By Howard Nema
Could democracy be merely an illusion?
Have you have ever suspected that very powerful people have guided events throughout history for generations; and that these royal and noble families have created a system appearing to be democratic, but actually excludes ordinary citizens from decision-making and through ever increasing taxation, regulations and legislation, incrementally enslaves them in a system of benevolent despotism with generous helpings of circus and bread?
We see this with the 2016 Presidential Elections which is clearly a circus and is chock full of bread $$$.
We also see the influence of the Hidden Masters behind both the democratic and republican political machines that have each attacked and sought to destroy their own party members, namely Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump.
In Quigley’s work we discover that national constitutions are routinely undermined by the leaders who are elected to defend them.
We learn that “all social instruments tend to become institutions,” regardless of their benevolent origin, and, from that point forward, the institution is run for the benefit of those who control it (at the expense of its original purpose).
(We see this in the generational rise of socialism and government dependence.)
Quigley reveals that real power operates behind the scenes, in secrecy, and with little to fear from democratic elections.
He proves that conspiracies, secret societies, and small, powerful networks of individuals are not only real; they’re extremely effective at creating or destroying entire nations and shaping the world as a whole.
We learn that “representative government” is nothing less than a carefully managed con, like the Federal Reserve, the IRS and a litany of other collectivist tyrannies we must endure to feed the parasite elites and their insatiable quest for global domination.
Since these disturbing truths contradict nearly everything we have been taught to believe about our government, our education system, and the media, many dismiss these truths as nonsensical nut job conspiracy theories that only gullible fools would believe.
But Carroll Quigley was no conspiracy theorist or gullible fool. He was a prominent historian who specialized in studying the evolution of civilizations as well as secret societies.
Quigley taught at Princeton University, Harvard University, and the School of Foreign Service at Georgetown University. He worked as an advisor to the US Defense Department, the US Navy, and the Smithsonian Institution.
In short, Carroll Quigley was a well-connected member of Ivy League society. Based on his own words, and his training as a historian, it appears that he was chosen by members of a secret network to write the real history of their rise to power. However, as Quigley later realized, these individuals did not expect or intend for him to publish their secrets for the rest of the world to see.
In 1966 after 2 years of having unfettered access to the records and minutes of the Council on Foreign Relations and more than 20 years of being in the presence of their leaders and spheres of influence, Bill Clinton’s mentor, Jesuit professor at Georgetown University Carroll Quigley wrote Tragedy and Hope: A History Of The World In Our Time.
In this superb expose of the ruling elite and their plans for a one world system of financial and political control in private hands, Quigley intricately details the “Anglo-American Establishment and their collectivist corporate goal of unifying the United States and Great Britain in a socio-economic political system dominated by the Central Banks of the world.
Shortly after publishing Tragedy and Hope, “the Network” took action against and the book he’d spent twenty years researching and two years writing was pulled from the market.
As Quigley recounts:
“The original edition published by Macmillan in 1966 sold about 8800 copies and sales were picking up in 1968 when they “ran out of stock,” as they told me (but in 1974, when I went after them with a lawyer, they told me that they had destroyed the plates in 1968). They lied to me for six years, telling me that they would re-print when they got 2000 orders, which could never happen because they told anyone who asked that it was out of print and would not be reprinted. They denied this until I sent them Xerox copies of such replies to libraries, at which they told me it was a clerk’s error. In other words they lied to me but prevented me from regaining the publication rights by doing so. . .
[Rights revert back to the copyright holder if the book is out of print, but not if the book is simply out of stock.]
…Powerful influences in this country want me, or at least my work, suppressed.”
When reading the 1377 page Tragedy and Hope, you immediately realize that it wasn’t written for the casual reader. It is a long, tedious read of which 95 percent consists of basic economic, political, and diplomatic history. However, the other 5 percent contains some truly astonishing admissions about the existence, nature, and effectiveness of covert power.
As one would expect from an Ivy League historian, both Tragedy and Hope and The Anglo-American Establishment reveals the existence of a secret network that formed to bring “all the habitable portions of the world” under its control.
