I want to take you back to 2007, politics did not permeate popular media as is so today. People thought Bush was an idiot who started a bunch of dumb wars, but not much else was part of a popular social discussion of politics. However, the internet had been slowly incubating the 9/11 false flag believers, the Da Vinci Code book and movie exploded in popularity, and the old shitty video sharing sites were being swept away by the tidal wave known as youtube. This all culminated in the first political video I ever watched/liked on youtube:
Besides this I watched basically no political content on youtube until 2012 when everything exploded. Its a pretty fun video, very much tailored to the masses but Im glad it was because it was probably hard to keep my attention back then.
THE ILLUMINATI
Hey Luigi, thanks! You always have an eye/ear for quality material.
Circa 2007 was a GREAT time for political discussion and info, maybe even the golden age of conspiracy research... we were fresh on the heels of the 911 false flag and the subsequent invasion/reshaping of the middle east via war crimes, and were putting a helluvalot of info together and connecting a ton of dots. New lines of research and discovery were being uploaded every day and progress was fast. Lots of great sites, forums, videos posted all the time that were blowing people's minds. It was like Neo had woken up the Matrix, lol.
Several members at this forum I know were there, were part of it. Exciting times.
Unfortunately the disinfo started getting thicker and thicker, and the community started getting divided and lost in the expansion of crap on the net. Today even the mainstream have heard all the stories but are bored of it and it's served on a plate of shit with a side of propaganda, rather than straight good clean healthy home cooked meals.
But under all that crap the truth is still there to be found. Hopefully some people will still find value in pursuing it, and resisting the false narratives being pushed everywhere. Anyone who says 911 is boring/old news/irrelevant for example is just wrong, lol
Keep up the good fight, I will check this vid for sure the coming work days.
Circa 2007 was a GREAT time for political discussion and info, maybe even the golden age of conspiracy research... we were fresh on the heels of the 911 false flag and the subsequent invasion/reshaping of the middle east via war crimes, and were putting a helluvalot of info together and connecting a ton of dots. New lines of research and discovery were being uploaded every day and progress was fast. Lots of great sites, forums, videos posted all the time that were blowing people's minds. It was like Neo had woken up the Matrix, lol.
Several members at this forum I know were there, were part of it. Exciting times.
Unfortunately the disinfo started getting thicker and thicker, and the community started getting divided and lost in the expansion of crap on the net. Today even the mainstream have heard all the stories but are bored of it and it's served on a plate of shit with a side of propaganda, rather than straight good clean healthy home cooked meals.
But under all that crap the truth is still there to be found. Hopefully some people will still find value in pursuing it, and resisting the false narratives being pushed everywhere. Anyone who says 911 is boring/old news/irrelevant for example is just wrong, lol
Keep up the good fight, I will check this vid for sure the coming work days.
It would be interesting to hear the perspective of someone who was deep into it over time and how things developed, good stories, etc. When I got into it I remember people were talking about how overexposure to radio towers and cell phones waves increase the risk of cancer which has not only been vindicated but I think is basically common knowledge now. Also pretty much every confirmed false flag ever was at one time just a conspiracy theory, BPS compiled a list of them in a recent video and there was a ton. There was also a lot of BS, but I think most fell somewhere in the middle. E.g. I remember being freaked out by chem trails back then and that's one that has some basis in truth(cloud seeding) but gets over embellished.
The funny thing is that the more I research history the more I realize that 90% of the details get left out of history class and the standard textbooks. I think it will always be important to have critical eyes examining the small details that most people are intent to ignore.
The funny thing is that the more I research history the more I realize that 90% of the details get left out of history class and the standard textbooks. I think it will always be important to have critical eyes examining the small details that most people are intent to ignore.
- Canuckster
- Posts: 6744
- Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 5:24 pm
- Reputation: 3081
People say they all want the truth, but when they are confronted with a truth that disagrees with them, they balk at it as if it were an unwanted zombie apocalypse come to destroy civilization.
Luigi wrote:It would be interesting to hear the perspective of someone who was deep into it over time and how things developed, good stories, etc. When I got into it I remember people were talking about how overexposure to radio towers and o phones waves increase the risk of cancer which has not only been vindicated but I think is basically common knowledge now. Also pretty much every confirmed false flag ever was at one time just a conspiracy theory, BPS compiled a list of them in a recent video and there was a ton. There was also a lot of BS, but I think most fell somewhere in the middle. E.g. I remember being freaked out by chem trails back then and that's one that has some basis in truth(cloud seeding) but gets over embellished.
The funny thing is that the more I research history the more I realize that 90% of the details get left out of history class and the standard textbooks. I think it will always be important to have critical eyes examining the small details that most people are intent to ignore.
I've been following and researching this sort of thing since day one of 911. Went pretty hardcore for a good many years trying to bring the puzzle into the best focus I could. My job is perfect for such conspiracy hunting as I could listen to documentaries, lectures, podcasts, debates etc for hours and hours every day for years. Took some breaks, lately especially I'm much more focussed on real life and what to do with it in spite of such knowledge...
You are so right to point out how many things we got ridiculed for as crazy conspiracy theorists that turned out to be true, lol "Oh, shit. Well I guess they were right again," lol Yet somehow, even when faced with such realities, it seems the majority of the public still can't put 2 + 2 together and start figuring out how they all lead to a bigger picture. They all know about easy shit like Iraq lies, NSA, and Monsanto lobby groups etc, but STILL when you try to get them to see how power exists higher than visible politics they cringe and ridicule again and turn away. Nope not ready to accept that yet. They still follow their MSM, go to the movies without filters, show up at the voting booths with hope, and swallow their daily blue pills "Muh DeMOCKracy!" lol
Cool you mention about history, as lately I've been way more concerned with the concept that our history has been fucked with than continuing to track the daily activities of the elites today. I'm starting to think that the very elites of today are only able to be doing what they are doing because of the fuckery that's been played on us over the last century in terms of propaganda and the lies of war. I'm starting to see WWI and WWII in a whole new light and how the history really was totally written by the winners and its really blowing my mind. Not just from a historical point of view but as the cornerstones to where we are today, and how this illusion society we live in was created in the first place. We are living in the construct of the winners (and I suspect the creators) of that war. Its much nicer to believe those winners were the good guys, but the more I see the more wicked they continue to appear. Then a lot of what goes on today starts to make more sense.
If you wanna go back further in history, that vid you posted starts with some info about Khazaria. That is some really interesting stuff when dropped into the timeline imo.
Masato wrote:Luigi wrote:
If you wanna go back further in history, that vid you posted starts with some info about Khazaria. That is some really interesting stuff when dropped into the timeline imo.
I am very interested in the older history of this stuff. Theres a lot Im not so sure of but also a lot that is verifiable and hiding in plain sight when you follow the bread crumbs. For anyone interested this is my theory on all of it: Everyone likes to look into the world war stuff, but the stage had to be set in such a specific way that it is closely linked with the previous eras. We know in the 1800s private financial interests were exerting a great deal of influence on politics. Ironically while it was an era of national romanticism it was also an era where intellectuals were experimenting with the seeds of internationalism. Marx was the obvious example but it was springing up in subtle ways across the West. The concept of America the melting pot nation was developed at this time.
So why was all this happening so suddenly? Just before the 1800s was the French revolution which inspired other moves away from monarchism in Europe. People look at this as all part of the birth of the age of enlightenment which all went so perfectly but in reality it was a social experiment which produced a lot of good but also had consequences. French intellectuals were the first to note and discuss the fact that their new political leaders were being rapidly encumbered by national debt, and unlike the autocratic monarchs could not break all the rules to set everything strait will the simple justification of might = right, or the divine right of kings.
I used to think this was the beginning until I found out that even mighty monarchs were being controlled with debt traps from loans with compounding interest rates. The Habsburgs for example were bankrupted despite controlling a massive empire complete with tons of silver mines. The reason this worked was because even a fairly learned person could see a loan with 6% interest rate and think its not so bad yet not realize that interest compounds because you have to pay interest on interest. So then you might think this started with late medieval monarchs, but I am seeing more evidence that this traces back to the power structure established with early medieval rulers. For example in 1066 when the Normans conquered England they didn't just come with swords and spears to enforce their power, they came in with bankers, priests, and a loyal network of landlords. The peasantry of early medieval Europe stood no chance against predatory loans, the former tribal social order of warrior upper class, farmer middle class, and slave underclass was replaced with feudalism, where basically everyone was a slave except the landlords and elites ruling society. The former animism and animism-Christianity hybrids were replaced with a well paid dedicated and dogmatic clergy of Roman Catholics directly linked to the papacy. This change did not go unopposed but when people rebelled it resulted in the genocide that came to be known as the Harrying of the North. The same model of control was rolled out wherever feudalism went. The fiercest resistors were the Lithuanians who time after time defeated their feudalist enemies in battle but were eventually given an offer they couldn't refuse when they were given control of all of Poland in exchange for integration into the Catholic feudal system. Keep in mind this is the same time of Khazaria, although any link to that nation has yet to be seen.
So the million dollar question is how exactly early medieval Frankish kings got in bed with these banks in the first place. To understand this you have to understand that the Frankish Kingdom was established in the ashes of the Roman Empire. While the Roman Empire was built on the imperial ideology which saw men loyal fighting for the glory of the imperium, having healthy large families, having an orderly society rooted in the Roman spiritual beliefs, and colonizing outlands, over time Roman society grew more wealthy and decadent. It also became more and more cosmopolitan with vast networks of roads and ships transporting people across the empire. Good times create weak men, and Romans were not having many children and their men didn't want to serve in the military. More and more foreign mercenaries were recruited into the Roman army, and all that was really holding everything together was that it was a huge established system where people were at least united in their common spiritual beliefs which were still Romanized and standardized. What had also happened at this time was that a vast trading network of merchants had been established across the Mediterranean region and also in Gaul, the Roman province which would become France.
A few centuries earlier a man named Yeshua Ben Yosef had created an apocalyptical universalist missionary sect of Judaism that would become known as Christianity. Paul of Tarsus, known to us now as Saint Paul, was a Jew and a Roman citizen who lived in Anatolia(modern Turkey). Paul took the narrative of Yeshua and crafted it in a way that it would be maximally popular among Greco-Romans and established many churches in the region to convert them. The Romans were portrayed in the best possible light and to de-emphasize the link to Judaism he intentionally portrayed them as an alien outgroup. Judas for example literally means Jew, while Pilate goes out of his way to try to help Jesus. Scholars often remark that in reading the Bible youre not reading the words of Jesus, youre reading the words of Paul. This tactic combined with the missionary activity proved rapidly successful. As Rome was facing its aforementioned problems, the Christians went from a quirky minority to a major problem, replacing those faithful to the old social order and actively subverting it. The last thing holding together the Roman empire was gone, and the strong Germanic tribes saw a giant universalist steak asking to be eaten.
Rome fell, and in its ashes stood Germanic warlords wishing to establish themselves as legitimate heirs to the wealth of the Romans. To do this we know they adopted the Roman administrative network and the Christian religion, but what also likely happened is they made deals with the economic powers in the regions. These were wealthy merchants with connections across the trade network of the Roman empire and in doing business with them they would have entered into a GoT style relation of powerful parties coming together to form a social order which would be able to establish itself, enforce itself, and become immensely profitable for those involved. This is the one piece of the story where I have yet to see the smoking gun, but I wouldn't be surprised if its out there. An alternative theory is that the initial Frankish rulers were reluctant to play ball, so a rival dynasty was propped up by financial parties to rival and replace them, resulting in the transition from the Merovingian to the Carolingian dynasty. This is supported by the fact that Charlemagne was the first to be declared Western Roman Emperor in over 300 years when Pope Leo III declared him as such in 800 AD. Such a deal with the devil seems like exactly what the Carolingians would do, and it really puts the massacre of Verden into perspective.
That's why Jesus wrecked up the money changers, lol
It used to be a lot more factors that determined empires, wars, how long a civilization could hold together, who overtook who, and why. Nations and cultures all jostling amongst the land, different religions competing and being manipulated etc... pure chaos.
But the 20th century has been the age of the Money Masters. No one has had control of wealth and world economy ever as since the Rothschild's banking schemes. Changed everything. You are right that in recent history, banks wielded way more power than kings or countries. This is the big trick that conventional history never seems to pay attention to. IMHO wars are not fought for any of the reasons we are told. They are the creations of the banking families, Rothchilds in particular imo, to shape and reorganize the world as they desire, to slowly gather the total wealth of the world and bring it under their image. This is really not hard to prove, just track the movements of their evolution and coincide them with world events. It's total lunacy that all the news and yapping about world events and geo politics that this element is so consistently removed from the discussion.
Don't even get me started with the pairing of this banking control with control of mass-media THAT is power, baby!
lol
I don't know much about economic control pre- French Revolution. You bring up some interesting chapters of history from this perspective. My research so far started at Waterloo, and the age of the Rothschilds.
This set of documentaries is absolutely great, I bet you'd love em Luigi. I've watched them like 5 times and still not completely soaked it in:
It used to be a lot more factors that determined empires, wars, how long a civilization could hold together, who overtook who, and why. Nations and cultures all jostling amongst the land, different religions competing and being manipulated etc... pure chaos.
But the 20th century has been the age of the Money Masters. No one has had control of wealth and world economy ever as since the Rothschild's banking schemes. Changed everything. You are right that in recent history, banks wielded way more power than kings or countries. This is the big trick that conventional history never seems to pay attention to. IMHO wars are not fought for any of the reasons we are told. They are the creations of the banking families, Rothchilds in particular imo, to shape and reorganize the world as they desire, to slowly gather the total wealth of the world and bring it under their image. This is really not hard to prove, just track the movements of their evolution and coincide them with world events. It's total lunacy that all the news and yapping about world events and geo politics that this element is so consistently removed from the discussion.
Don't even get me started with the pairing of this banking control with control of mass-media THAT is power, baby!
lol
I don't know much about economic control pre- French Revolution. You bring up some interesting chapters of history from this perspective. My research so far started at Waterloo, and the age of the Rothschilds.
This set of documentaries is absolutely great, I bet you'd love em Luigi. I've watched them like 5 times and still not completely soaked it in:
Creation of the Federal Reserve/Federal Reserve Act - Dec 1913
Kickoff to World War 1 - Jul 1914
How else could modern wars of such scale even be possible without the financing from such banks?
Also interesting is how many new Acts and Government departments were suddenly created in US, UK, even Canada that brought all kinds of major sections of the economy (and some new ones!) under total 'government' control. Even personal income taxes were begun for this purpose - sold to the people as a 'temporary wartime measure' but never ceased even when war was over, lol The people thought it was controlled by government, and therefore under the direction of democracy, but the truth was that they were all controlled VIA government but in fact it was the banks that were at the helm, directing government because government were so completely in debt and dependent on them forever to even function.
WWI specifically brought SO much power and control under a very small umbrella its unfathomable.
Listen to Smedley Butler.
Kickoff to World War 1 - Jul 1914
How else could modern wars of such scale even be possible without the financing from such banks?
Also interesting is how many new Acts and Government departments were suddenly created in US, UK, even Canada that brought all kinds of major sections of the economy (and some new ones!) under total 'government' control. Even personal income taxes were begun for this purpose - sold to the people as a 'temporary wartime measure' but never ceased even when war was over, lol The people thought it was controlled by government, and therefore under the direction of democracy, but the truth was that they were all controlled VIA government but in fact it was the banks that were at the helm, directing government because government were so completely in debt and dependent on them forever to even function.
WWI specifically brought SO much power and control under a very small umbrella its unfathomable.
Listen to Smedley Butler.
Return to “The Grand Chessboard”
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 46 guests