The Trilateral Commission, John, Hillary, Obama, and the NWO of Feudalism

By Barbara H. Peterson

 

This morning I opened my e-mail and found two items of interest that when put together, spell disaster for America as we know it. As it stands right now, the three Presidential “frontrunners” are nothing but shills for a New World Order of feudalism.

 

The first item I opened was from the American Free Press:

 

Global Elite Gather in D.C., by James P. Tucker Jr.

 

The Trilateral Commission—one of the three most powerful globalist groups in the world—held closed-door meetings right here in Washington, D.C. from April 25 to 28. True to form, those members of the media who knew about the meeting—or were themselves participants in the proceedings—refused to discuss what went on inside or report on the attendees. Luckily, AFP’s own editor, Jim Tucker, was on the scene to bust this clandestine confabulation wide open.

 

Luminaries at the Trilateral Commission meeting in Washington expressed confidence that they own all three major presidential candidates, who, despite political posturing, will support sovereignty-surrendering measures such as NAFTA and the “North American Union.”

 

The second item of interest this morning was titled “The New Feudalism” by Moss David Posner. David postulates in this essay that Americans have a disconnect to reality that has been carefully groomed over the years to make them susceptible to things that they would normally not accept. He goes on to conclude,

 

The current crop of international criminals wishes to reduce the world to one large feudal system. Such a notion endured for many centuries before. Could they really believe such is possible? Could they really pull it off? In this last regard, history does not speak in our favor.

 

Connecting the dots, one would have to conclude that David is absolutely correct in his conclusion. It all makes sense.

 

Standing Orders for the Next President

 

According to James Tucker,

 

This panel [Trilateral Commission] had these orders for the next president: increase foreign aid across the board because “America does not pay its fair share,” pay up the arrears in UN dues, allow as many immigrants into the United States as want to come and provide “amnesty” for illegal aliens already here.

 

Why else would the Trilateral Commission’s standing orders for the next President include such things as open borders, illegal alien amnesty, and shelling out even more taxpayer money, if not to reduce American citizens to lives of servitude and desperation?

 

All three handpicked Presidential candidates will do nothing to stop NAFTA or the NAU. In fact, they have pledged to support them. Here are quotes from the Trilateral Commission’s meeting regarding the candidates’ stand on these issues:

 

“John has always supported free trade, even while campaigning before union leaders… Hil and Barack are pretending to be unhappy about some things, but that’s merely political posturing. They’re solidly in support…”  referring to Sens. John McCain (R-Ariz.), Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.) and Barack Obama (D-Ill.). Mrs. Clinton, they noted, held strategy sessions as first lady on how to get Congress to approve NAFTA “without changes.” As president, they agreed, she would do no more than “dot an i or cross a t.” Candidate Obama has not denied news reports in Canada that his top economic adviser, Austan Goolsbee, assured Canadian diplomats that the senator would keep NAFTA intact and his anti-trade talk is just “campaign rhetoric.” (Tucker, 2008)

 

The Trilateral Commission members concluded that the only real danger is Ron Paul.

 

They expressed concern that Paul’s rallies have attracted multitudes of young people who are getting “their political education.” They want Republicans to pressure Paul to drop out now and stop his education rallies. This assignment was given to Thomas Foley, former U.S. House speaker. (Tucker, 2008)

 

An educated and informed populace is not on the agenda for these New World Order (NWO) promoters. After all, have you ever seen an educated feudal serf?

 

The Stockholm Syndrome

 

Remember President Bush saying after 9/11 “if you are not with us, you are with the terrorists?” Who is this “us?” Why, the global elite of course. You thought it was all loyal Americans? Think again. Who are “the terrorists?” anyone besides the global elite. And what do you do with terrorists? If you are the ruling power, you exterminate, torture, and use them to accomplish your objectives. You keep them uninformed, fill their lives with propaganda and lies, and make them believe that there is nothing they can do about it. In fact, if you’re very good at what you do, they even learn to love you for it. This phenomenon is called the Stockholm Syndrome.

 

The Stockholm syndrome occurs when abused persons show signs of loyalty to their abuser/s because they become emotionally attached. How do you get your victim to become emotionally attached? According to Katina Krasnic, “This development occurs when there are perceived threats of violence, disempowerment of the subject, high levels of stress or trauma upon subject, and ultimate dependence upon the person in control for base survival” (LINK).

 

Isn’t this exactly what our government is doing? The population is bombarded with perceived threats of terrorism, our basic human rights are being confiscated before our eyes and we are becoming more disempowered by the day. People are under high levels of stress due to the threat of violence, as well as foreclosures, gasoline prices, lowering wages, loss of jobs, lack of medical care, and the myriad of other ways stress is induced. This stress creates the ultimate dependence desired by the abusers in power, and is exactly what is happening at this very moment. By the time the program is complete, people will be running to the government to protect them from the government, and thus, the serfdom noose tightens; and as good little serfs, will defend their master to the death.

 

In an act of self-delusion, the victims of Stockholm Syndrome develop conditions in order to reassure themselves that they will be protected or cared for. By creating a false emotional attachment and seeking praise and approval of their captor, they attempt to make a false reality for themselves, in which no harm can come to them. And by defending and/or protecting their captors from police or anyone who “comes to the rescue,” they allow themselves to appear as if they have some control in a relationship which they really have no power. The value of their lives, which the captor grants, is seen as a sign of affection or love, and the captive wishes to reciprocate in order to maintain their own position at that time. By accepting a level of objectification that one should reject as a matter of basic human dignity, hostages or captives weaken their ability to control their emotions. This allows them to become malleable, thus becoming easily susceptible to the whims of their captors, and creates this unbalanced relationship of attachment between the captor and the captive. (Krasnec, 2008)

 

Presidential Elections and the Road to Serfdom

 

Our Presidential elections are an emotional parade in which charlatans called candidates create a false reality for a nation of Stockholm Syndrome victims who desperately need to believe that someone in a high place actually cares about what happens to them. This is a carefully constructed delusion. While the populace lives the delusion and buys into the lies perpetrated by these Trilateral Commission globalist lackeys, the real players work the sidelines and act as shills in a crowd of marks, spurring the act on.

