Let's Get Honest! Absolutely Uncommon Analysis of Family & Conciliation Courts' Operations, Practices, & History

Identify the Entities, Find the Funding, Talk Sense!

As Previously Published, “None Dare Call It Conspiracy.” That It’s Corporate and Foundation-Funded NONProfits Collaborating in Private, Closed-Door Sessions, Seeking to Test National Model “Solutions” for a Privately Determined Set of Problems, Hand-delivered to Legislators and/or Chief, Governor-Appointed Executives In the Public Interest and for Its Own Good, which Consistently, Increasingly, Resembles Tyranny (Fascism/Theocracy) is Just Coincidence. (Did I mention Tax-Exempt yet?)

with 2 comments

It’s not “Conspiracy” — the preferred term is  “Collaborations” (linked to Collaborations linked to Collaborations of Experts seeking, ever questing, for the Holy Grail  of a “Solution to End All Solutions.” 

Starting with the income tax (to redistribute wealth AWAY from the wealthy?), through “problem-solving courts,” and Faith-Based Offices.    The motive of all collaborators, without exception, is of course NOT to be questioned by menials (anyone receiving government services in any form and for any reason), OBVIOUSLY it’s because of innate generosity of the whole pack, and desire to end welfare as we knew it *poverty.

Did I read somewhere that the purpose of government is to protect families and end poverty, educate the young, eradicate disease, and run social science demonstrations upon the nation at its expense, discuss the results of these tests in publications most people will not read, and don’t understand is going to drive their futures and restrict their privileges (liberty)?   Because I sure have had a gutful of reading publications that indicate this is EXACTLY what too many seem to believe it is for.


Copyright © 1971 by Gary Allen with Larry Abraham  ISBN: 0899666612

This entire book seems to be available on-line, here

Having been a college instructor, a State Senator and now a Congressman I have had experience with real professionals at putting up smokescreens to cover up their own actions by trying to destroy the accuser. I hope that you will read the book carefully, draw your own conclusions and not accept the opinions of those who of necessity must attempt to discredit the book. Your future may depend upon it.


John G. Schmitz was not exactly portrayed as a nice guy, at least per Wikipedia here.  Also of note, it looks
like one of his sons working for Blackwater.  He fathered two children through an affair with one of his former college students, ending his political career; and didn’t support them.  After their mother died (1994) they went into the care of astrologer Jeanne Dixon.  When SHE died in 1997, they became wards of the state and went to an orphanage.   John Birch society, extreme conservative and so forth.
One of his legitimate daughters was convicted of having sex with one of HER students (except the student was 12 at the time)
later marrying him.
Apparently this man’s son Joseph E. Schmitz was referenced in my post yesterday, in re: “Opus Dei:  The Vatican/Pentagon Connection” by Frank Morales

One current Opus Dei member worth noting is Joseph E Schmitz. A former Pentagon inspector general, he became chief of operations for Blackwater Worldwide, the private security firm, back in 2005. While at the Pentagon, he’d been tasked with the job of overseeing all war contracts in Iraq and Afghanistan. His connection to war profiteers became well known. At least $2 trillion went “missing” from the Pentagon during his watch. Shortly after Schmitz exonerated his friends in the war industry, he announced that he was going to work for Blackwater, where he is today.

In a 2004 speech Schmitz said, “No American today should ever doubt that we hold ourselves accountable to the rule of law under God. Here lies the fundamental difference between us and the terrorists.” Aside from his membership in Opus Dei, Schmitz is also a member of the Sovereign Military Order of Malta, a Christian militia formed in the 11th century, before the first Crusades, with the mission of defending territories that the Crusaders had conquered from the Muslims. The Blackwater leadership apparently think they are following in that tradition.

Wikipedia on the son here:
Joseph Edward Schmitz (born on August 28, 1956 in Milwaukee, Wisconsin)[1] is an American lawyer, formerInspector Ge
neral of the Department of Defense and a former executive with Blackwater Worldwide, a private contractor providing security services to the U.S. State Department and the U.S. military.
Joseph Edward Schmitz is the son of the John G. Schmitz, former California State Senator, member of the U.S. House of Representatives, and U.S. Presidential candidate (1972). Schmitz attended Catholic schools as a child and Georgetown Preparatory School **  while his father served in Congress. He holds a Bachelor of Science (1978) from theUnited States Naval Academy in Annapolis, Maryland and a Juris Doctor (1986) from Stanford University. He was on the wrestling team at the Naval Academy.
Georgetown Preparatory:
Georgetown Preparatory School is an American Jesuit college preparatory school for grades 9 through 12. It is the oldest all boys school in the United States[3], and the only Jesuit boarding school in the country. It is located in the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Washington on 90 acres (360,000 m2) in the suburban community of North Bethesda in Montgomery County, Maryland, outside of the District of Columbia.
(this reminds me of former Gov. Keating of Oklahoma, who attended Cascia Hall Preparatory School (prior to Georgetown, the college), except that Georgetown Prep is Jesuit, and Cascia Hall based after the order of Augustine.  Both were all-boys (Cascia Hall, became co-ed and stopped being a boarding school in 1986, long after Gov. Keating was there….)…
Anyhow, as fascinating as all this is, and despite the biographical profile of the person who wrote an intro to this book, I believe its principles are relevant today.  They make sense and almost none of them make it into public dialogue, let alone electoral politics.
The Blackwater Connection is exceptionally disturbing as is my continuing evidence of Catholicism (specifically this Opus Dei) kind in US policies.

“The Knights of Malta are the militia of the Pope, and are sworn to total obedience by a blood oath which is taken extremely seriously and to the death. The Pope as the head of the Vatican is also the head of a foreign national power.”
-”Encyclopedia of Freemasonry and Its Kindred Sciences” by Albert G. Mackey 33rd degree Mason, published by the Masonic History Company, Chicago, New York, & London, 1925: (Volume One, pp. 392-95)

(Interesting book — see “The Goddess, the Grail and the Lodge,”  Alan Butler)  (not that all reviews were good — I did read the book — but, for example,
“He uses very solid archelogical and other evidence from the megalithic period in Britain and Ireland and into Egypt, Crete, Malta, et al to prove there is a thread in the fabric of history regarding goddess worship and its ultimate connections thereof to modern religious practice. But, this is NO novel. It is REALITY that spans across thousands of years with a clear thread running through the fabric of history which Mr. Butler refers to as “The Golden Thread”. The reader will learn of a select group of indivduals who have perpetuated this practice throughout the ages.”   AND . . . .

“Alan Butler demonstrates, in the most fascinating manner possible, how an original veneration for a Great Goddess, perhaps as much as 5,000 years ago, never stopped in Western Europe and beyond and he explains how the rise of Christianity tried hard to destroy the Goddess worshipers. But what is most convincing about Alan Butler’s investigation is that it shows, clearly and in an entertaining style, just how important Goddess worship has been and remains to the progress of the world in which we live.”)

Relevance?  Current religion’s (Catholic, Protestant, Muslim, etc.) utter hatred of women, and why is this religion so “masculine,” really, and why has it degenerated into essentially dominating the feminine — and particularly, the weak — in society?)  (Just a side-note, there…)


“The painful saga of modern Arab-Muslim history evokes the battles fought in Crusades of the 11th century – when the Knights of Malta began their operations as a Christian militia whose mission it was to defend the land conquered by the Crusaders.

These memories return violently to mind with the discovery of links between the so-called security firms in Iraq such as Blackwater have historic links with the Order of Malta. You cannot exaggerate it. The Order of Malta is a hidden government or the most mysterious government in the world.”
– Jordanian MP Jamal Muhammad Abidat, from an editorial in the United Arab Emirates daily Al-Bayan entitled “The Knights of Malta – more than a conspiracy”. Abidat describes the role played by the Knights of Malta during the Crusades, and that the Order is playing a similar role in the Middle East today, citing the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Successor to Fascist Dictator Francisco Franco and Knight of Malta, King Juan Carlos,

with Grand Master of the Sovereign Military Order of Malta, [“SMOM”]  Andrew Cardinal Bertie, 2000

((previously noted, Opus Dei’s connection — in origins — with “Carlists”)

Blackwater is more than just a “private army”, much more than just another capitalist war-profiteering business operation.

It is an army operating outside all laws, outside and above the US Constitution ** and yet is controlled by people within and outside our government whose allegiance is primarily to the foreign Vatican state. In other words, Blackwater is a religious army serving the Pope in Rome through the Order of Malta, which is itself considered under international law, as a sovereign entity with special diplomatic powers and privileges.

**from the “outside and above” link — so you know how relevant this is, from a 2007 Los Angeles Times . . . .

The Blackwater ‘hole

Neither Iraqi nor U.S. laws apply to its contractors, so a controversial shooting may go unpunished.

November 09, 2007

‘They can get away with murder” has been the cry of critics of hiring private companies such as Blackwater to provide security for the U.S. military and diplomats in Iraq and other war zones. Now it looks as though the critics may be right — and in the worst way.

Legal experts say the Blackwater contractors accused of killing 17 Iraqi civilians and wounding 24 others while guarding a State Department convoy in Baghdad in September cannot be prosecuted under either Iraqi or U.S. law — even if an FBI investigation validates the Iraqi view that the contractors opened fire unprovoked. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, quizzed by a congressional committee last month, agreed that “there is a lacuna in our law about this. And even though this particular case . . . has been referred to the Department of Justice for further action, we believe that there is a hole.” What Rice didn’t say was that the State Department has been aware of that “hole” for at least two years and has rejected Pentagon suggestions to plug it by making security contractors subject to military law

{{Back to the other link on Blackwater…}}

Like Blackwater, the Order of Malta is “untouchable” because it is at the heart of the elite aristocracy.

Knight of Malta Amschel Mayer Rothschild (1744–1812)

The Knights of Malta is not merely a “charitable organization”.

That’s just an elaborate front, as should become clear to you later. As the name Sovereign Military Order of Malta confirms, it is a military order based on the crusader Knights Hospitaller of Jerusalem and is interwoven with Freemasonry. Most people have never even heard of SMOM, much less that it is a part of Freemasonry. But that is the way the aristocratic elite like it.

One of the symbols of the military orders of the Vatican, the masonic double-headed eagle emblazoned with the Maltese cross, signifies omnipotent royal dominion over both East and West. The orb signifies temporal dominion over the globe of Earth, and the scepter signifies control over the spiritual and religious impulses of humanity.

