling these banks? It can't be the "guys you see" (Bernanke, the leadership of JPM, Bank of America, and so on). Why? Because I know where some of these guys came from--like, in their old lives (as in: from somewhere down in the ranks of comparatively normal people). To be sure, they were learned corporate bankers--but they were not born into some massive global conspiracy--and their lives (and I am talking TOP of the food chain) are blitzkrieg series of five-minute meetings where they desperately try to control their massive organizations.
Those guys? The "head banksters"? They have a 60+ hour-per-week job running the bank you do see. when are they deciding to knock-over Libya? During their other 60 hour work week? So it has to be someone else. So who?
The board of directors--clearly? Yeah: but--while these guys I do not "know" (as in: I have never had a meeting with the board of directors and seen them as flawed humans with limited line of sight and insane schedules--living constantly under the gun of regulation and market forces) I can tell you this: in order to get anything done (say, give 7 million dollars off the books to Al-Q) they would have to order someone to do it.
Who? Let me tell you: I know -something- about money movement, AML, fraud checking and all that jazz. There is no single point of contact that Mr. Board Member can call in an international bank to make it happen. There just isn't. And those computer systems? Those computer systems are designed by giant teams of people run by senior developers and architects that leave the industry, move around, and are basically normal schmucks. They are not secretly building in back-doors that allow terminals in the secret board room to move money outside the normal parameters without leaving a trail.
It just doesn't exist. So even if some lounge-chair super-rich dude wanted to have his mega-bank give money to someone shady--off the books--with some magical disbursement of funds from a "black book account"? He might as well order Scotty to beam them the money by talking into his cuff-link. It'll have the same chance of success.
The End Game
I'm never quite sure why these guys want to kill everyone off. Is it to save the planet? Is it just because we're breathing their air? I mean, what's the ROI? I guess it's that if you uncork life extension you can't have everyone cluttering up the planet. So, yeah? Okay--it's scary: I like it.
But it's science fiction too.
ALSO NOTE: I love the InfoWars graphic. Alex Jones does good YouTube. The 21st century is the gold-plated era of conspiracy theory!