A college of corporations. In Tragedy and Hope, Quigley wrote:
“I know of the operations of this network because I have studied it for twenty years and was permitted for two years, in the early 1960’s, to examine its papers and secret records. I have no aversion to it or to most of its aims and have, for much of my life, been close to it and to many of its instruments. I have objected, both in the past and recently, to a few of its policies…but in general my chief difference of opinion is that it wishes to remain unknown, and I believe its role in history is significant enough to be known.”
Quigley exposes this wealthy “Anglophile network” that cooperates with any group that can help it achieve its goal.
(This includes Communists, which, on the surface, would seem to be the sworn enemy of super-wealthy capitalist conspirators.)
Quigley chronicles how the Network formed in the late 1800s in England and immediately began creating front groups. By 1919, it had formed the Royal Institute of International Affairs (also known as Chatham House), and it went on to create other extremely powerful institutes within “the chief British dominions and in the United States.” Hiding behind these front groups, the Network began secretly exercising its power.
In the United States the main institute was named the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), which Quigley described as “a front for J. P. Morgan and company.”
In short time, the Network expanded its operations; spreading like cancer into our universities, media, and especially government “foreign policy.”
On this basis, which was originally financial and goes back to George Peabody, there grew up in the twentieth century a power structure between London and New York which penetrated deeply into university life, the press, and the practice of foreign policy. In England, the center was the Round Table Group, while in the United States it was J. P. Morgan and Company or its local branches in Boston, Philadelphia, and Cleveland.
The American branch of this “English Establishment” exerted much of its influence through five American newspapers (The New York Times, New York Herald Tribune, Christian Science Monitor, the Washington Post, and the lamented Boston Evening Transcript). In fact, the editor of the Christian Science Monitor was the chief American correspondent (anonymously)…It might be mentioned that the existence of this Wall Street, Anglo-American axis is quite obvious once it is pointed out.
If the idea of powerful Wall Street insiders joining a secret foreign network to establish dominion over all “habitable portions of the world” and successfully penetrating “into university life, the press, and the practice of foreign policy” sounds like something you should have heard about, you’re right. But the secret to why you haven’t is contained in the story itself. (The successful “penetration” of universities, the press, and the government has proven quite useful to those who wish “to remain unknown.”)
The group behind this Great Work which Carroll Quigley calls, “The Network”, which has no official name is also known as the Milner Group, or Milner’s kindergarten.
They have worked for generations, centuries– to achieve this goal and to reach the stage of socio-political control we see today.
Their nameless, faceless dominant presence is obvious to all of us in inflation and dollar devaluation. We see it in rising food prices, commodities stagnant wages, rising unemployment, poverty and shrinking middle class.
Although most are aware of these effects of their influence, they are ignorant to the group, or their agenda.
Quigley agrees on most of the goals of this clandestine operation, but disagrees on the group’s omerta of absolute secrecy, believing the “cause” of the Milner’s is significant in world history and should be known.
Here are a few key quotes from Quigley’s
Tragedy And Hope:
“In 1891, Cecil Rhodes organized a secret society with members in a “Circle of Initiates” and an outer circle known as the “Association of Helpers” later organized as the Round Table organization. In 1909-1913, they organized semi-secret groups known as Round Table Groups in the chief British dependencies and the United States.
In 1919, they founded the Royal Institute of International Affairs. Similar Institutes of International Affairs were established in the chief British dominions and the United States where it is known as the Council on Foreign Relations. After 1925, the Institute of Pacific Relations was set up in twelve Pacific area countries. They were constantly harping on the lessons to be learned from the failure of the American Revolution and the success of the Canadian federation of 1867 and hoped to federate the various parts of the empire and then confederate the whole with the United Kingdom.
There does exist and has existed for a generation, an international Anglophile network which operates to some extent in the way the Radical Right believes the Communists act. In fact, this network, which we may identify as the Round Table Groups, has no aversion to cooperating with the Communists, or any other groups, and frequently does so. I know of the operations of this network because I have studied it for twenty years and was permitted for two years, in the early 1960s, to examine its papers and secret records. I have no aversion to it or to most of its aims and have, for much of my life, been close to it and to many of its instruments. I have objected, both in the past and recently, to a few of its policies but in general my chief difference of opinion is that it wishes to remain unknown, and I believe its role in history is significant enough to be known.
The powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent meetings and conferences. The apex of the systems was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world’s central banks which were themselves private corporations. Each central bank sought to dominate its government by its ability to control Treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country, and to influence cooperative politicians by subsequent economic rewards in the business world.”
The Institute of Pacific Relations (IPR)
Quigley provides many examples of Network infiltration and manipulation. For instance, on pages 132 and 953 of Tragedy and Hope, he exposes yet another “front group” called the Institute of Pacific Relations (IPR). Because the IPR provides priceless insight into the deceptive nature and true power of the Network, we’ll briefly cover it here. Let’s begin with the final report of a US Senate investigation of the IPR. It stated, in part:
The IPR has been considered by the American Communist Party and by Soviet officials as an instrument of Communist policy, propaganda and military intelligence. The IPR disseminated and sought to popularize false information including information originating from Soviet and Communist sources…The IPR was a vehicle used by the Communists to orient American far eastern policies toward Communist objectives.
To the average person, it sounds crazy to suggest that a network of super-wealthy capitalists is secretly conspiring to gain control of the world.
But it sounds even crazier to accuse these same super-wealthy capitalists of using their tremendous wealth and power to “popularize” a system of government (Communism) that would, in theory anyway, lead to the destruction of all their wealth and power.
Surely, if such an unbelievable story were true, the free press would have shouted it from the rooftops…right? Wrong. Let’s jump ahead for just a second and look at how Quigley described the Network-directed media cover up of the Senate investigation:
“It soon became clear that people of immense wealth would be unhappy if the investigation went too far and that the “most respected” newspapers in the country, closely allied with these men of wealth, would not get excited enough about any [revelations] to make the publicity worth while, in terms of votes or campaign contributions.
As this demonstrates, the Network fully understands the importance of controlling public opinion. This also provides a glimpse into how it can do so.”
(If a disturbing truth isn’t reported on by a “respected” news outlet, it might as well not exist. The vast majority of citizens will remain forever oblivious.)
Additionally, in this particular case, any senator that insisted on taking the investigation “too far” would surely face a smear campaign by the same press that was ignoring the IPR story.
Needless to say, this type of influence can drastically affect how much attention an issue receives in the media. The merit and importance of a story will often take a backseat to the wishes of those who have the power to keep it quiet. More importantly, similar tactics of control can be applied in other areas as well. Keep that in mind as you read the following short summary of the IPR’s activities, because the blueprint for directing perception and policies hasn’t changed.
In 1951 the Subcommittee on Internal Security of the Senate Judiciary Committee…sought to show that China had been lost to the Communists by the deliberate actions of a group of academic experts on the Far East and Communist fellow travelers whose work in that direction was controlled and coordinated by the Institute of Pacific Relations (IPR). The influence of the Communists in IPR is well established, but the patronage of Wall Street is less well known.
The headquarters of the IPR and of the American Council of IPR were both in New York and were closely associated on an interlocking basis. Each spent about $2.5 million dollars [nearly $30 million when adjusted for inflation] over the quarter-century from 1925 to 1950, of which about half, in each case, came from the Carnegie Foundation and the Rockefeller Foundation (which were themselves interlocking groups controlled by an alliance of Morgan and Rockefeller interests in Wall Street). Much of the rest…came from firms closely allied to these two Wall Street interests, such as Standard Oil, International Telephone and Telegraph, International General Electric, the National City Bank, and the Chase National Bank.”
On the Network’s influence over Far East Policy:
“There is considerable truth in the…contention that the American experts on China were organized into a single interlocking group which had a general consensus of a Leftish character.
It is also true that this group, from its control of funds, academic recommendations, and research or publication opportunities, could favor persons who accepted the established consensus and could injure, financially or in professional advancement, persons who did not accept it.
It is also true that the established group, by its influence on book reviewing in The New York Times, the Herald Tribune, the Saturday Review, a few magazines, including the “liberal weeklies,” and in the professional journals, could advance or hamper any specialist’s career.
It is also true that these things were done in the United States in regard to the Far East by the Institute of Pacific Relations, that this organization had been infiltrated by Communists, and by Communist sympathizers, and that much of this group’s influence arose from its access to and control over the flow of funds from financial foundations to scholarly activities.
Awards for work in the Far Eastern area required approval or recommendation from members of IPR. Moreover, access to publication and recommendations to academic positions in the handful of great American universities concerned with the Far East required similar sponsorship.