 

Wake up! John, Hillary, and Obama do not care one iota about the people of this country. They are charlatans in a circus staged for no other purpose than to push the people of this country further down the road to delusion and serfdom.

 

There is no doubt in this writer’s mind that feudalism is the global elite’s plan for the earth’s population. David Posner has nailed it. Americans are to be reduced to serfdom in this Utopia envisioned by the Trilateral Commission, Bilderbergs, and the rest of the criminals in power in a worldwide conspiracy to dominate life itself.

 

What Chance Do We Have?

 

The only chance that we as a people have is that these “leaders” do not perceive their own weaknesses because of arrogance. The more power they get, the more arrogant they get, and the weaker they become. As one ascends into the heights of arrogance, the less aware a person becomes of any personal weakness, and as any fighter knows, if an opponent is not aware of personal weakness, vulnerabilities are created. The key is to study one’s opponent, and prepare one’s self to strike at his/her undefended weakness. You cannot study your opponent if you are too engrossed in his/her charade by being a good little Stockholm Syndrome victim.

 

Therefore, I encourage people to think outside the box. Do not get wrapped up in the emotional hype surrounding the three Presidential “frontrunners.” They are all supporting the same ideology, and that is feudal serfdom for America as well as the rest of the world. Wake up! Join the people willing to think beyond the hype. Start studying your adversary and spreading the word about the weaknesses you encounter. It is the only chance we have.

 

 

Copyright 2008, Barbara H. Peterson

 

 

The New Feudalism

By Moss David Posner

I received another thoughtful correspondence today from the first American citizen to be granted refugee status by a foreign government. For obvious reasons, he will remain anonymous. I commented that I hadn’t written lately; and on asking myself why, the answer surprised even me: There was little more to be said regarding our current circumstances as a nation and as a republic.

As I think over my views and how they have evolved over the past six years, what comes to mind are the drastic revisions I have been obliged to make. The revisions are not so much in the very understandings that I have entertained as they are in the nature of the seriousness with which I have come to regard them. For some time now, events have never really made any sense. It has appeared that the policies and actions of our government officials as well as the various interest groups have been on a suicidal course, giving away liberties, dumbing down education, dropping the protections of our borders, and the continuous and indiscriminate squandering of enormous sums of money for the purpose of fighting totally senseless wars.

These observations have been coupled with what has appeared to be an existential disconnect between what I envisioned as the drastic and inevitable consequences of our actions, on the one hand, and the de facto consequences, on the other. It is as if we have been living in a dream-world, a through-the-looking-glass universe in which events would appear to have an inevitable and inescapable existential import yet which evaporate in front of our eyes with no observable incontrovertible consequences.

In a simpler, perhaps agrarian lifestyle, a person could see a necessary and prompt consequence of an ill-chosen action. Even actions that led to consequences a year or two later were met with quite predictable outcomes, such as the result of failure to rotate crops, or the failure to store provisions. Yet in our highly technological and culture-deficient and value-deficient world, we somehow are protected from the immediate recognition of consequences. This is particularly true when considering the subject of human rights and of the law. Sell-outs and betrayals by our congresspersons, massive corporate control and sequestering of activities–all–do not strike us immediately with a resounding thud, which would jar us to make the obvious connection and thereby would confirm our previously tentative conclusion

Perhaps two hundred and fifty years ago, when people could make necessary connections in time and space, they would react immediately, fearing the obvious consequences. But in a long-chain inferential world, such connections are subtle and difficult to measure.

I am reminded of a comment made by Ayn Rand in “Atlas Shrugged,” a work which directed itself precisely to this subject, when one independent thinker says to another,

“I would have killed–but who was there to kill? It was everybody, and it was nobody.”

We did not see parallels in pre-war Nazi Germany. Our failure was in part due to a lack of a sense of history (which has long since been forgotten in any meaningful sense of the terms in our halls of education) and due in large part to a very subtle and powerful disinformation and mass conditioning effort on the part of our government. This influence has been more organized and centralized over the past half-century, to the extent to which it is almost understandable that the average American would simply pass off any insights suggested as “conspiracy” hogwash.

Finally, because as a nation we have never had mass invasion since the Revolutionary War, or mass starvation and privation, as has Europe seen, there is no basis for direct comparisons to be drawn. It is true that many bright writers are now seeing our plight in those very broad terms that our founders created formally and retroactively embraced out of necessity, and which these writers recognize as directly relevant to our situation at hand. What is not clear is in what manner can citizens organize and combat the evil that surrounds them, precisely because of this lack of focal discomfort which I have tried to describe. Do they boycott Arab oil pumps? Are they even aware that such is possible? How about massive numbers of recall elections? In order for that to work it would be necessary for people to know that this could be done, and to see clearly to what end. One or two idealistic individuals could be eliminated without a trace or a ripple.

With the inability to protect one’s property, one’s income, or even to have control over money by exercising the right to trade in any monetary equivalent one chooses, with the inability to regard one’s person and loved ones sacrosanct and to defend them with weapons–what is left in the way of a departure point? Even the right to privacy is lost.

The current crop of international criminals wish to reduce the world to one large feudal system. Such a notion endured for many centuries before. Could they really believe such is possible? Could they really pull it off?

In this last regard, history does not speak in our favor.

 

 

Originally published at LINK.