This eagle symbol is used in the masonic rite of Memphis and Misraim, under which it reads, “Order Out of Chaos”, the Hegelian method of crisis creation. It is found on the seals of many European and Eurasian nation states including that of Russia, indicating direct Vatican control over those countries.

It symbolizes the desire of a predatory elite with virtually unlimited resources, to totally dominate the entire world under a New World Order global government system using secrecy, manipulation, coercion and terror with the ends justifying the means.

Double-Headed Eagle Symbol

The two-headed eagle emblem of the Byzantine Empire (Roman Empire) on a Red Shield was adopted in 1743 by the infamous goldsmith Amschel Moses Bauer.**((link gives a brief history of start of the Rothschild family))  He opened a coin shop in Frankfurt, Germany and hung above his door this Roman eagle on a red shield.

The shop became known as the “Red Shield firm”. The German word for ‘red shield’ is Rothschild. After this point, the Rothschilds became the bankers to kings and pontiffs alike, among the richest families in the world. Ever since, they have financed both sides of every major war and revolution using the Hegelian Dialectic to engineer society toward their New World Order.

Notable — the family taught their sons about money — financing and banking . . . . From the “redicecreations” link (though probably available plenty of other places on the web):
Amschel Bauer had a son, Meyer Amschel Bauer. At a very early age Mayer showed that he possessed immense intellectual ability, and his father spent much of his time teaching him everything he could about the money lending business and in the basic dynamics of finance.
Pause to note:  How few public schools in USA teach kids ANYTHING about it, how little politicians talk about the nuts and bolts of money to the public; rather they are constantly talking about “Job Creation” which to me is an oxymoron — and it’s not the business of government.  The business of governments (at least these days), is paying their debt to controlling bankers, and collecting taxes to do so, or (as cause arises) starting wars somewhere for financial reasons related to their ruling elite.    Ask me why Ron Paul almost never gets any MSM press, again?  He’s got actual skills (M.D.) and he’s the only candidate who squeaks out ANYTHING at this point, about the Federal Reserve.   Prolonged Silence . . . prolonged ignorance . . . .   The business of money is a SKILL, and it can be taught.  The history of it also needs to be taught.
To understand money, one needs some concept — at LEAST rudimentary — of basic math.  US Schools can barely teach that AND reading at the same time.

A few years after his father’s death in 1755, Mayer went to work in Hannover as a clerk, in a bank, owned by the Oppenheimers. While in the employ of the Oppenheimers, he was introduced to a General von Estorff for whom he ran errands. Meyer’s superior ability was quickly recognized and his advancement within the firm was swift. He was awarded a junior partnership. Von Estorff would later provide the yet-to-be formed House of Rothschild an entré into to the palace of Prince William.His success allowed him the means to return to Frankfurt and to purchase the business his father had established in 1743. The big Red Shield was still displayed over the door. Recognizing the true significance of the Red Shield (his father had adopted it as his emblem from the Red Flag which was the emblem of the revolutionary minded Jews in Eastern Europe), Mayer Amschel Bauer changed his name to Rothschild (red shield). It was at this point that the House of Rothschild came into being. Through his experience with the Oppenheimers, Meyer Rothschild learned that loaning money to governments and kings was much more profitable than loaning to private individuals. Not only were the loans bigger, but they were secured by the nation’s taxes. 

Five Sons, Five Arrows, Five Directions.

Meyer Rothschild had five sons, Amschel, Salomon, Nathan, Karl and Jakob. Meyer spent the rest of his life instructing them all in the secret techniques of money creation and manipulation. As they came of age, he sent them to the major capitals of Europe to open branch offices of the family banking business. Amschel, stayed in Frankfurt, Salomon was sent to Vienna. Nathan was sent to London. Karl went to Naples, and Jakob went to Paris.

 But, what about the church?   This next section I find interesting — a Catholic priest, on exposure to Jesuit teaching, became an atheist.  I don’t know what was done, but this was the result!
Meyer Rothschild began to realize that in order to attain the power necessary to influence and control the finances of the various monarchs in Europe, he would have to wrest this influence and power from the church, which would necessitate its destruction. To accomplish this, he enlisted the help of a Catholic priest, Adam Weishaupt, to assemble a secret Satanic order.
The point not being, do we believe in God, or Satan, or not — but what about people who do?  Or, who know how to use religion to broker power?  We are not running world banking systems, or governments.  But those who do have to deal with religion.  Always have.  Religious imagination can lead people to start a war, or to refrain from engaging in defense of others.    
Adam Weishaupt was born February 6, 1748 at Ingoldstadt, Bavaria. Weishaupt, born a Jew, was educated by the Jesuits who converted him to Catholicism. He purportedly developed an intense hatred for the Jesuits. Although he became a Catholic priest, his faith had been shaken by the Jesuits and he became an atheist.
And he read Voltaire:

It is believed that, as a result of Voltaire’s writings, Weishaupt formulated his ideas concerning the destruction of the Church. In 1775, when summoned by the House of Rothschild, he immediately defected and, at the behest of Meyer, began to organize the Illuminati. The 1st chapter of the order started in his home town of Ingolstadt.As the name implies, those individuals who are members of the Illuminati possess the ‘Light of Lucifer’. As far as they are concerned, only members of the human race who possess the ‘Light of Lucifer’ are truly enlightened and capable of governing. Denouncing God, Weishaupt and his followers considered themselves to be the cream of the intelligentsia – the only people with the mental capacity, the knowledge, the insight and understanding necessary to govern the world and bring it peace. Their avowed purpose and goal was the establishment of a “Novus Ordo Seclorum” – a New World Order, or One World Government.

And it’s at this point I’m going to stop the narrative, the backdrop, and again reiterate:  We are talking in both Opus Dei, apparently in the Knights of Malta, which is to also say Blackwater, and definitely in associates of the Bush family regime, a mentality in which, there are those intelligent enough to govern and formulate governments, and then there are those whose duty is to shut up and be managed.  I don’t think that matter is exactly up for debate — but if you want to, comments field is open.
The attitude (which I complained about yesterday, and recently — and in general — displayed by Ron Haskins et  al., shown by the creation of entities like MDRC (government/corporate/foundation — which is to say, tax-exempt for the latter, tax-collecting for the former, and hiring workers which produce tax income for the middle, get it?  Govt/Corporate (produce jobs, workers wages are taxed), foundation (does not pay taxes, accumulates and distributes wealth,e tc.) —   they have what I call a “bad attitude.”  supercilious, proud, arrogant, DETACHED, and full of assumptions about human nature, chief of which is, it needs an overlord, and, somehow, “WE” are qualified.
They got this attitude from their position in life, which is who they are connected to, and who is buttering their bread, in exchange for TALKING and WRITING.
Also the fact that there is no conscience about conducting these conservations and conferences without input from the people whose lives are going to be changed as a result of them.   That’s taxation without ANY representation.  This attitude affects society, negatively.

fast forwarding some more (from “redice creations”) to remind us about the creation of the Federal Reserve — due to an engineered crisis, which precedes most centralization:

Just a passing mention to Benjamin Franklin’s OPPOSITION to centralized banking, which he’d apparently witnessed in London:

After the Bolshevik Revolution and the wholesale murder of the entire Russian royal family, Standard Oil of New Jersey brought 50% of the huge Caucasus oil field even though the property had theoretically been nationalized. In 1927, Standard Oil of New York built a refinery in Russia. Then Standard Oil concluded a deal to market Soviet Oil in Europe and floated a loan of $75 million to the Bolsheviks. Jacob Schiff and Paul Warburg at the Kuhn Loeb Bank started a campaign for a central bank in the United States. They then helped the Rothschild’s to manipulate the financial Panic of 1907.

Then, the panic of 1907 was used as an argument for having a central bank to prevent such occurrences. Paul Warburg told the Banking and Currency Committee: ‘Let us have a national clearing house’.”

The Federal Reserve Act was the brainchild of Baron Alfred Rothschild of London. The final version of the Act was decided on at a secret meeting at Jekyll Island Georgia, owned by J.P. Morgan. Present at the meeting were; A. Piatt Andrew, Assistant secretary of the Treasury, Senator Nelson Aldrich, Frank Vanderlip, President of Kuhn Loeb and Co., Henry Davidson, Senior Partner of J.P. Morgan Bank, Charles Norton, President of Morgan’s First National of New York, Paul Warburg, Partner in Khun Loeb and Co. and Benjamin Strong, President of Morgan’s Bankers Trust Co.

Jekyll Island, Georgia, USA
A Talk by G. Edward Griffin Author of The Creature from Jekyll Island
The Federal Reserve Act of 1913, brought about the decimation of the U.S. Constitution and was the determining act of the international financiers in consolidating financial power in the United States. Pierre Jay, Initiated into the “Order of Skull and Bones” in 1892, became the first Chairman of the New York Federal Reserve Bank. A dozen members of the Federal Reserve can be linked to the same “Order

To be a little more balanced (?), here’s a site (found by searching Weishaupt) explaining things a little differently — but note, it talks about Gnosticism and calls Judaism, Christianity and Islam ‘Satanic’ religions:


How did it come about that a revolutionary movement committed to the overthrow of corrupt European monarchies and privileged elites became, via the propaganda of its enemies, the very embodiment of everything it opposed? The Illuminati, through several historical epochs, have striven to overthrow the super rich and super powerful, and they have suffered savage persecution as a consequence. So how can they be confused with the puppetmasters who stand behind these tyrants of privilege and power? It’s absurd. Any person who knows anything of the history of the Illuminati should be able to see that their aims are incompatible with the aims commonly attributed to them by many anti-NWO conspiracy theorists.

Below we provide a Q&A list to address many of the myths surrounding the Illuminati’s most notorious Grand Master – Adam Weishaupt, and the Illuminati in general.

Quoting a long section here:  (“AW” stands for Adam Weishaupt)

Q. Did AW reject Catholicism and the Jesuits?
A. Yes. He became a Gnostic and therefore an enemy of the Satanic religions of Judaism, Christianity and Islam. He was content to be described as a deist rather than a theist. Anyone who understands Gnosticism will see why this should be so.

Q. Was AW influenced by the European Enlightenment?
A. Yes. He was a radical freethinker, but he did not go down the atheist/agnostic path as so many other leading thinkers did. He wanted to bring the light of knowledge/gnosis to those in the dark thrall of Satan.

Q. Was the Illuminati part of Freemasonry?
A. No. Freemasonry was a creation of the Illuminati, though it then evolved undesirably (paradoxically due to its success in America where all the main figures involved in the American Revolution were Masons) and eventually became everything the Illuminati opposed i.e. Freemasonry was corrupted and transformed itself into the very oppressive establishment it once resisted. (The vast majority of members of the Old World Order today are senior Freemasons.) The Illuminati did not travel the same path as the Masons. They remained true, steadfast and untarnished, although they have never subsequently been able to shake off their connection to Freemasonry in the eyes of the unenlightened and ill-informed. The Freemasons, as a creation of the Illuminati, are not party to any secrets unknown to the Illuminati, and were duped by the Illuminati to protect the Illuminati’s core secrets – as will be discussed in another section.

Q. Did AW and the Illuminati believe in perfecting human nature?
A. Yes. (As far as possible within the framework provided by Gnosticism.)

Q. Was the Illuminati linked to the Alchemists, the Cathars, and the Knights Templar?
A. Yes. They were all Gnostic, and the Illuminati stood behind all of them.

Q. Did the Illuminati believe in the abolition of religion?
A. No. Only in the abolition of Satanic religions that enslaved and damned people (such as Judaism, Christianity and Islam.) It is true that many members of the Illuminati went under the guise of orthodox Christians to avoid the penalties associated with heresy.

Q. Did the Illuminati believe in the abolition of government?
A. No. Only in the abolition of oppressive governments such as those of monarchs, aristocrats, and privileged elites. They opposed Communism for the same reason.

Q. Did the Illuminati believe that they should rule the world?
A. No. They wished to create a New World Order in which everyone would have the chance to go as far in life as their talents warranted. At that stage, there would be no further need of the Illuminati. The purpose of the Illuminati was to free and educate people as far as possible. A society composed entirely of free, well-educated and talented individuals would result in an emergent society from which a new, higher type of humanity would emerge. Throughout history, most people have been neither free nor educated, and the human race has remained enslaved.

Q. Are the Illuminati linked to a Masonic elite in the present day?
A. No. The Illuminati have repudiated Freemasonry and now rank it alongside the Satanic religions. Most Freemasons are Protestant Christians: anathema to the Illuminati. (The Illuminati are enemies of all forms of Satanic Christianity. Catholicism was their great enemy historically, but Protestantism now spawns the greatest opposition to the Illuminati.)

Q. Do the Illuminati believe in a free, just, noble and unified world?
A. Yes, that is their ultimate vision, though they believe it would take many steps to get there. They believe that nationalism, patriotism, separation, isolationism, different languages, different cultures, different religions, all inevitably lead to division, suspicion, fear and, finally, conflict. Humanity should emphasise what unites it rather than what divides it. A New World Order with a single world language and a single economy where there are no boundaries and no barriers best symbolizes this new state of being

Note:  Bible talks about the Tower of Babel and is opposed to this, i.e., the metaphor of confounding languages so that men wouldn’t again try to build a tower to heaven, etc ….

What comes next is telling:

Q. Do the Illuminati believe in the abolition of private property?
A. No. But they are opposed to excessive ownership of private property. They believe in a fair share for everyone. When one person gains more than his fair share, he is depriving another of his. You end up with a few families owning much of the land and wealth of a nation, thus placing massive power in their hands and outside the hands of the people. This cannot be tolerated. It is the basis of unfairness, inequality and injustice in society.

Q. Do the Illuminati believe in the abolition of the family?
A. No. But they do advocate much higher government involvement in the lives of failing families in order to save those families from themselves and stop them becoming a burden to other members of the community. All families are ultimately interdependent: a failing family affects all the families around it. Therefore government must intervene decisively to stop one bad apple spoiling the barrel, which is what happens too often in contemporary society. A huge underclass of failed families exists which sucks up taxpayers’ money and requires an extremely costly police force to keep it in order, an extremely costly criminal justice system, an extremely costly prison system, and an extremely costly welfare and social care system. These are huge costs that are never recovered. Failed families are a constant drain on the rest of society. Therefore, government must act before the failure of a family becomes cast in stone and irretrievable. No family has the right, in the name of personal freedom, to become a burden to other families.

OK, RIGHT THERE is where I make note of the (current and recent US Administration’s) ongoing assumption that we actually have a “meritocracy” right now — and that government is wise or capable enough to direct the lives of families.  We can see (taggs.hhs.gov and incorporation records) that the Federal Designer Family is a medicine worse than the disease, and is being used to further impoverish families, blaming them for being impoverished.  It is one of the most evil creations, a “conduit” theory, a “training theory” and so forth, I can think of.  

Then again, this is the female perspective after having had identity dismantled within a family, for having had a personal intellectual life before and during it — and then again afterwards, for failling to have blended well enough into a family, and continuing to have and act on a personal, moral, intellectual and professional life based on choice, and assessment of the situations.    Based on my existence as a free-will individual, within societal restraints against criminal behavior.

This also assumes that the familial failure has nothing to do with prior or current government policies!  In short, it indicates, “NOT” equal under the law.

The paragraph shows the “us/them” mentality in operation, and as such, I am opposed.   Families consist of people.  People do not ONLY exist in (functional, economic unit, etc.) families — nor should they be forced to.  It’s a force for good or evil, and seems to me, about 50% which way any particular family (rich or poor) might go.

Q. Did AW believe that the world would be improved if “every man were placed in the office for which he was fitted by nature and a proper education.”
A. Yes. This is a good definition of meritocracy.

Q. Do the Illuminati believe in democracy?
A. No. They believe in meritocracy where the vote is granted to those who have demonstrated that they can think meaningfully and productively about the issues of the day. No one should get an automatic right to a vote simply by living long enough to reach their 16th, 18th or 21st birthday.

(I note the plural “their” avoids using the pronoun “her” — No one should get an automatic right to vote simply by living long enough to reach his or her 16th, . . . . etc.)

Logical hole there — it’s presumed the someone exists intelligent and neutral (ethical) enough to determine what is or isn’t “meaningful and productive thinking” on the issues of the day.  Nontraditional, or visionary thinking, under this system, could easily be shut down.

Q. Is the Illuminati fascist?
A. No. Meritocracy is opposed to fascism. Fascism is obsessed with racial purity, nationalism, patriotism and xenophobia. Meritocracy is opposed to all of these. Ironically, many of the people who denounce the Illuminati as fascists could themselves be accurately described as fascists. The nationalist American “patriots” who despise their government, who rail against the Illuminati, who hate foreigners, who have never ventured out of their country, would all be classified by the Illuminati as dangerous fascists.

FINALLY — with apologies for quoting so much of this — The writer talks about “Master and Slave” mentality.  Essentially he is talking about Job versus  Business owner situation — and I find it hard to read, because unlike the (just go fulfil your joy-less work), I actually love the work I was doing, or put my heart into work outside that field; I loved the process of solving problems, engagement with others in the community, making  difference, and so forth.  This is going to sound like straight communism (and maybe is) — but think about it, OK?  How true is it?  How much has been bread and circuses, and have you actually struggled with and answered, to satisfaction, the principal questions of life — or have you swallowed others answers whole, or partially digested?  Do you adjust your world-view when confronted with evidence, it’s time to — and does that in any way change your actions?  I sure hope so.

Most of us are slaves. No matter how much we loathe that conclusion and reject it, it is true nevertheless.
If you want to know if you are a slave, consider these criteria.

Every day you go and do a job you don’t like. {{assumption — may be true or false…}}  It gives you no creative thrill, and you derive no feeling of self-worth from it. You are under someone else’s control. Your employer decides how you spend your time, not you. Your employer demands obedience, application and proper conduct from you. If you don’t comply, you will be fired. You must behave in the way that the employer sees fit, not in the way that you deem fit.

In other words, you have handed over your definition of “proper conduct” to another. You have sold your time and effort to your employer. Sure, you get a salary in return. {That is the DEFINITION of “JOB” (just over broke)}}

You can pay the bills, buy nice things, support your nearest and dearest, go on holidays, go out for fine meals at the weekend. {{Consume Bread and Circuses, if there’s leftover from food and housing, from basics}}   In short, you can live comfortably. It is on that basis – that your petty needs are satisfied – that you can justify the fact that you have given away your control over the most precious thing you have: your own life.

Your employer, on the other hand, is wealthy, loves what he {{note gender}} does, gets immense status and prestige from it, is admired and envied. His lifestyle is breathtaking. He has three magnificent homes, a 300-ft yacht, a stable of Ferrari supercars. He stays in the best hotels, and everyone is eager to do his bidding and fulfil his every wish. They are permanently at his beck and call, falling over themselves to please him. He can come and go as he pleases. He will never be sitting in front of another person waiting to hear if he is about to lose his job. He is the one who decides who gets hired and who gets fired. He controls his life. He allocates his time as he sees fit. He behaves as he wishes to. He imposes his views on others. Others depend on him, but he does not depend on them.

So, then, which are you…master or slave?

Who are the masters? The Old World Order. Who are the slaves? The rest of us.

Who is guilty? We are. Why? Because we allow the masters to rule us. In exchange for a “comfortable” living, we sign away our own lives. All over the globe, for billions of us, the headstones of our graves will bear exactly the same inscription: “Here lies the body of a person who was an adequate employee. He did what he was told and paid his taxes. He made no impact on the world. Nothing more need be said.” Are you happy for that to be your epitaph?

But on the marble headstones of the members of the Old World Order, overlooking vast, spectacular mausoleums, will be magnificent eulogies, great lists of achievements, the tales of the lives of people to whose tune so many danced.

SO — is there a resurrection and different, eternal life or not?  The question counts!  (cf.  “you can’t take it with you.”)

Overwhelmingly, the masters are those born into privilege, those handed huge advantages from the outset. Their parents are wealthy. They live in the finest neighbourhoods. They go to the finest schools. They join Masonic societies with the other sons and daughters of privilege. They agree to carve up all of the best jobs amongst each other. They marry each other and breed new generations of masters. They don’t care about anyone else. Why should they? They have everything they want. On their side of the equation, there is no question to be answered.

{{You KNOW there is some truth to this!}}

The people who must answer the question are the slaves. The question could not be simpler. It is: Why do we let the masters get away with it? And the answer is a painful one. It’s because we are lazy, apathetic, cowardly, satisfied with our trivial comforts. We’d rather accept the status quo than make any attempt to change things because then we’d need to leave our comfort zone, put in time and effort, and above all be brave and take bold risks. If we weren’t content with our enslavement, we’d be doing something about it. We’d be fighting back. But how many of us are doing anything at all? Don’t ask others what you need to do. Use your initiative.

(THEN, he brings up Hegel…)

You want to listen to masters talking about what to do with slaves?  They will generally bring up religion and family.  Anyhow, here’s a sample:

Clinton Signs Welfare Bill Amid Division

By Barbara Vobejda
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, August 23 1996; Page A01President Clinton signed historic welfare legislation yesterday that rewrites six decades of social policy, ending the federal guarantee of cash assistance to the poor and turning welfare programs over to the states.

“Today, we are ending welfare as we know it,” Clinton said at a White House ceremony, where he was flanked by three former welfare recipients. “But I hope this day will be remembered not for what it ended, but for what it began.”

It ALL boils down into exchange of services and goods, and the money system.    There’s almost no facet of life, including use of time, which can’t be understood from this framework.  And yet what do we hear on TV (during primary season, USA) — about creation of JOBS and about upper, middle “class”  and “the poor.”  What’s all that about class status?
  • Upper class — has assets and an income stream, minimizes taxes, the real job of life is to fill all the free time with something meaningful, like changing the world according to one’s particular desires.
  • Middle class — works decent enough jobs to own homes, or at least consistently pay rent, raise children, even get them to college.  Works at businesses owned, or invested in, by upper class, and is a good employee so as to make it to retirement, and keep cash flow going.   Too busy to really learn investing, so if there’s something to invest, hires professionals to do this.
  • “The Poor” — live paycheck to paycheck and are stuck in public institutions everytime the roll out of bed in the morning.  Or, have no jobs.   Have more of their stuff tracked — if they are on food stamps or cash aid, some bureaucrat literally knows what they eat, wear, and where they shop!  (you get the picture).  They bury their dead more often and have more relatives in prison.  This doesn’t mean they have more relatives engaged in criminal activity.
The poor (and middle classes) are constantly being stopped and interrogated about WHAT THEY ARE DOING.  Their status is not so secure, and having something endure depends on hooking up with the right associates, and those associates sticking around long enough to make a difference.  The poor — forget it — their time is simply NOT valued.  Their existence makes others’ careers and middle class government jobs managing them.
QUESTION:   Why are the election political discussions so irrelevant to what’s actually taking place, and has been for a few centuries, in the country?
If you want another interesting discussion (From the same site, not that I always agree), here’s THE TRIUNE BRAIN (Crocodile, horse, computer)  Warning — may insult women.  Well, and men.

Few of humanity rise to the world of reason and consciousness powered by the logic circuits of the computer brain. This highest arena is uniquely human – no other animals have an onboard computer – and the irony is that few humans know how to operate it. They are whizz-kids at using iPhones, but they are clueless about using their own brains properly. They mostly use brains 1 and 2 and rarely trouble brain 3. It lies dormant and dusty in most people, like some never-visited library containing all the knowledge of the cosmos. In fact, many men struggle to use anything more than the crocodile brain. Their minds are preoccupied with fucking, fighting and feasting – like the Vikings.

The computer brain, sadly, does not dominate the lower brains. The limbic system – the seat of the emotions – usually hijacks the higher mental functions i.e. reason is put to the service of the emotions rather than the emotions being in the service of reason. In times of great stress or sexual excitement, the crocodile takes charge of everything and humans become reptiles operating at the basic instinctive level.

With this model of the brain, it becomes easy to see why humanity struggles to reach its potential. {{IS humanity an “it”??}} Most people are stuck at the level of crocodile or horse, and can’t {{or is it WON’T?  Or is it numbed, to the point they don’t sense the need? — which is it?}} raise themselves to the godlike, rational level of the internal supercomputer. The attainment of gnosis** requires the highest brain working at full capacity.

In Jungian terms, the “shadow” is the crocodile brain, the “ego”, “persona” and “anima/animus” are the limbic system and the “Self” is the computer. Reason, not belief, makes us Gods


(** I did mention, the site is Gnostic, right?)

The Abrahamic religions — all of them — tell a different story.  The one thing I have to say though — and face — is that they’re good at hating (and, more rarely, some — loving).   Christianity talks about spirit, as in a spiritual awakening through baptism in the name of Jesus.  Are these just different languages for the same things?  Is it possible to love without hating, and why all the murder?  what’s all this about DEFINING “God” and Monotheism?

(etc. . . . . . ).  Those who do, and those who do not, believe in “God” are so often considering themselves superior — and the other inferior — on that basis alone, it gets ridiculous.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

 Back to title Topic: (though it overlaps, ALL this above was a distraction, or exploration, of the person who wrote the introduction to the book “None Dare Call it Conspiracy.”  It ain’t my fault he happened to be conservative Republican, possibly a very poor husband & father, and have a son involved in The Knights of Malta, or at least Blackwater!    The point is to keep understanding how did we get to this (insane) point in US history.   AND NDCC provides insight.

From Chapter One:  “Don’t Confuse Me With Facts” (remembering, this is 1971!!!):

Millions of Americans are concerned and frustrated over mishappenings in our nation. They feel that something is wrong, drastically wrong, but because of the picture painters they can’t quite put their fingers on it.

Millions of Americans are concerned and frustrated over mishappenings in our nation. They feel that something is wrong, drastically wrong, but because of the picture painters they can’t quite put their fingers on it.

. . .We keep electing new Presidents who seemingly promise faithfully to halt the world-wide Communist advance {{See date…}}, put the blocks to extravagant government spending, douse the tea of inflation, put the economy on an even keel, reverse the trend which is turning the country into a moral sewer, and toss the criminals into the hoosegow where they belong. Yet despite high hopes and glittering campaign promise these problems continue to worsen no matter who is in office. Each new administration, whether it be Republican or Democrat continues the same basic policies of the previous administration which it had so thoroughly denounced during the election campaign. It is considered poor form to mention this, but it is true nonetheless. Is there a plausible reason to explain why this happens? We are not supposed to think so. We are supposed to think it is all accidental and coincidental and that therefore there is nothing we can do about it.

FDR once said “In politics, nothing happens by accident. If it happens, you can bet it was planned that way.” He was in a good position to know

And, how an “ad hominem” attack usually stops discussion of the matter through ridicule and satire.  Having just recently been the subject of (another) one of these, I can certainly understand.  Also works well in family court — psychological profile, rather than facts of the case gets the job done most of the time.  Derails the conversation, and I’ve already shown, the system was set up to do this (afcc.net, about us/history page — change the language):

Most intellectuals, pseudo and otherwise, deal with the conspiratorial theory of history simply by ignoring it. They never attempt to refute the evidence. It can’t be refuted. If and when the silent treatment doesn’t work, these “objective” scholars and mass media opinion molders resort to personal attacks, ridicule and satire. The personal attacks tend to divert attention from the facts which an author or speaker is trying to expose. The idea is to force the person exposing the conspiracy to stop the exposure and spend his time and effort defending himself.

However, the most effective weapons used against the conspiratorial theory of history are ridicule and satire. These extremely potent weapons can be cleverly used to avoid any honest attempt at refuting the facts. After all, nobody likes to be made fun of. Rather than be ridiculed most people will keep quiet; and, this subject certainly does lend itself to ridicule and satire

Successful trial lawyers are expert at this.   It’s a clear technique.

Or, because of racial or religious bigotry, they will take small fragments of legitimate evidence and expand them into a conclusion that will support their particular prejudice, i.e., the conspiracy is totally “Jewish,” “Catholic,” or “Masonic”. These people do not help to expose the conspiracy, but, sadly play into the hands of those who want the public to believe that all conspiratorialists are screwballs.

Author(s) prefer the term “Insiders.”    They confront attitude — social acceptability over protecting one’s children from slavery:

Because the Establishment controls the media, anyone exposing the Insiders will be the recipient of a continuous fusillade of invective from newspapers, magazines, TV and radio. In this manner one is threatened with loss of “social respectability” if he dares broach the idea that there is organization behind any of the problems currently wracking America. Unfortunately, for many people social status comes before intellectual honesty. Although they would never admit it social position is more important to many people than is the survival of freedom in America.

If you ask these people which is more important — social respectability or saving their children from slavery — they will tell you the latter, of course. But their actions (or lack of same) speak so much louder than their words. PeopIe have an infinite capacity for rationalization when it comes to refusing to face the threat to America’s survival. Deep down these people are afraid they may be laughed at if they take a stand,. . .

The Insiders know that if the business and professional community will not take a stand to save the private enterprise system, the socialism through which they intend to control the world will be inevitable. They believe that most business and professional men are too shallow and decadent, too status conscious, too tied up in the problems of their jobs and businesses to worry about what is going on in politics. These men are told that it might be bad for business or jeopardize their government contracts if they take a stand. They have been bribed into silence with their own tax monies!
This was written before the internet.  It was written before welfare reform, and (to be quite honest) before the feminist movement of the 1970s was under way.  It was basically before no-fault divorce.  Yet it was NOT before some other significant developments in finance, before the creation of the Federal Reserve, and the selling of the income tax as a way to reign in the ultra-rich!   HOW YOU THINK THAT ONE’S GOING SO FAR? (Actually, this was unbelievably pernicious and has heightened the caste differences — it creates classes by tax laws! And knowledge of how to deal with them…).
What do you think?

Is it not theoretically possible that a billionaire could be sitting, not in a garret, but in a penthouse, in Manhattan, London or Paris and dream the same dream as Lenin and Hitler? You will have to admit it is theoretically possible. Julius Caesar, a wealthy aristocrat, did. And such a man might form an alliance or association with other like-minded men, might he not? Caesar did. These men would be superbly educated, command immense social prestige and be able to pool astonishing amounts of money to carry out their purposes. These are advantages that Hitler and Lenin did not have.

It is difficult for the average individual to fathom such perverted lust for power. The typical person, of whatever nationality, wants only to enjoy success in his job, to be able to afford a reasonably high standard of living complete with leisure and travel. He wants to provide for his family in sickness and in health and to give his children a sound education. His ambition stops there. He has no desire to exercise power over others, to conquer other lands or peoples, to be a king. He wants to mind his own business and enjoy life. Since he has no lust for power, it is difficult for him to imagine that there are others who have … others who march to a far different drum. But we must realize that there have been Hitlers and Lenins and Stalins and Caesars and Alexander the Greats throughout history. Why should we assume there are no such men today with perverted lusts for power? And if these men happen to be billionaires is it not possible that they would use men like Hitler and Lenin as pawns to seize power for themselves?

. . .

In keeping with the fact that almost everybody seems to have his own definition of Communism, we are going to give you ours, and then we will attempt to prove to you that it is the only valid one. Communism: AN INTERNATIONAL, CONSPIRATORIAL DRIVE FOR POWER ON THE PART OF MEN IN HIGH PLACES WILLING TO USE ANY MEANS TO BRING ABOUT THEIR DESIRED AIM-GLOBAL CONQUEST.

The men at the apex of this movement are not Communists in the traditional sense of that term. They feel no loyalty to Moscow of Peking. They are loyal only to themselves and their undertaking. And these men certainly do not believe in the clap-trap pseudo-philosophy of Communism. They have no intention of dividing their wealth. Socialism is a philosophy which conspirators exploit, but in which only the naive believe. Just how finance capitalism is used as the anvil and Communism as the hammer to conquer the world will be explained in this book.
. . . . THE ROLE OF TAX-FREE FOUNDATIONS: . . . DO I HAVE OUR ATTENTION YET?  (Because, in investigating the trail leading back from my troubles, and others, in this one venue — family law, domestic violence + the child support system, and the failure of criminal law to ‘function’ under family law – – — I have been stunned at the influence (not to mention “chutzpah”) of foundations.  They simply run government — period.  Then you look at the backgrounds of the wealth (families) behind them, and the puzzle pieces begin to show the frame, the outline, of the reality we live.
(I am still working on where religion fits in….)
In addition, the-author has interviewed six men who have spent considerable time as investigators for Congressional committees. In 1953,one of these men, Norman Dodd, headed the Reece Committee’s investigation of tax-free foundations. When Mr. Dodd began delving into the role of international high finance in the world revolutionary movement, the investigation was killed on orders from the Eisenhower occupied White House. According to Mr. Dodd, it is permissable to investigate the radical bomb throwers in the streets, but when you begin to trace their activities back to their origins in the “legitimate world,” the political iron curtain slams down.
This source (link above) at first glance, seems a chronological and factual account of the influence of these foundations, no need for a Ph.D. to understand. It also makes sense from my experience of life under some of the institutions that the foundations finance.  Excerpts:

Tax-exempt Foundations

Tax-exempt Foundations were originally setup for humanitarian purposes to provide grants to existing institutions. Rene A. Wormser served as General Counsel to the Reece Committee, which was a congressional committee that investigated the Tax-exempt Foundations from 1953 to 1955. His book, Foundations: Their Power and Influence, is a documented expose of his experience with the committee. In it he wrote, “Foundations were originally created to support existing institutions and to undertake certain ‘operating’ functions.”

Soon after (or possibly from their inception) foundations became a loop hole that the financial elite used to avoid taxes. “By the time the income tax became law in 1913, the Rockefeller and Carnegie foundations were already operating. Income tax didn’t soak the rich, it soaked the middle class,” wrote Perloff. “Because it was a graduated tax, it tended to prevent anyone from rising into affluence. Thus it acted to consolidate the wealth of the entrenched interests, and protect them from new competition.”

Smoot pointed out that the primary purpose of some of the large Tax-exempt Foundations is no longer humanitarian in nature, but “predominately tax avoidance.” “One of the leading devices by which the wealthy dodge taxes” concurred Perloff “is the channeling of their fortunes into tax-free foundations.” He also charged that, “The major foundations, though commonly regarded as charitable institutions, often use their grant-making powers to advance the interests of their founders.”

It’s claimed that The Woodlawn Foundation (assets, see tax returns) which funds Opus Dei-served nonprofits (i.e., some of the men’s & women’s homes and retreats, I gather — and there are 40 to 50 of them around the US) holds stock in AES (Advanced Energy Systems) — lots of it.  For a sample of what AES does (just a random find here) and how technical, first understand, it used to be part of Northrup Grunman:

Our Mission:

To be the supplier of choice for advanced radiation sources, high brightness commercial accelerator applications, government accelerator projects, and integrated engineering services.

Our History

On September 28, 1998, the former employees of NorthropGrumman’ sAdvancedEnergySystems Group completed the formation of a new small business, Advanced Energy Systems, Inc. (AES). Incorporated in New York and purchased from Northrop Grumman as a legacy organization, AES retains all former assets including the skilled personnel,intellectualproperty,accelerator development laboratories, prototype machine shops, computational analysis systems and contracts. The new company can draw upon a 22-year experience base in accelerator and fusion technology to supply full service engineering and physics analysis & design, in addition to component fabrication. Our active customers include many US national laboratories, international laboratories, and commercial corporations. AES technical operations are conducted within a 7,800 ft2 facility in Medford, NY, that includes a machine shop and a 650 ft2 facility in Princeton, NJ. Specific areas of AES expertise include: electron accelerators and free electron lasers, advanced radiation sources, low energy ion accelerator systems for commercial applications, high power ion accelerator systems for government applications, and fusion systems.

They are into, “Scientific Research, Homeland Security, Medical Imaging, Drug Discovery, Defense”  -“Putting Accelerator Technology To Work”  get the picture?  Prior to spinoff from Northrup Grunman (it says), it delivered more than $400M in sales to NG.     Highly technical.

Now– assuming The Woodlawn Foundation indeed has a good amount of shares in this group, how much wealth do we think is going through the foundation?  And that’s just one example (Note:  author cited “hoover on-line” a database I don’t know to use yet).

Back to the Congressional investigations of the role of these tax-exempt foundations:

The “independent, uncontrolled financial power often enables foundations to exert a decisive influence on public affairs,” wrote Wormser. He further testified that, “They have a power comparable to political patronage.” He cautioned “When they do harm, it can be immense harm–there is virtually no counterforce to oppose them.”

(quote, continued):
According to the findings of congressional investigations, the foundations have been known to fund political movements in a direction inclined to favor a socialistic, one-world government. Individual foundations have also been known to merge themselves in a “cartel-like” fashion to fund their political projects, which tends “to endanger the freedom of our intellectual and public life,” warned Wormser. Wormser referred to this merging as theTax-exempt Complex.
{{I have been documenting these — see Washington State’s CCYJ:  The Shape Of Things To Come, which partly inspired today’s post’s LONG title;

“The Center for Children & Youth Justice is shaping better lives for youth involved in Washington’s foster care and juvenile justice systems. In partnership with parents, advocates and policymakers, the Center develops and advances innovative approaches to systemic changes that will support kids, stabilize families and strengthen communities.”

Parents may at some level be involved, but the tax return shows a different story — it shows WHICH foundations were involved in each purpose.  The only “local” part of it was an about to retire, prominent woman judge (Bobbe Bridges) and it was of course handy to have cooperation from a 2009 DSHS appointee Susan N. Dreyfuss (of wisconsin fame and behavioral health organization backgrounds) to head up a $20 BILLION government department and cooperate with CCYJ in having Washington State be a nice “MODEL FOR CHANGE.”

Models for Change: Systems Reform in Juvenile Justice

So, such forces can truthfully say “The Shape of Things To Come” because the same forces are the shapers!  Get it?  
I was upset at AFCC doing this — but this makes AFCC look like kids’ play.  That’s why I publicized “ALEC.”  However, it’s the structure that enables this which is causing the trouble — and never do the “shapers” suggest any change to THAT system, which allows them to play chess with the world, or USA, state by state, and system by system!   Suppose you, as an individual, chose to live in a manner different from “the Shape of Things to Come” — and had children?  I’ve experienced this (it’s why I blog) — simply opted out of a malfunctioning public institution for my kids’ and households sake.  Boy, was that an eyeopener!  If I experienced a degree of freedom (culturally, in the air, in the country) in my 30s, by early 40s, they had evaporated.  Now we are 50s, and I’m looking down this immediate future, and my kids’ and thinking, WHAT can I do, to change the course of these things?   (hence, the blog and on-line activity, activism, you name it. . .. )Another example (I remember the progressive discovery of how things work) is Stand for Children — run by Jonah Edelman, son of the famous Marian Wright Edelman (Children’s Defense Fund).   Apparently the group over-reached, or boasted too much of its (genuine) clout and deep pockets:  see,

Education Group Tries to Rebound After Diatribe By KRISTEN McQUEARY Published: December 2, 2011

Stand for Children Leadership Center” 2002 return.  Scroll through, esp. board of directors at the end (includes Geoffrey Canada (Harlem Children’s Zone), someone from the National Council of Churches, Jonah’s mother, Marian Wright, and others. . . . Mostly, notice their planning — 33 centers nationwide, shared offices with the 501(c)4 “Stand for Children, Inc.”   They simply tell you what they are doing, and are not ashamed of “deep pockets” to influence school boards or politics.








Stand for Children Inc. OR 2010 $770,075 990O 32 52-2146673
Stand for Children Inc. OR 2010 $770,075 990O 32 52-2146673
Stand for Children Inc. OR 2010 $770,075 990O 32 52-2146673
Stand for Children Inc. OR 2009 $427,528 990O 29 52-2146673
Stand for Children Inc. OR 2008 $429,570 990O 27 52-2146673
Stand for Children Inc. OR 2007 $329,701 990O 17 52-2146673
Stand for Children Inc. OR 2006 $287,008 990O 18 52-2146673
Stand for Children Inc. OR 2005 $231,751 990O 16 52-2146673
Stand for Children Inc. OR 2004 $123,114 990O 11 52-2146673
Stand for Children Leadership Center * * * OR 2010 $4,954,746 990 45 52-1957214
Stand for Children Leadership Center OR 2009 $2,387,883 990 39 52-1957214
Stand for Children Leadership Center OR 2008 $1,819,690 990 36 52-1957214
Stand for Children Leadership Center OR 2007 $1,300,706 990 25 52-1957214
Stand for Children Leadership Center DC 2006 $1,285,006 990 26 52-1957214
Stand for Children Leadership Center OR 2005 $1,245,615 990 26 52-1957214
Stand for Children Leadership Center OR 2004 $754,309 990 20 52-1957214
Stand for Children Leadership Center OR 2003 $487,799 990 19 52-1957214
Stand for Children Leadership Center DC 2002 $375,773 990 15 52-1957214 

Contrast SCLC 2002 with 2010 – it has close to $11 million revenues, 135 employees, nearly 6,000 volunteers; several directors now being paid $100K or well over (Jonah, $190K), and I saw approximately $1 million on contractors, including consultants, strategy group, etc.  Whether their idea is basically good, or not so good (breaking the back of teachers’ unions appears to have been involved, in part), the fact is, they are getting that strategy pushed through; the family has a history of organizing for change, obviously, and is going about it state by state, now.

Concentrations of power.

(more from “the hidden evil: tax-exempt foundations” link):

The first glimpse into foundation influence came under the Congressional Act of August 23, 1912, when the Commission on Industrial Relations studied labor conditions and the treatment of workers by the major U.S. industrial firms. They eventually examined the foundations, which were interlocked with them. “Starting with a study of labor exploitation, it [the Commission on Industrial Relations] went on to investigate concentrations of economic power, interlocking directorates, and the role of the then relatively new large charitable foundations (especially of Carnegie and Rockefeller) as instruments of power concentration,” wrote Wormser.

During the commission hearings, future Supreme Court Justice Louis D. Brandeis testified on January 23, 1915, that he was seriously concerned about the emerging danger of such a concentration of power. He said, “When a great financial power has developed … which can successfully summon forces from all parts of the country … to carry out what they deem to be their business principle … [there] develops within the State a state so powerful that the ordinary social and industrial forces existing are insufficient to cope with it.”

“Control is being extended largely through the creation of enormous privately managed funds for indefinite purposes, hereinafter designated ‘foundations'” declared Mr. Basil M. Manly, director of research for the commission. The commission’s report concluded that, “As regards the ‘foundations’ created for unlimited general purposes and endowed with enormous resources, their ultimate possibilities are so grave a menace … [that] it would be desirable to recommend their abolition.”

. . .(more investigations in the 1950s) . . ..

On August 1, 1951, a motivated Congressman E. E. Cox (Democrat) of Georgia introduced a resolution in the House of Representatives to conduct a thorough investigation into the foundations. He asserted, “There are disquieting evidences that at least a few of the foundations have permitted themselves to be infiltrated by men and women who are disloyal to our American way of life. They should be investigated and exposed to the pitiless light of publicity…”

The Cox resolution to investigate the foundations was passed in 1952. Unfortunately, Congressman Cox died during the investigation. The commission met the same fate as the one before it. No actions were taken to prevent the expansion of these foundations, or provide means for future accountability to the public. And as Smoot described it, “the final report of his [Cox] committee (filed January 1, 1953) was a pathetic whitewash of the whole subject.”

However, it did still yield some important facts. Part of the final report on January 1, 1953 said some foundations “supported persons, organizations, and projects which, if not subversive in the extreme sense of the word, tend to weaken or discredit [our] system as it exists in the United States and to favor Marxist socialism.” Or in other words, they were found to promote Communism.

The third attempt to investigate the foundations lasted from 1953 to 1955, during the Reece Committee hearings. Smoot wrote, “On April 23, 1953, the late Congressman Carroll Reece, (Republican, Tennessee) introduced a resolution proposing a committee to carry on the ‘unfinished business’ of the defunct Cox Committee. The new committee to investigate tax-exempt foundations … was approved by Congress on July 27, 1953.” Author Perloff added, “For what was probably the … last time, the CFR came under official scrutiny.

and,  . . . . . .(CFR being “Council on Foreign Relations”)

The report clearly states that the CFR with interlocked foundations have infiltrated the government. And that they use enormous sums of money to propagandize “educate” the public in support of the policies which they decide we should adopt. What congress has told us is that the government has been infiltrated by the CFR using multi-billion-dollar private bank accounts known as Tax-exempt Foundations.

This means that when a major U.S. policy is filtered down from the federal government, into the local and state governments, that it may originate from the CFR/foundation interlock. Specifically, this means that it has come from the big corporations and the international banks, of which the CFR and other Think Tanks are composed.

The “State within a state” that Justice Louis D. Brandeis warned about in 1915, was part of the beginning of a government within a government, or, as FBI Agent Dan Smoot calls it, The Invisible Government. Other notable components include: the emergence of the Federal Reserve System, and the creation and infiltration of the CFR, the Bilderbergers and the TC into the executive branch.

CAN YOU AGREE WITH ME ON THE NEXT PART — THAT THE MILLIONS BEING DUMPED INTO SOCIAL SCIENCES (including literally starting institutes and centers at various universities around the US) PLUS PSYCHOLOGY IS INAPPROPRIATE, IF NOT SUSPICIOUS — BUT DEFINITELY EXISTS?   (see welfare reform, diversionary funds).   

The Reece Committee found that, “When their activities spread into the field of the so-called, ‘social sciences’ or into other areas which our basic moral, social, economic, and governmental principles can be vitally affected, the public should be alerted to these activities and be made aware of the impact of foundation influence on our accepted way of life.”

“The power of the individual large foundations is enormous,” they concluded. “It can exercise various forms of patronage which carry with them elements of thought control. … It is capable of invisible coercion through the power of its purse. … This power to influence national policy is amplified tremendously when foundations act in concert. There is such a concentration of foundation power in the united States.”

The foundations are not there to “help” the average citizen.  They may, but that is not their purpose for existing.
Make sure you also read “A Revolution in Education, Part 1” (and Part 2).

Charlotte Iserbyt was the Senior Policy Advisor at the U.S. Department of Education during the 1980s & was trained as a Change Agent to help promote this change. In her book, The Deliberate Dumbing-Down of America, she provides evidence in the form of a timeline, which contains a paper trail dating back to the 1930s, consisting of mainstream news, congressional records, & publications authored by these institutions. Her evidence shows undeniably that the major Tax-exempt Foundations caused a drastic change in the school system, by way of legislation, incredible funding, propaganda, & deception.

Iserbyt stated, “Principals who resisted innovation eventually ended up being forced out of the system undergoing radical change.” “Their trials and tribulations, ” says Iserbyt, “were known only to them, and what they underwent during the change agents’ activities in their schools could be described as inhumane treatment . . .

Iserbyt describes a Change Agent, as, “[a] term used by many people, including President Clinton, leading educators, and social engineers, to identify individuals, highly trained in the group process and in the Delphi Technique.” The Delphi Technique is a method used to manipulate a group, large or small, during a Q&A period so it arrives at a predetermined conclusion. She continues, “These people are designated to bring about controversial change in education, in the operation of our local and state governments, and at the federal and international levels.” After resisters were identified, Change Agents would use other educators who had embraced the new system to pressure them into conforming. Non-conformists were forced out of the industry.

. . .

According to Iserbyt, instead of focusing on conveying knowledge, public education is now mostly about changing a person’s fixed attitudes & beliefs. The new system is based specifically on the works of behaviorists such as Ivan Pavlov & B.F. Skinner. Pavlov & Skinner are best known for their behavior modification tests on rats, pigeons, & dogs. In some cases, communist educators from Russia & China were literally flown into the U.S. to help with the re-structuring.

On August 1, 1977, the Washington Post ran an article entitled, New Curriculum Shifts Teaching Methods in District, stating, “the new curriculum is based on the work in behavioral psychology of Harvard University’s B.F. Skinner who … trained pigeons during World War II to pilot and detonate bombs and torpedoes.”

Can you read the next few paragraphs?  I put them in, because I have LIVED the war over the education of my children in the context of family breakup due to my husband’s violence and threats.  Thereafter, I was treated like “dirt” by specific members of my family, one of who had recently been indoctrinated (himself) into this behavioral-change agent thing (apparently) and was blatantly using it on me, and my minor children.  It became very clear that resistance to total domination was met with HATE and multi-faceted attack, particularly when I refused to “submit” docilely to this person’s plan for me, which (in context) made no sense.  What was particularly annoying was lack of (1) truth and (2) reason in his attempts.   It’s gotten worse over the years, too.   I understand TOO much of this.  So, reading on, I’ll affirm this one:

Iserbyt essentially states that public schools are factories, & compares the educational process to an assembly line, whereas, at the end of this line (graduation), you’ll find a predictable product–an indoctrinated person. This appears to be a process of mental castration where students are conditioned to be small-minded, which makes them easier to control. This new system has an emphasis on “global interdependence,” with little tolerance for independent freethinkers. This means the financial interests that funded this revolution want everyone completely dependent on the global state in their New World Order. This is obviously for control purposes.

Iserbyt wrote, “I had experienced traveling in and living in socialist countries. When I returned to the United States I realized that America’s transition from a sovereign constitutional republic to a socialist democracy would not come about through warfare (bullets and tanks) but through the implementation and installation of the “system” in all areas of government… The brainwashing for acceptance of the “system’s” control would take place in the school–through indoctrination and the use of behavior modification, which comes under so many labels…” She warned that this, “war has, in fact, become the war to end all wars … [if] citizens on this planet can be brainwashed … using dumbed-down Pavlovian/Skinnerian education, to accept what those in control want.”

This revolution apparently took place as part of the installation of a world government & according to Iserbyt, the “brainwashing” is part of a plan to achieve a type of “global feudalism,” which will be managed by behavioral scientists. “[T]he carefully laid plans to change America from a sovereign, constitutional republic … to just one of many nations in an international socialist (collectivist) system (New World Order) are apparent,” proclaims Iserbyt. “Only a dumbed down population … could be expected to willingly succumb to the global workforce training planned by the Carnegie Corporation and the … Rockefellers …which is being implemented by the United States Congress.” This global school system is managed by UNESCO.

When I could not be bullied, extorted or fully intimidated enough, or fast enough, out of compliance, a conscious decision was made (in our case), involving several people, to remove the children from me illegally and curtail all of my “influence.”  ONE of my daughters even reported overhearing the dialogue — the people needed a “win” and were afraid that I might attempt to teach my own children — ANYthing ! !    ! ! ! !    Most of us (as it says in NDCC) are not equipped, if we are relatively ethical, moral, mind our own business, centered, enjoy our work type people — to deal with totally corrupt lust for power over others.  But, unless slavery is acceptable — we’d better get up to speed fast in how to deal with the reality!
Here is a Transcript of a Norman Dodd Interview I found, in which the topic of how to get America into war, take charge of their diplomacy and education systems, and recruit bright young “stable of historians” to send to London, so as to teach history from the “right” perspective is discussed calmly.  Foundations involved were:  Ford, Carnegie, Rockefeller and Guggenheim, with responsibilities being “divvied up” among them casually, like a game of Monopoly — you take domestic, you take international, someone else help with Education, and who will fund those (revisionist) historians?   Cool as cucumbers.  The narration indicates that a bright young attorney “Kathryn Casey” was so disturbed in reading through the minutes, she stopped practicing law and (it says) “lost her mind.”    We are talking about calculated intention to involve the USA in World War I, make sure it didn’t end too soon, and to plan life in the US to be easily merged with life in Russia.   . . . .
WELL, This title & paragraph sets it up.  I have been curious about this Reece Commission for a long time, and so now am reading more about it.  i have also pasted into the “link” a segment which I think most interesting (hover cursor, to view)

Transcript of Norman Dodd Interview

1982 A.D.


G. Edward Griffin

Alan Gaither was, at that time, President of the Ford Foundation.  Mr. Gaither had sent for me when I found it convenient to be in New York, asked me to call upon him at his office, which I did.  On arrival, after a few amenities, Mr. Gaither said, “Mr. Dodd, we have asked you to come up here today because we thought that, possibly, off the record, you would tell us why the Congress is interested in the activities of foundations such as ourselves.”

Before I could think of how I would reply to that statement, Mr. Gaither then went on to say, “Mr. Dodd, all of us who have a hand in the making of policies here, have had experience operating under directives, the substance of which is, that we use our grant-making power so as to alter life in the United States that it can be comfortably merged with the Soviet Union.

Warning!  You are about to enter the Reality Zone — a place were truth is stranger than fiction — where knowledge is king — where myths are shattered and deception exposed.  It is a place where the lessons of history are found, and where true-life adventures reveal the hidden nature of man.

HERE we go — it’s a LONG quote  (and another long post, I see!):

If you proceed, you will not be able to return to the twilight zone from which you came.

You have five seconds remaining to escape.

1 – 2 – 3 – 4 – 5.

Welcome to the Reality Zone.  I am Ed Griffin.  The story we are about to hear represents a missing piece in the puzzle of modern history.  We are about to hear a man tell us that the major tax-exempt foundations of America, since at least 1945, have been operating to promote a hidden agenda.  That agenda has nothing to do with the surface appearance of charity, good works or philanthropy.

This man will tell you that the real objective has been to influence American educational institutions and to control foreign policy agencies of the Federal government.  The purpose of the control has been to condition Americans to accept the creation of world government.  That government is to be based on the principle of collectivism, which is another way of saying socialism;  and, it is to be ruled from behind the scenes by those same interests which control the tax-exempt foundations.

Is this a believable scenario?

Well, the man who tells this story is none other than Mr. Norman Dodd who, in the year 1954, was the staff director of the Congressional Special Committee to investigate tax-exempt foundations — sometimes referred to as the Reece committee, in recognition of its chairman, Congressman Carroll Reece.  I conducted the interview we are about to hear, in 1982.  I had no immediate use for the material at that time, but I realized that Mr. Dodd’s story was of great importance.

Since he was advanced in age and not in good health, I wanted to capture his recollections on videotape while he was still with us.  It was a wise decision, because Mr. Dodd did pass away just a short time afterwards.

In later years there was a resurgence of interest in Mr. Dodd’s story, and we released the videotape to the public in 1991. And so, what now follows is the sound track taken from the full, unedited interview, broken occasionally only for a tape change, or to omit the sound of a passing airplane.  It stands on its own as an important piece in the puzzle of modern history.

 JUST another reminder:  At a certain point, you either continue to process information, cognitively, (see “the 3 brains,” above), or have a “fight-or-flight” response — and RUN from it, after which, your cognitive system will continue to go down the same road, next time more evidence shows up — and after a period of time, your thinking will become potentially useless in processing this.   World views will have to shift back to an altered reality to convince you, somehow, that the “powers that be” are really well-intentioned, if inefficient, and that with better communications, we all can just get along with each other!

Not to mention continuing to believe that because you may have even got to the level of talking to a Congressman or woman, you are talking to someone actually in power.

And that it’s OK if your children’s education and futures was worse than your own (as the case may be) . . . .

(Consider yourself warned . . . .. )

[begin interview]

Griffin:  Mr. Dodd, let’s begin this interview by a brief statement, for the record, telling us who you are, what your background is, and your qualifications to speak on the subject.

Dodd:  Well, Mr. Griffin, as for who I am, I am just as the name implies — an individual born in New Jersey and educated in private schools, eventually in a school called Andover, Massachusetts, and then Yale University.

And, running through my whole period of being brought up, growing up, I have been an emphaticable [sic] reader, and I have had one major interest and that was this country, as I was led to believe that it was originally founded.

I entered the world of business knowing absolutely nothing about how that world operated.  And, I realized that the only way to find out what that world was, and consisted of, would be to become part of it.  And I then acquired some experience in the manufacturing world, and in the world of international communications, and finally chose banking as the field I wished to devote my life to.

I was fortunate enough, to secure a position in one of the important banks in New York.  I lived there.  I lived through the conditions which led up to what is known as the crash of 1929.  I witnessed what is tantamount to a collapse of the structure of the United States as a whole.

Much to my surprise, my superiors, in the middle of the panic in which they were immersed, confronted me.  I was confronted with the question, “Norm, what do we do now?”

I was thirty at the time, and I had no more right to have an answer to that question than the man in the moon.  However, I did manage to say to my superiors, “Gentlemen, you take this experience as proof of something that you do not know about banking.”  And you better go find out what that something is, and act accordingly.

Four days later, I was confronted by these same superiors, with a statement to the effect that, “Norm, you go find out.”  And I really was fool enough to accept that assignment, because it meant that you were going out to search for something, and nobody could tell you what you were looking for.  I felt so strongly on the subject that I consented to it.

I was relieved of all normal duties inside the bank and, two and a half years later, I felt that it was possible to report back to those who had given me this assignment.  So, I rendered such a report and, as a result of the report I rendered, I was told the following:  “Norm, what you are saying is, we should return to sound banking.”  And I said, “Yes, in essence, that’s exactly what it is that I am saying.”

Whereupon, I got my first shock, which was a statement from them to this effect:  “We will never see sound banking in the United States again.”  And they cited chapter and verse, to support that statement.

What they cited was as follows:  since the end of WWI, we have been responsible for what they call the institutionalizing of conflicting interests.  And they are so prevalent inside this country, that they can never be resolved.

This came to me as an extraordinary shock because the men who made this statement were men who were deemed as the most prominent bankers in the country.  The bank of which I was a part was spoken of a Morgan bank.  Coming from men of that caliber, a statement of that kind made a tremendous impression on me.

Institutionalized Constant Conflict to create centralized control . . . .
(and it goes on a while — not too hard a read, just text):

But, they had to have something in the way of a rationalization of their decision to do everything they could to stop completion of this investigation, given the direction that it was moving.  That direction would have been exposure of this Carnegie Endowment story, and the Ford Foundation, and the Guggenheim, and the Rockefeller Foundation — all working in harmony toward the control of education in the United States.

 {{HOW the investigation was stopped]]

Well, to secure the help of the White House in the picture, they got the White House to cause the liaison between the White and the Hill — a major person — to go up to Hayes and try to get him, as it were, actively to oppose what the investigation was engaged in.

Hayes, then, very kindly, would listen to this visit from this major person.  Then he would call me and say, “Norm, come up to my office.  I have a good deal to tell you.”

I would go up.  He would tell me he just had a visit from this major person, and he wants me to break up this investigation. So then I said, “Wayne, what did you do?  What did you say to him?”  He said, “I just told him to get the hell out.”  And he did that three times.  I got pretty proud of him, in the sense that he was, as it were, backing me up.  We finally embarked upon hearings at Hayes’ request.  Hayes wanted to get them out of the way, before he went abroad in the summer.

Griffin:  Why were the hearings finally terminated?  What happened to the Committee?

Dodd:  What happened to the Committee, or to the hearings?

Griffin:  The hearings.

Dodd:  The hearings were terminated.  Carroll Reece was up against such a furor in Hayes, through the activity of our own Counsel. Hayes became convinced that he was being double-crossed;  and he put on a show in the public hearing room, Mr. Griffin, that was an absolute disgrace.  He called Carroll Reece publicly every name in the book.

Mr. Reece took this as proof that he couldn’t continue the hearings.  He actually invited me to accompany him when he went down to Hayes’ office and, in my presence, with the tears rolling down his face, Hayes apologized to Carroll Reece for all he’d done, and his conduct.  He apologized to me.  I thought that would be enough, and Carroll would resume.  He never did.

This is what he states as the focus and purpose of these foundations’ intense desire to control ALL educationin the US (from Early Childhood (as we see it now) up through College — and I’ve SEEN this, on-line, at the Ivy League level.  It cannot be denied that foundations endow universities for THEIR projects . . . And these projects are increasingly in the social sciences, “human development,” and so forth. . ..

. . . .

Griffin:  How would you describe the motivation of the people who created the foundations — the big foundations — in the very beginning?  What was their motivation?


Dodd:  Their motivation was, well, let’s take Mr. Carnegie, as an example.  His publicly declared and steadfast interest was to counteract the departure of the colonies from Great Britain.  He was devoted just to putting the pieces back together again.


Griffin:  Would that have required the collectivism to which they were dedicated?


Dodd:  No.  No.  No.  These policies are the foundations’ allegiance to these un-American concepts;  these policies are all traceable to the transfer of the funds over into the hands of Trustees, Mr. Griffin.  Those Trustees were not the men who had a hand in the creation of the wealth that led to the endowment, or the use of that wealth for what we would call public purposes.


Griffin:  It was a subversion of the original intent, then?


Dodd:  Oh, yes!  Completely so.  We got into the worlds, traditionally, of bankers and lawyers.


Griffin:  How have the purpose and direction of the major foundations changed, over the years, up to the present?  What are their purposes and directions today?


Dodd:  100% behind meeting the cost of education, such as it is presented through the schools and colleges of this United States, on the subject of our history -– to prove that our original ideas are no longer practical.  The future belongs to collectivistic concepts.  There is just no disagreement on this.


Griffin:  Why do the foundations generously support communist causes in the United States?


Dodd:  Well, because, to them, communism represents a means of developing what we call a monopoly — as the organization, we’ll say, of large-scale industry into an administrable unit.


Griffin:  Do they think that they will?


Dodd:  They will be the beneficiary of it, yes.


This section below was actually from higher up on the tape.  I can just about imagine the conversations taking place — gods planning the fates of mere mortals, in the US, that is, and seeking help from fellow elites to make it happen.     The fact that death by bloodshed, bomb, or starvation was sure to ensue doesn’t seem to bother their consciences much . . . . .  Font color will be GREEN:

Off she went –{{his staff person, an attorney, to read over notes of board minutes of a tax-exempt foundation}}  to New York.  She came back at the end of two weeks, with the following recorded on dictaphone belts.

We are now at the year nineteen hundred and eight, which was the year that the Carnegie Foundation began operations.  And, in that year, the trustees meeting, for the first time, raised a specific question, which they discussed throughout the balance of the year, in a very learned fashion.  And the question is this:  Is there any means known more effective than war, assuming you wish to alter the life of an entire people?  And they conclude that, no more effective means to that end is known to humanity, than war.  So then, in 1909, they raise the second question, and discuss it, namely, how do we involve the United States in a war?

Well, I doubt, at that time, if there was any subject more removed from the thinking of most of the People of this country, than its involvement in a war.  There were intermittent shows in the Balkans, but I doubt very much if many people even knew where the Balkans were.  And finally, they answer that question as follows:  we must control the State Department.

And then, that very naturally raises the question of how do we do that?  They answer it by saying, we must take over and control the diplomatic machinery of this country and, finally, they resolve to aim at that as an objective.  Then, time passes, and we are eventually in a war, which would be World War I.  At that time, they record on their minutes a shocking report in which they dispatch to President Wilson a telegram cautioning him to see that the war does not end too quickly.  And finally, of course, the war is over.

At that time, their interest shifts over to preventing what they call a reversion of life in the United States to what it was prior to 1914, when World War I broke out.  At that point, they come to the conclusion that, to prevent a reversion, we must control education in the United States.  And they realize that is a pretty big task.  To them it is too big for them alone.

So they approach the Rockefeller Foundation with a suggestion:  that portion of education which could be considered domestic should be handled by the Rockefeller Foundation, and that portion which is international should be handled by the Endowment.

They then decide that the key to the success of these two operations lay in the alteration of the teaching of American History.  So, they approach four of the then most prominent teachers of American History in the country — people like Charles and Mary Byrd.  Their suggestion to them is this, “Will they alter the manner in which they present their subject””  And, they get turned down, flatly.

So, they then decide that it is necessary for them to do as they say, i.e. “build our own stable of historians.”  Then, they approach the Guggenheim Foundation, which specializes in fellowships, and say”  “When we find young men in the process of studying for doctorates in the field of American History, and we feel that they are the right caliber, will you grant them fellowships on our say so?  And the answer is, “Yes.”

So, under that condition, eventually they assemble twenty (20), and they take these twenty potential teachers of American History to London.  There, they are briefed in what is expected of them — whenas, and if they secure appointments in keeping with the doctorates they will have earned.

That group of twenty historians ultimately becomes the nucleus of the American Historical Association.  And then, toward the end of the 1920’s, the Endowment grants to the American Historical Association four hundred thousand dollars ($400,000) for a study of our history in a manner which points to what this country look forward to, in the future.

That culminates in a seven-volume study, the last volume of which is, of course, in essence, a summary of the contents of the other six.  The essence of the last volume is this:  the future of this country belongs to collectivism, administered with characteristic American efficiency.

That is the story that ultimately grew out of, and of course, was what could have been presented by the members of, this Congressional Committee, and the Congress as a whole, for just exactly what it said.  But, they never got to that point!

Reminds me, naturally, of The Road to Serfdom.  Note:  it’s easier to make fun of books than to process their ideas and see if a reality-test fits reality.

The Road to Serfdom is a book written by the Austrian-born economist and philosopherFriedrich von Hayek(1899–1992) between 1940–1943, in which he “warned of the danger of tyranny that inevitably results from government control of economic decision-making through central planning,”[1] and in which he argues that the abandonment of individualismclassical liberalism, and freedom inevitably leads to socialist or fascist oppression and tyranny and the serfdom of the individual. Significantly, Hayek challenged the general view among British academics that fascism was a capitalist reaction against socialism, instead arguing that fascism and socialism had common roots in central economic planning and the power of the state over the individual.

And I have to agree with this.  We are SO far down the road, but still, it’s a hard sell to have acknowledged.

The Road to Serfdom is among the most influential and popular expositions of market libertarianism and remains a popular and influential work in contemporary discourse, selling over two million copies, and remaining a best-seller.[2][3]

The Road to Serfdom was to be the popular edition of the second volume of Hayek’s treatise entitled “The Abuse and Decline of Reason,”[4] and the title was inspired by the writings of the 19th century French classical liberal thinker Alexis de Tocqueville on the “road to servitude.”[5] The book was first published in Britain by Routledge in March 1944, during World War II, and was quite popular, leading Hayek to call it “that unobtainable book,” also due in part to wartime paper rationing.[6] It was published in the United States by the University of Chicago Pressin September 1944 and achieved great popularity. At the arrangement of editor Max Eastman, the American magazine Reader’s Digest published an abridged version in April 1945, enabling The Road to Serfdom to reach a wider popular audience beyond academics.

The Road to Serfdom has had a significant impact on twentieth century conservative and libertarian economic and political discourse and is often cited today by commentators.

SO — does my title start to hold some water yet?  I could prove more instances of it in the HHS field, but it’s definitely what I see.


I think WOMEN are well-equipped to turn this around, as well as people who have painfully experienced this type of repression and are more likely (if still surviving) to FIGHT it, and prioritize fighting it (rearranging the rest of life, including comfort zones) based on principles.
HERE’S from the conclusion to None Dare Call It Conspiracy:


1. Restrictions on taking money out of the country and on the establishment or retention of a foreign bank account by an American citizen.

2. Abolition of private ownership of hand guns.

3. Detention of individuals without judicial process.

4. Requirements that private financial transactions be keyed to social security numbers or other government identification so that government records of these transactions can be kept and fed into a computer.

5. Use of compulsory education laws to forbid attendance at presently existing private schools.***

(*** but notice which schools some of our government leaders, and their children, attend!)

6. Compulsory non-military service.

7. Compulsory psychological treatment for non-government workers or public school children.

8. An official declaration that anti-Communist organizations are subversive and subsequent legal action taken to suppress them.

9. Laws limiting the number of people allowed to meet in a private home.

10. Any significant change in passport regulations to make passports more difficult to obtain or use.

11. Wage and price controls, especially in a non-wartime situation

12. Any kind of compulsory registration with the government of where individuals work.**

(**welfare roles document this — the poor are subject to even more invasion than others…)

13. Any attempt to restrict freedom of movement within the United States.

14. Any attempt to make a new major law by executive decree (that is, actually put into effect, not merely authorized as by existing executive orders.)

As you are n6 doubt aware President Nixon already has invoked numbers 1, 14 and 14.

Steps 2, 3, 6, 7, 9, 12 and 13 already have been proposed and some are actively campaigned for by organized groups. As of January 1, 1972 banks must report to the government any deposit or withdrawal over $5,000.The next step will be to restrict the taking of money out of the country. Big Brother is watching your bank account!

Increased government control over many kinds of private schools is proposed annually in many state legislatures.

And here’s the rallying call (now about 40 years old, just as urgent . . . . . )

The Insiders are counting on your being too preoccupied with your own problems or too lazy to fight back while the chains of slavery are being fastened on you. They are counting on their mass media to con you, frighten you, or ridicule you out of saving your freedom, and, most of all, they are counting on your thinking you can escape by not taking part in opposing their takeover.

They are also counting on those of you who recognize the conspiracy becoming so involved with watching all moves that you become totally mesmerized by their machinations, and thus become incapable of acting.

The choice is yours. You can say, “It can’t happen here!” But nearly every one of the one billion people enslaved by the Communists since 1945 doubtless said the same thing. Or you can end run this whole conspiratorial apparatus.

Written by Let's Get Honest|She Looks It Up

February 5, 2012 at 9:31 pm

2 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

    • Thanks for bringing Blackwaterwatch.com site to the attention of readers (at least any readers that make it down to comments).

      And also for putting up my post, which I believe is timely and important.

      I notice that the first blog on the site, ca. 4/2007, is talking about Christian Fascism & the private mercenary army.

      There are other kinds of “armies” in America, and i’ve dealt with both kinds — the second kind being an out-of-control judiciary (meaning, control by US Constitution which forbids them to commit crimes and which they are to uphold) coupled with the fearsome power to declare anyone mentally ill, by a very nebulous definition indeed, or anyone’s parenting suspect (while failing to properly prosecute the worst kind of parenting and, in the name of “family,” allowing all kinds of homicides, femicides, infanticides, and familicides by multiple means to take place surrounding “custody” actions.

      It takes living with true liars and manipulators to understand them, and I will never again consider this world, or the US, a “safe place” or buy into so many of its myths.

      It took me a number of years to realize what police were here for (Serve & Collect), about discretion & immunity, and basically to get my bearings in life as a female individual who’d given birth and raised kids, which included protecting them from their father.

      These days, I am working with people who have been rounded up for simply EXISTING inside the walls of a fiefdom (aka courthouse annex) and get threatened by a judge when they had no proceedings before them. On following up on this, I found yet more evidence of people exercising First Amendment getting hauled off in handcuffs, set up for a kangaroo trial and incarcerated for six months (Sassower / CJA).

      I learned the hard way that protective orders don’t protect, which then brings up the question – what are they there for to start with ?

      I also have no qualms about the issue the religious groups don’t protect their WOMEN, BOYS & GIRLS. However, equally bad behavior and belief systems exists among agnostics and atheists in my life, in fact, the excuses given are about the same, and the behavioral traits the same.

      When it talks of Christian Fascism, however, we have to be honest that as it’s played out by Bush & Friends, this also includes Unification Church (hardly “Christian”) and is mostly just a power/money justification.

      With what I’ve seen, I cannot rule spiritual influences, and reject the Bible as a coherent set of meaning and language in describing what it calls spirit (holy/unholy) as opposed to simply emotions. Nor can I ignore that the literacy brought out in the 1500s/1600s in England challenged a SERIOUS regime and changed that neck of the world, and helped make possible the country i was born in (though not all my grandparents).

      Anyone who wishes to create independence or create slavery is going to understand the power of language — and either drench the air with certain flavors, censoring others, or create such chronic confusion that most are left in a state of confusion, i.e., not organized enough to act to protect themselves.

      As I read (with vomit receptacle handle) the “reasoning” and rhetoric behind so many HHS programs, and others failure to critique the censorship of the “DV” (VAWA”) movement’s “ideas bank,” it’s clear that logic and reason about reality departed long ago — and instead to favor any and all attempts to manipulate perception of reality in order to perpetuate (grants and other favored status projects).

      Only this past year, watching these corporations, did I start to question: OK — they are taking the money and running — so, where is that money GOING, and what’s it being used for?


      February 11, 2012 at 2:47 pm

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: