Click here to submit Tips... contact me... information or news articles you wrote that pertain to this site!
Welcome to The Truth News.Info
How Does the 1 percent Control the 99 percent?
March 1, 2010 by Bob Livingston
“It is the absolute right of the state to supervise the formation of public opinion whatever the state needs to do.”—Joseph Goebbels
We cannot understand modern despotism and police power unless we understand modern money.
Modern money in the United States and the whole world is fiat paper money and credit. It is under the total control of government (and the bankers).
This means that all government funding is with fiat counterfeit paper that is created in unlimited amounts and costs the government nothing. But it transfers wealth and savings of the people to the money creators and government through the depreciation of the currency. The American people have no understanding of how the government gets everything literally for nothing. It is the source of all government power. The control of free and unlimited funding with created money in unlimited amounts guarantees the power and control of the 1 percent over the 99 percent.
The American people are taught voodoo economics. They have absolutely no understanding of reality.
So how does the 1 percent control the 99 percent? By gross deception at all levels:
By controlling all news media, printed and live.
By controlling all newscasters.
By controlling public education from start to finish.
By controlling the “healthcare” system. The public is kept sick by mass vaccinations.
Through fear campaigns:
Fear of disease to manipulate people to take mass vaccinations.
Fear of financial collapse for an excuse to increase fiat, diluting the purchasing power of the currency and destroying dollar assets of savers.
Fear of bogey-man enemies. Example: Saddam Hussein’s “weapons of mass destruction.”
Fear through war propaganda that is waged by the military industrial complex. The words democracy and patriotism are heavy words used repeatedly. Perpetual war is possible because of unlimited access to funding with fiat paper money.
Income tax controls the population by forcing “voluntary” disclosure of personal information.
Information about the people is typical and necessary to tyranny. Fear of the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) is awesome.
Government at all levels promotes the state over the individual person. Personal freedom is the enemy of the state. In all things the state promotes the collective man and the collective mind.
The virtue of individualism always gives way to group dynamics through the group psychosis of altruism. The state can manipulate the crowd far easier than the individual.
The bigger bureaucratic government is, the more it fears the people. The government has to control the population in order to control the government.
Only the power of propaganda keeps the people from overthrowing the government by force.
Also, government (the 1 percent) holds the police power and the military power, the main purpose of which is the silent force to contain the population. Even though the population in the U.S. is armed, there is no general awareness that government is enemy No. 1.
Toward the last days of a fiat regime, confidence in government accelerates on the downside and the risk of armed violence escalates. Hence, stepped-up oppression of the government against the people.
Gold rises and is hoarded. Controls at all levels are intensified with the strategy that the bigger counter-force will prevail. Government bets that its own police and military will not mutiny.
Pensions and pay loom large in the collective mind of Federal police and armed forces. None realize that their pensions in fiat will be worthless.
Modern propaganda in America hides behind and is passed off as science and research.
In the last days the people begin to realize that their “elected” representatives are really employees of the Federal Government.Modern government, especially the U.S.government, operates above the threshold ofthe intelligence of the people. The people arecontrolled because they can’t discern betweenhocus-pocus and reality.
The fiat paper money mentality is something for nothing and the government obliges with bread and circus. The population is unaware that they are unaware. Criminal government is recognized when the rule of law breaks down, as now.
The control by the 1 percent of the 99 percent can be summed up in two words: “Psychological warfare.”
GORDON DUFF: AFGHANISTAN AND AMERICA: OUR DYSFUNCTIONAL APPROACH March 13, 2010
I have only recently returned from the region where I toured as a journalist and lecturer. Our group included Jeff Gates, Raja Mugtaba, BG Asif Haroon Raja and BG Ali Raza and me of Veterans Today and Opinion Maker. We met with some people we will not mention and many we can. Prince Ali of Afghanistan had a delegation with us headed by Fayyaz Shah, as advisors. BG Ali Raza was primary coordinator on the ground for Pakistan during the “Charley Wilson War” against the Soviets. No person has spent so much time “where he isn’t supposed to be” as General Ali Raza. BG Asif Haroon Raja is Pakistan’s best known military analyst and author and an invaluable resource.
I would thank the Director General of the ISPR, Maj. Gen. Athar Abbas and Director BG Syed Azmat Ali for their detailed briefing and great courtesy.
Background on the critical border regions was supplied by the former military head, BG Amir Gulistan Janjua. His vast experience in the region was an invaluable aid to our understanding. I would also thank Ahsan Rashid and Col. Javed Mujtaba for their advice, hospitality and analytical skills.
Our primary briefer and advisor for the region and constant correspondent is Admiral I A Sirohey, former Chairman, JCOS of Pakistan. General Aslam Beg, former Army Chief of Staff and General Hamid Gul, former DG ISI, also briefed us extensively on military affairs. These three, along with our companions, BG’s Raja and Ali, are the primary experts on regional military affairs and the Taliban.
We also want to thank Tarik Jan of the ISSI for his kind assistance. I am leaving out two dozen names, some out of kindness. Many political leaders met with us who normally would never see Americans. We were treated with more than courtesy and kindness in some of the most unexpected places.
My close friends and personal advisors, Col. James Hanke, USA SF (ret) former Defense Attache to Israel and Fred Coward, former FBI counter-terrorism expert were a continual help. Their knowledge and extensive contacts in the region were vital.
The question, of course, what did we learn? Does anyone learn anything if weighed down by prejudiced, misconceptions or military and political theories based on flawed analyses or policies? Our job is simply to listen, learn and use our best judgment. Our responsibility is to be honest in our assessments. The findings in this work are entirely my own.
The root of the problems in the region are historical in nature. Unless you go back 200 years or more, something we aren’t doing here, nothing will make sense. The region, Af-Pak, is a creation, primarily of Britain’s, seemingly created out of a design to stimulate instability and conflict to enable “the great game” Britain is famous for to be played, one side against the other. In 1893, when Afghanistan and India/Pakistan were split by Durand, dividing tribes and even families, continual war was guaranteed. In 1947, when Pakistan was created out of a group of peoples, roughly “Islamic” but otherwise unrelated, we were guaranteed even more instability. Pakistan would be a combination of advanced culture, warlike tribes and resentful quasi-independent regions constantly at odds with their powerful neighbor, India.
The alliances that have defined the region, India and the Soviet Union, Pakistan and the United States (and China) and now, India and Israel and the United States(maybe Russia again and part of Afghanistan) and Pakistan and the United States (and China) have led to continual military buildups, including nuclear weapons and other advanced strategic technologies, all within a framework of acrimony and continual terrorism.
India, Israel, the United States, Afghanistan, China and Britain are all accused, on a daily basis, of coordinating terror attacks inside each country of the region, including Iran. Accusations of training and arming terrorist groups, numbered in the dozens, perhaps the hundreds, in each of the countries involved, Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan and India, are continually voiced. In the process, everyone denies involvement in the vast drug trade that has reemerged with the American occupation of Afghanistan and the vast network of corruption based primarily on what seems to be an American policy to stimulate waste.
Permanent war, in itself, has become the only business of the region, other than drug trafficking, with endless thousands of “contractors” from around the world flocking to the region to suck down the American dollars carelessly thrown at every imaginable perceived threat or ill, often with little or no consideration for end result or attempt at accounting.
This has brought American war planners to a number of disastrous conclusions about the area, ones that defy any historical or strategic model. The gutting of the intellectual capabilities of American policy planners during the Bush administration, based on an overlay of an Evangelical Christian model, applied, not only to the Pentagon but intelligence services, State Department and many key decision making environments has left the United States unable to process and respond properly to feedback. Thus, failed policies are replaced by untested experiments and short term fixes, none based on broad or sound analysis.
All advice comes from groups tied financially to the continuation of the war and even the destabilization of Pakistan. One major unseen actor is Israel, whose powerful lobby in Washington is capable of making policy for the region. Israel’s military alliance with India and extensive investment in the regions gas and oil industry is a major driver in, what has become a suicidal American effort. With Israel benefitting from billions in arms contracts with the United States and India along with becoming a defacto “super power” of the region by proxy, their “special interest” and unique ability to use their control of media, their massive influence over the electoral process in the US and their long relationship with the Pentagon, continual regional conflict may be a hidden agenda.
Current American policies in the region, both military and economic, seem to prove this out. All are doomed to eventual failure, seemingly purposely so and all are the result of reliance on advice from sectors profiting from war and destabilization, not only of the region, but of the United States itself. It is a unique possibility that the series of ill conceived wars begun under the Bush administration may eventually bring about the economic collapse of the United States as had happened to the Soviet Union some years before.
America claimed they came into Afghanistan seeking the terrorists who attacked on 9/11. This is blatantly dishonest. Osama bin Laden had been a guest of the Taliban for some time but had been put under severe restrictions by that group. There is no evidence any terrorist organizations were being run by Bin Laden in Afghanistan and current intelligence has proven, despite “media” coverage to the contrary, that bin Laden had no involvement in 9/11. Broad evidence exists that bin Laden died during the initial US attack in 2001. All intelligence and informed opinion leads to this conclusion causing both embarrassment and consternation when “press driven” demands for a continued hunt for bin Laden come from the United States.
Less publicly, the United States has long accepted the death of bin Laden yet has spent millions of dollars and hundreds of lives in a dishonest attempt to keep a “branded” big name terrorist in front of the public. This has caused a general distrust of the United States among its military allies who, universally, believe that the phony “hunt for bin Laden” is proof, not of a need to resurrect a phony “boogieman” for public consumption but rather to create an artificial “icon” to cover massive corruption and a history of failure.
At the outset, America’s approach in Afghanistan was flawed. Our dependence on the Northern Alliance, a group of warlords wishing to restore drug production, prohibited by the Taliban, to assist us led to establishing a regime in Kabul that was never accepted by the people of Afghanistan. President Karzai, not only notoriously corrupt and weak but closely allied to India, would make an unlikely leader in a war requiring continual coordination with Pakistan, a country nearly as distrustful of Karzai as his own people.
The decision by the US to support Karzai, even after a rigged election and to build an army and national police force primarily out of tribal minorities from the Northern Alliance who are hated by the majority of Afghanis has led to the need for the current increase in American presence and the stalled military operations in Helmand, the nation’s primary opium producing region since 2001. Current American plans to consider restructuring the massive national police force on regional ethnic lines is encouraging but doomed to failure.
Tribal traditions in Afghanistan are based on a system called Pashtunwali. All judicial and police functions reside within a long established tribal structure, one that functioned well prior to the Soviet occupation and one which could be restored. Replacing this with a “northern occupation” will only lead to continual warfare.
The economy of Afghanistan is almost entirely non-existent. Warring groups are living off American bribes, payments to allow supplies to pass unharmed to American forces or from taxes on the massive opium harvest. With the destruction of tribal cohesion under the Russian backed government and the mining of Afghanistan, the traditional yearly migrations of the large pastoral population within Afghanistan has stopped. This group, numbering as many as 15 million, are a recruiting ground for “gun culture.”
Replacing normal occupations, farming, husbandry or small industries is a vast number of fighters, many simple bandits and criminals but untold thousands fighting out of a belief they are opposing a foreign occupation. Discerning the difference between the two and restoring a traditional economy to replace warlord-ism, drug production and mercenary activities is the only way of bringing about stability. The cost of these programs, some of which the USAID is working on now, is low in comparison to military action.
However, too little is being done and, for every successful program, ten “boondoggle” programs are put in place, building useless projects with massive cost overruns and corruption.
American military planners are currently trying a variety of approaches, including working with the Afghan army, a vast mercenary group, primarlily of the northern tribes that is, on the whole, both unsupportable economically and totally helpless when used in any independent capacity. Afghanistan has a tradition of compulsory military service, a “people’s army” of lowly paid but highly motivated soldiers from ever area of the nation. These troops are paid as little as $5 per month but receive food subsidies for their families and extensive training in civilian trades as part of their service.
This successful system has been destroyed by the United States and the Karzai government, replaced with a “paid” professional army untrusted by any group within the country. Pakistan fears that this army will fall under Indian command and threaten their borders and, perhaps, rightly so. The model used is based on Blackwater, a private military contractor, not any national army. The new national army in Afghanistan is quite likely to work for any group capable of paying them. The nation of Afghanistan itself will never have that capability.
American efforts to occupy destabilized regions thru “civil affairs” operations used in Vietnam with some success can only function as they did in Vietnam, as part of a permanent occupation force which will be immediately replaced by an opposing “occupation force” of domestic fighters, the enemy, when Americans leave. In fact, Taliban units simply melt into the civilian population when confronted by American forces beyond their capability of defeating.
Only the foreign fighters in Afghanistan, those who came to fight and die, continue action against the US forces under unfavorable conditions. Others, trained in “irregualr warfare” from birth, simply wait out America’s resolve, exactly as had happened in Vietnam. Pentagon planners understand this, thus making our current efforts by cynical and deceitful.
WHEN ALL DISSENT IS QUELLED, IDIOTS RULE
America is unaware that most of the Taliban live in Pakistan. The total number of Taliban exceeds 50 million, a number America and Pakistan can never fight successfully nor do they need to. The vast majority of those the US considers enemy combatants can be rehabilitated, but not under programs currently being initiated by the United States. The idea of paying “fighters” or members of the “gun culture” to stop resisting is hardly a thoughtful strategy but it is the one the United States has chosen.
There are forces that need to be defeated and that could be defeated by an Afghan army, a traditional force based on compulsory service and fighting for a government with wide support among the tribes, a government Afghanistan currently doesn’t have.
Current military operations are likely to recruit more fighters against the United States and the unpopular Karzai government and, as things are going, eventually lead to a wider conflict in Pakistan and the economic destruction of that nation, a vital US ally. We are well along that road already and are more than well aware of it despite our protestations to the opposite and the total lack of media attention to any “reality based” assessment.
Economic development programs being enacted in Afghanistan are primarily based on supporting a corrupt culture and maintaining “cover” for the massive drug trade that powerful groups among all the players, Afghanistan, Israel, the United States, India and Pakistan, are growing immensely wealthy and powerful on. A restructuring of the economies on both sides of the Durand Line separating Pashtun regions of Afghanistan and Pakistan along lines suggested by Imran Khan and Jeff Gates and groups supporting Prince Ali Seraj may be the best solution.
Simple “grass roots” development built on supporting and expanding traditional industries while providing improved delivery of educational and health care services is a start. Only education of men and women can fight the cycle of extremism, broad public education delivered at village level within a social and economic environment supporting a traditional model. These plans exist, are inexpensive and have broad support among nearly all tribal leaders in Afghanistan and Pakistan. The only thing stopping their implementation is the current much more profitable and corrupt system that is creating a new ruling oligarchy based on American money and continual chaos.
They have always been there but real solutions have been opposed by those profiting off the war and the environment the war has created. Too many with too much money and power want the wars to continue for too many reasons, including long term geopolitical goals unfavorable to the United States and Pakistan. With a lack of strong leadership within the United States compounded by the disastrous policies of the Bush administration, US foreign policy will continue to be a “runaway train.”
The first step toward enacting known solutions would be getting real information to decision makers and keeping the American people properly informed. Currently, media in the United States is so heavily skewed toward misinformation and propaganda that political accountability has nearly disappeared. An systematically misinformed populace negates all concepts of democracy and representative government. There can be no accountability and no national policy as long as the mechanisms for disinformation that have taken control of America’s news media exist.
Defacto control of Americas media by foreign nations and a cabal of corporations tied to the war economy has ended effective public participation in American policy and decision making and, in the process, ended Congress’s ability to oversee policy. Grassroots movements in Afghanistan, while America remains the “prime mover” depend on restoration of similar authority in the United States.
A Petition Requesting the U.S. Congress to Stop Funding Additional Troops in Afghanistan.
Whereas, Congress has the responsibility to decide whether to go to war under Article I, Section 8; and
Whereas, it’s not up to the United States to be able to choose the government of other countries, and
Whereas, Congress has the responsibility to focus on conditions at home in America, addressing infrastructure, putting millions of Americans back to work, saving millions of people from foreclosure and helping 47 million people to receive health care; and
Whereas, Congress must acknowledge public sentiment in our communities, where people are desperate for jobs, trying to protect their wage levels, worried about their investments, their savings, their security; now therefore,
I STRONGLY URGE MEMBERS OF CONGRESS TO VOTE AGAINST ANY FUNDING FOR ADDITIONAL TROOPS IN AFGHANISTAN AND THAT CURRENT FUNDING BE REASSESSED AND REDIRECTED TO THE ECONOMIC NEEDS OF AMERICANS AT HOME.
The Empire will stop at nothing to find mechanisms and techniques to achieve its final objective, and we cannot disregard the possibility of a military conflict in the near future. If the US places Venezuela on the “terrorist list” this year, we could be on the verge of a regional war.
Latin America has suffered constant aggressions executed by Washington during the past two hundred years. Strategies and tactics of covert and overt warfare have been applied against different nations in the region, ranging from coup d’etats, assassinations, disappearances, torture, brutal dictatorships, atrocities, political persecution, economic sabotage, psychological operations, media warfare, biological warfare, subversion, counterinsurgency, paramiliary infiltration, diplomatic terrorism, blockades, electoral intervention to military invasions. Regardless of who’s in the White House – democrat or republican – when it comes to Latin America, the Empire’s policies remain the same.
In the twenty-first century, Venezuela has been one of the principle targets of these constant aggressions. Since the April 2002 coup, there has been a dangerous escalation in attacks and destabilization attempts against the Bolivarian Revolution. Although many fell beneath the seductive smile and poetic words of Barack Obama, it’s not necessary to look beyond the past year to see the intensification of Washington’s aggressions against Venezuela. The largest military expansion in history in the region – through the US occupation of Colombia – the reactivation of the Fourth Fleet of the US Navy, as well as an increased US military presence in the Caribbean, Panama and Central America throughout the past year, can be interpreted as preparation for a conflict scenario in the region.
Escalation in Aggressions
The hostile declarations from various Washington representatives during the past few weeks, accusing Venezuela of failure to combat narcotics operations, violating human rights, “not contributing to democracy and regional stability”, and of being the “regional anti-US leader”, form part of a coordinated campaign that seeks to justify a direct aggression against Venezuela. Soon, Washington will publish its annual list of “state sponsors of terrorism”, and if Venezuela is placed on the list this year, the region could be on the brink of an unprecedented military conflict.
Evidence seems to indicate a move in that direction. A US Air Force document justifying the need to increase military presence in Colombia affirmed that Washington is preparing for “expeditionary warfare” in South America.
The 2009 Air Force document, sent to Congress last May (but later modified in November after it was used to demonstrate the true intentions behind the military agreement between the US and Colombia), explained, ““Development of this CSL (Cooperative Security Location) will further the strategic partnership forged between the US and Colombia and is in the interest of both nations... A presence will also increase our capability to conduct Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance (ISR), improve global reach, support logistics requirements, improve partnerships, improve theater security cooperation and expand expeditionary warfare capability”.
On the Verge of War
The first official report outlining the defense and intelligence priorities of the Obama administration dedicated substantial attention to Venezuela. The Annual Threat Assessment of the US Intelligence Community – which has mentioned Venezuela in years past, but not nearly with the same emphasis and extension – particularly signaled out President Chavez as a major “threat” to US interests. “Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez has established himself as one of the US’s foremost international detractors, denouncing liberal democracy and market capitalism and opposing US policies and interests in the region”, said the intelligence document, placing Venezuela in the same category as Iran, North Korea and Al Qa’ida.
Days after the report was published, the State Department presented its 2011 budget to Congress. In addition to an increase in financing through USAID and the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) to fund opposition groups in Venezuela – more than $15 million USD – there was also a $48 million USD request for the Organization of American States (OAS) to “deploy special ‘democracy promoter’ teams to countries where democracy is under threat from the growing presence of alternative concepts such as the ‘participatory democracy’ promoted by Venezuela and Bolivia”.
One week later, the Inter-American Human Rights Commission of the OAS – funded by Washington – emitted a whopping 322-page report slamming Venezuela for human rights violations, repression of the press and undermining democracy. Despite the fact that it was a report – and a Commission – dedicated to the topic of human rights, the detailed study barely mentioned the immense achievements of the Chavez government in advancing human rights; advances which have been recognized and applauded over the past five years by the Unted Nations. The evidence used by the OAS to elaborate the report came from opposition testimonies and biased media outlets, a clear demonstration of dangerous subjectivity.
Simultaneous to these accusations, a Spanish court accused the Venezuelan government last week of supporting and collaborating with the FARC and ETA – organizations considered terrorist by both the US and Spain – provoking an international scandal. President Chavez reiterated that his government has absolutely no ties with any terrorist group in the world. “This is a government of peace”, declared Chavez, after explaining that the presence of ETA members in Venezuela is due to an agreement made over 20 years ago by the government of Carlos Andres Perez in order to aid Spain in a peace treaty with the Basque separatist group.
The Empire Has No Color
Last week, on tour in Latin America, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton couldn’t stop attacking Venezuela during her different declarations made before international media. She expressed her “great concern” for democracy and human rights in Venezuela, accusing President Chavez of not “contributing in a constructive manner” to regional progress. In a cynical tone, Clinton advised President Chavez to “look further south” for inspiration, instead of towards Cuba.
Clinton’s regional trip was part of a strategy announced by the Obama administration last year, to create a divide between the so-called “progressive left” and the “radical left” in Latin America. It’s no coincidence that her first tour of the region coincided with the announcement of a new Latin American and Caribbean Community of States, which excludes the presence of the US and Canada.
The Coming Conflict
A military conflict is not initiated from one day to the next. It’s a process that involves first influencing public perception and opinion – demonizing the target leader or government in order to justify aggression. Subsequently, armed forces are strategically deployed in the region in order to guarantee an effective military action. Tactics, such as subversion and counterinsurgency, are utilized in order to debilitate and destabilize the target nation from within, increasing its vulnerability and weakening its defenses.
This plan has been active against Venezuela for several years. The consolidation of regional unity and Latin American integration threatens US possibilities of regaining domination and control in the hemisphere. And the advances of the Bolivarian Revolution have impeded its “self-destruction”, provoked by internal subversion funded and directed by US agencies. However, the Empire will not cease its attempts to achieve its final objective, and a potential military conflict in the region remains on the horizon.