And, finally, there can be little doubt that consultant jobs on Far Eastern matters in the State Department or other government agencies were largely restricted to IPR-approved people. The individuals who published, who had money, found jobs, were consulted, and who were appointed intermittently to government missions were those who were tolerant of the IPR line.”
Amazingly, after admitting all of this, Quigley somehow concludes:
“The charges…accepted and proliferated by the neo-isolationists in the 1950’s and by the radical Right in the 1960’s, that China was “lost” because of this group, or that the members of this group were disloyal to the United States, or engaged in espionage, or were participants in a conscious plot, or that the whole group was controlled by Soviet agents or even by Communists, is not true.
In Quigley’s defense, the last part of his statement is obviously accurate: the group wasn’t controlled by “Soviet agents or even Communists.” Rather, according to Quigley himself, the group was controlled by a secret network of individuals who “have no aversion to cooperating with the Communists, or any other groups, and frequently does so.”
This is one of many cases where Quigley expresses a clear bias toward the Network and its “instruments.” Clearly, this bias clouds his judgment. For instance, he repeatedly describes the Network’s methodical deception of others, but apparently he never questions whether he too might have been deceived.
He describes the carnage of their “mistaken” policies, but their “good intentions” are always accepted without a second thought.
Combine this favorable bias with his open contempt for “the radical Right” and “neo-isolationists,” and poorly reasoned conclusions are nearly unavoidable.
His casual dismissal of the IPR’s role in the fate of China provides but one shining example. That Quigley can admit the IPR had tremendous financial and political power, a specific agenda, and actually achieved its goals, but then attribute the rise of Mao Zedong solely to the “incompetence and corruption” of Chiang Kai-shek’s regime is difficult to explain.
After the creation of the IPR in 1925, wouldn’t you know the civil war in China conveniently began? It seems the Network preferred a Communist regime in China. This is apparent in the following statement by Quigley:
“From the broadest point of view the situation was this: The rivalry between the two super-Powers [the United States and Soviet Union] could be balanced and its tensions reduced only by the coming into existence of another Great Power on the land mass of Eurasia. There were three possibilities of this: a federated and prosperous Western Europe, India, or China. The first was essential; one of the others was highly desirable; and possibly all three might be achievable, but in no case was it essential, or even desirable, for the new Great Power to be allied with the United States.
If the Soviet Union were boxed in by the allies of the United States, it would feel threatened by the United States, and would seek security by more intensive exploitation of its resources in a military direction, with a natural increase in world tension. If, on the other hand, the Soviet Union were boxed in by at least two great neutral Powers, it could be kept from extensive expansion by the initial strength of such great Powers and the possibility that these Powers would ally with the United States if the Soviet Union put pressure on them.”
The “Great Game” of playing one side off another, engaging in balance-of-power politics, is discussed many times throughout Quigley’s book. I’ve included the reference above only because it provides a potentially logical motive (at least logical in the Realpolitik sense of the word) for the Network’s policy toward China.
Now, returning to Quigley’s characterization of the IPR conspiracy and the subsequent lack of media coverage referenced earlier: As a result of continuing pressure, spurred on by the “radical Right,” the Network soon found itself the target of two Congressional investigations. Quigley describes the second of these investigations, the Reece Committee, this way:
“A congressional committee, following backward to their source the threads which led from admitted Communists like Whittaker Chambers, through Alger Hiss, and the Carnegie Endowment to Thomas Lamont and the Morgan Bank, fell into the whole complicated network of the interlocking tax-exempt foundations. The Eighty-third Congress in July 1953 set up a Special Committee to Investigate Tax-Exempt Foundations with Representative B. Carroll Reece, of Tennessee, as chairman.
It soon became clear that people of immense wealth would be unhappy if the investigation went too far and that the “most respected” newspapers in the country, closely allied with these men of wealth, would not get excited enough about any [revelations] to make the publicity worth while, in terms of votes or campaign contributions.
An interesting report showing the Left-wing associations of the interlocking nexus of tax-exempt foundations was issued in 1954 rather quietly. Four years later, the Reece committee’s general counsel, Rene A. Wormser, wrote a shocked, but not shocking, book on the subject called Foundations: Their Power and Influence.”
Quigley then closes this chapter on the Network with the following:
“The financial circles of London and those of the eastern United States…reflects one of the most powerful influences in the twentieth-century American and world history.
The two ends of this English-speaking axis have sometimes been called, perhaps facetiously, the English and American Establishments. There is, however, a considerable degree of truth behind the joke, a truth which reflects a very real power structure. It is this power structure which the Radical Right in the United States has been attacking for years in the belief that they are attacking the Communists.”
Again, as Quigley points out, the “power structure” that he exposed isn’t loyal to Communism, or Socialism, or Fascism, or capitalism. The Network is happy to exploit the rhetoric of any movement or ideology, prop up any dictator or tyrant, and support any economic or political model, provided it serves their one overarching aim.
That aim, to bring “all the habitable portions of the world under their control,” is as old as the lust for power itself. The death and suffering that their policies have already caused in pursuit of this aim are incalculable. Allowing them to continue as they have will only bring more of the same.
W. Cleon Skousen shines light on this in his book, The Naked Capitalist:
“As I see it, the great contribution which Dr. Carroll Quigley unintentionally made by writing Tragedy and Hope was to help the ordinary American realize the utter contempt which the network leaders have for ordinary people. Human beings are treated en masse as helpless puppets on an international chess board where giants of economic and political power subject them to wars, revolution, civil strife, confiscation, subversion, indoctrination, manipulation and deception.”
Skousen hit the nail on the head. Tragedy and Hope revealed something even more important than “one of the most powerful influences in the twentieth-century American and world history.” It inadvertently revealed the mind-set of those who wield such power. It exposed the astonishing arrogance and hypocrisy of those who feel they have the right to rule billions of other human beings.
If there is one goal for this book, it is to expose the attitude and inherent nature of those who seek to dominate others. Don’t worry about remembering all of the dates and names that have been listed. Don’t worry about trying to recall all of the specific events.
(All of that information will always be here if you need to find it again.)
Instead, make it a point to simply verify the following: there is no lie that these men and women will not tell.
There is no crime that they will not commit. The only measure of “right” and “wrong,” in their view, is whether their tactics succeed or fail.
The Network’s game is won by those who calculate properly, and moral considerations only impede accurate calculation.
Henry Kissinger personifies the essence of the Network accurate calculation mindset. In his book Diplomacy, he introduces his readers to the amoral concepts of raison d’état (translated as “reasons of state,” or state interests) and Realpolitik.
The basis of both concepts, Kissinger explains, that individual men can be judged negatively on moral grounds, but governments cannot. When it comes to government action, the only suitable judgment is based on whether or not the government achieves its ends.
Throughout his book, Kissinger praises those who are “wise enough” to govern by these concepts and practically mocks those who object on so-called “moral” grounds.
In praise of seventeenth-century French statesman, Cardinal de Richelieu, Kissinger writes:
“Though privately religious, [Richelieu] viewed his duties as minister in entirely secular terms. Salvation might be his personal objective, but to Richelieu, the statesman, it was irrelevant. “Man is immortal, his salvation is hereafter,” he once said. “The state has no immortality, its salvation is now or never.” In other words, states do not receive credit in any world for doing what is right; they are only rewarded for being strong enough to do what is necessary.
As the King’s First Minister, [Richelieu] subsumed both religion and morality to raison d’état, his guiding light.
Richelieu was indeed the manipulator described, and did use religion [as a tool of manipulation]. He would no doubt have replied that he had merely analyzed the world as it was, much as Machiavelli had. Like Machiavelli, he might well have preferred a world of more refined moral sensibilities, but he was convinced that history would judge his statesmanship by how well he had used the conditions and the factors he was given to work with.”
To clarify, according to statesman like Kissinger, the moral and legislative laws that limit the actions of ordinary men do not apply to a select few. To escape accountability, the ruling class needs only to invoke the name of the state.
This, of course, is the same position held by past rulers who justified theft, deceit, torture, slavery, and slaughter in the name of God.
The tactic has simply been modernized. Our new rulers have substituted “the state” for God. And conveniently for them, they are the state…and not just any state; they are the emerging, omnipotent, global state.
Though citizens have been conditioned to believe that their statesmen and government instruments are in place to serve them, nothing could be further from the truth. Both the instruments and statesmen are part of an institutional apparatus that exists for the benefit of those who control it.
Put another way: the state is nothing more than a collection of men and women who direct the resources and policies of government. Contrary to popular belief, it is an institution that exists for its own sake, to ensure its own “salvation,” and to prevent the rise of anything that might challenge its power.
This is a harsh reality, and some will surely object on the grounds that the modern state is different. After all, it is built on the consent of the people. Democratic elections enable citizens to vote for who their leaders will be. They can choose from Republicans or Democrats. They can throw either out of office if they break their campaign promises.
But what if our so-called representative government is all a carefully crafted illusion? What if the Network chooses the candidates that we get to vote for? What if the Network’s “experts,” not the figureheads placed in official positions of power, are the ones who ultimately determine government policy? What if both political parties, right and left, are controlled by the exact same people? Quigley shines some light on this topic as well:
The argument that the two parties should represent opposed ideals and policies, one, perhaps, of the Right and the other of the Left, is a foolish idea acceptable only to doctrinaire and academic thinkers. Instead, the two parties should be almost identical, so that the American people can “throw the rascals out” at any election without leading to any profound or extensive shifts in policy.
Quigley goes even further when describing the system that’s now emerging:
“It is increasingly clear that, in the twentieth century, the expert will replace…the democratic voter in control of the political system…Hopefully, the elements of choice and freedom may survive for the ordinary individual in that he may be free to make a choice between two opposing political groups (even if these groups have little policy choice within the parameters of policy established by the experts)…in general, his freedom and choice will be controlled within very narrow alternatives.”
Does that statement alarm you? Let’s hope so.
Quigley’s work highlights how a small group of dominant men were able to secure control of local, national, continental, and even global policy to the point of control we see today. We blame politicians for all of societies ills, when these hidden masters are behind most of the mayhem in the world.
“Though the power of this network is not complete, they are moving inexorably in that direction. Without increased awareness (and resistance), their unelected and unaccountable global state will become a reality. And though the illusion of national sovereignty might be maintained, the freedom of the world’s citizens will be controlled within very narrow alternatives.
Real power is unelected. Politicians change, but the power structure does not. The Network operates behind the scenes, for its own benefit, without ever consulting those who are affected by its decisions.
The Network is composed of individuals who prefer anonymity. They are satisfied to possess the reality rather than the appearance of power.
This approach of secretly exercising power is common throughout history because it protects the conspirators from the consequences of their actions.
A primary tactic for directing public opinion and government policy is to place willing servants in leadership positions of trusted institutions (media, universities, government, foundations, etc.).
If there is ever a major backlash against a given policy, the servant can be replaced. This leaves both the institution and the individuals who actually direct its power unharmed.
Historically, those who establish sophisticated systems of domination are not only highly intelligent; they are supremely deceptive and ruthless. They completely ignore the ethical barriers that govern a normal human being’s behavior. They do not believe that the moral and legislative laws, which others are expected to abide by, apply to them. This gives them an enormous advantage over the masses that cannot easily imagine their mind-set.
Advances in technology have enabled modern rulers to dominate larger and larger areas of the globe. As a result, the substance of national sovereignty has already been destroyed, and whatever remains of its shell is being dismantled as quickly as possible. The new system they’re building (which they themselves refer to as a New World Order), will trade the existing illusion of democratically directed government for their long-sought, expert-directed, authoritarian technocracy.”
To be sure, it’s difficult to accept these statements upon first hearing them. They challenge our world view and force us to reconsider everything that we’ve been taught to believe. It’s much easier to dismiss these facts without further investigation; it’s easier to accept comforting lies that alleviate our anxieties.
But this, of course, is exactly the opposite of what must be done. If we allow ourselves to be manipulated, we empower the Network at our own expense.
Edward Bernays, perhaps more than anyone, helped establish the modern system of public manipulation. Drawing on the psychoanalytical techniques of his uncle, Sigmund Freud, Bernays became known as the father of propaganda. His low opinion of the masses is best expressed in his own words. The following quotes are taken from his book Propaganda:
“No serious sociologist any longer believes that the voice of the people expresses any divine or specially wise and lofty idea. The voice of the people expresses the mind of the people, and that mind is made up for it by the group leaders…and by those persons who understand the manipulation of public opinion.
If we understand the mechanism and motives of the group mind, is it not possible to control and regiment the masses according to our will without their knowing about it?”
The fact is, we are dominated by a small cabal that understand the mental processes of the masses and psychological manipulation more almost any of us.
It is they who pull the strings of the puppets we elect. Puppets who are guided to control the public mind and contrive new ways to forward the Great Work and guide the world into the New World Order.
Political campaigns today are circus and bread. Lots of bread $$$$
A presidential candidate may be drafted due to popular demand,” but his or her future is really decided by the so called society of experts, a half dozen men, hidden in the shadows of luxurious secrecy.
The conscious manipulation of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country.
Bertrand Russell describes the global “society of experts:
“The society of experts will control propaganda and education. It will teach loyalty to the world government, and make nationalism high treason. The government, being an oligarchy, will instill submissiveness into the great bulk of the population…It is possible that it may invent ingenious ways of concealing its own power, leaving the forms of democracy intact, and allowing the plutocrats or politicians to imagine that they are cleverly controlling these forms…whatever the outward forms may be, all real power will come to be concentrated in the hands of those who understand the art of scientific manipulation.”
In 1974 after his legal battle against his publisher failed, Carroll Quigley said:
“I am now quite sure that ‘Tragedy and Hope’ was suppressed although I do not know why or by whom.”
I do. And now so do you. They are the elusive hidden masters of the Network who, by concealing its own power seek to dominate our world. They are the puppet masters holding the strings of Our political leaders and using mass media to influence public opinion by any and all means necessary to attain their goal.
Purveyors of the democratic illusion assure us that sophisticated conspiracies and powerful secret societies are figments of Our imaginations, given to right wing extremism and religious fanaticism.
But as you have learned, there does indeed exist a hidden hand guiding the course of history. We must awaken others to this reality. Until a critical mass of understanding is reached, humanity will remain enslaved and the elite sociopaths operating behind the scenes will never be held accountable for their treasonous crimes.
Sources and related material:
Tragedy and Hope by Carroll Quigley:
The Anglo-American Establishment by Carroll Quigley:
Weapons Systems And Political Stability by Carroll Quigley:
The Evolution Of Civilizations by Carroll Quigley:
Propaganda by Edward Burnays:
Public Opinion by Walter Lippmann:
Diplomacy by Henry Kissinger:
The Final Days by Carl Bernstein and Bob Woodward:
The Foundations: Their Power and Influence by Rene A. Wormser:
The Naked Capitalist by W. Cleon Skousen:
Norman Dodd interview by G. Edward Griffin regarding the 1953 Reese Committee (1982):
Network (1976) FULL MOVIE:
Morals And Dogma by Albert Pike:
A.C. De La Rive, La Femme et l’Enfants Dans La Franc – maconnerie universelle
(English Translation) :
Protocols of the Elders of Zion (Sion) :
Proofs of A Conspiracy by John Robison (1797):
Feel free to share and download this FAIR USE content.
Do the research.
Find your own truth.
There is only one truth.
Seek and you will find it.
In the end all we have is memories.
What will our memories of today be tomorrow?
Some things to think on until next time.
TRUTH TALK NEWS
“Where truth the mainstream media ignores is the top story!”
All information reported on TRUTH TALK NEWS and HowardNema.com is sourced and verifiable.
USE THE GREEN SEARCH ENGINE AT THE TOP RIGHT TO PERUSE TOPICS FROM THE ABUNDANCE OF LINKS, BOOKS, VIDEOS, ARTICLES, CONGRESSIONAL RECORDS AND OTHER RELATED INFORMATION AVAILABLE ON THIS SITE.
SUBSCRIBE TO THE NEW TRUTH TALK NEWS CHANNEL 2
ADDITIONAL TRUTH TALK NEWS SITES:
If you seek truth and want to help restore Our Constitutional Republic as intended please subscribe and share the valuable information contained on this site. Thank you for your continued support.
All content on TRUTH TALK NEWS and HowardNema.com are for the purposes of FAIR USE. All content herein can be used by anyone in accordance with U.S. Copyright law.
FAIR USE NOTICE: Some content displayed on this video/site may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. This material has been made available in our efforts to advance understanding political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. constituting a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, all the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes