Here Thar Be Monsters!

From the other side of the argument to the other side of the planet, read in over 149 countries and 17 languages. We bring you news and opinion with an IndoTex® flavor. Be sure to check out the Home Site. Send thoughts and comments to, and tell all your friends. Sampai jumpa, y'all.


A Modest And Attainable Proposal

That there is a global conspiracy of some sort is beyond a reasonable doubt.  I have interviewed several top-flight researchers on Radio Far Side, there are hundreds of well-documented books, and a simple search of the internet will turn up thousands of hours of erudite (opposed to wild-eyed) speculation on the subject.

That the conspiracy involves some connection between banking, science and religion is additionally without doubt.

That the conspirators are obsessed with genetics and breeding is also beyond reproach.

As I, and many others, have posited, these people use multi-layered approaches to everything.  Just as one example, the JFK assassination can be laid at the feet of a half-dozen different groups.  Many have argued for this one or that, but in reality, they are all guilty.  Each group received some benefit from the killing, and each added some aspect to the perpetration and cover-up of the killing.  The same can be said for 9/11, the various wars, even the Tulip Bubble of 1637.

For those who have read, pondered and concluded that this conspiracy is real, the question has always been, "How do we stop them?"  After all, this conspiracy has most likely existed since the dawn of our common history.  It has tentacles in every aspect of life and has a media machine so pervasive and powerful that most people are entranced and only exist at the most superficial levels of consciousness.

Those nations that have attempted to fight this global conspiracy, represented on the most visible level as the international banksters, have found themselves destroyed.  Among the many examples are Libya, Nazi Germany, Egypt, Syria, Socialist Russia, and so on.  What all these examples have in common is the use of non-debt money and banking, as well as the universal perception that they are/were evil.

That's not to say that they didn't/don't have distasteful aspects, but I am hard-pressed to think of any example of a person or nation that is truly and completely evil (save for the international banksters).  Each example cited has a number of redeeming values that are carefully hidden from those who don't dig a little past the veneer of evil cast upon them by the conspirators.

So, how does one fight such a seemingly all-powerful, all-pervasive enemy?  And what makes us so sure that they are an enemy and not just trying to raise the human race to new levels of existence?

Second question first.  The conspirators control our global economic system (i.e., the banksters).  The money they issue is privately owned and based on debt, and includes some amount of 'interest' over principle.  By not issuing the money to pay the interest, they ensure a system of scarcity, boom-bust cycles, unemployment, and so forth.  In other words, they have created a 'closed' financial system that is unable to grow, at least beyond their control, and is incapable of ensuring all people participate in wealth creation.  It is a system which engenders death, suffering and destruction.  It is 'negative' economics.

By contrast, a economic system that issues money based on the productive output of any group of people will always have enough for everyone.  The more an individual creates, the more money they have, and consequently, the more money available to the collective economy.  This is known as an 'open' financial system, and examples include the American colonies, Nazi Germany and Libya under Ghaddafi.  In each example, there was full employment, economic vitality and high productivity (we are only addressing economic issues here).

In each case of 'open' economies, the bankster class mounted massive efforts to control and destroy those countries and bring them under the control of the 'closed' system.  In each case, the local populations suffered scarcity, poverty and business cycles once the banksters had re-instituted their control.

If one considers purposefully causing the suffering and destruction of societies to be morally reprehensible and evil, then we can easily classify the bankster class as such.  They are without moral or ethical concern for the larger population, and so can not be assumed to have the best interests of Mankind at heart.

As for the first question, "What can we do to stop them?"  The answer is at once very simple and extremely complex.  A surgeon trying to extract a tumor knows that all he needs to do is cut out the offending tissue, but he must also be concerned about the surrounding tissues and how the extraction will affect the organism as a whole.

The simple answer is shun the banksters.  Ignore them.  Cast them as pariahs.  Treat them as lepers or cancers.  Take away their power by completely ignoring them.  Simple.  Blooless.  Non-violent.


For thousands of years, these creatures have invaded and infested every major part of our society.  They have infiltrated religion, science, education, communications, art, politics and economics.  What else is there?How can we cut off our noses to spite our faces?  We would almost literally have nothing of our current culture if we were to reject that which the banksters have sullied.

In order to fight this evil, we must be prepared to take multi-generational action, just as they have done.  We must make it a central part of our lives to do something each and every day to extract ourselves from their system.  And we must ensure that the effort lasts as long as it takes to put an end to it.  In other words, we are all cancer patients and we must resolve to stay the course to health, or give up and die.  Simple choice, very complex actions.

The first thing is education.  We have the power to educate ourselves.  The information is out there, but we must be both discerning and focused in getting it.  It takes hours of reading and listening.  It takes time to research and determine who are the good teachers and the bad.  It takes a concerted effort over many years to gain the knowledge we need to act correctly and decisively.  Until we do this, we can not teach others, and we will continue to be susceptible to the influence of the banksters.  It is important to note that you are never too old to start, only too unmotivated to want freedom for yourself and those you love.

Second, you must assume that any mass culture is suspect and likely controlled by the banksters, no matter how innocuous or vital it seems.  All religion, politics, entertainment, economics, science, and especially education are designed to indoctrinate the population into their system.

Because of this, we should try in every way possible to avoid any of these systems.  Wherever possible, set up your own groups for worship, leadership, recreation, trade, and especially education.  Homeschooling, barter, neighborhood art projects, home worship, and the like are all viable alternatives in many places to the mass culture which is little more than mind-control outlets.  This will involve turning off the TeeVee, or at least carefully selecting those things which are allowed in.  Remember that all communications implant thought memes and even viruses.  We must guard both our conscious and unconscious minds.

It is important to remember that the banksters view our children as weapons, and as such, they use the schools as a means of training and activating soldiers for their quests.  We would all do well to keep our children as far away from those institutions as we can.

We must also avoid the alopathic medicine pushed by the banksters.  This is getting increasingly difficult, since a century of antibiotics and vaccines are quickly creating pathogens that are beyond the efficacy of natural and homeopathic healing.  However, avoiding vaccines at all costs and refusing to use pharmaceuticals within reason seems a worthwhile effort.

As for worship, one can easily see that modern religious institutions are designed to prevent the individual from experiencing quiet solitude and introspection.  Instead, they are garish nightmares of sound and light and noise preventing real religious experience.  It is vital for each person to spend at least a half-hour a day in a quiet, secluded space looking deep within one's self.  It stands to reason that if we are created in the Divine Image, then the answers we need are encased inside of each of us.  We simply have to listen.

Why else would our mass society be designed to keep us hyper-active?  It is purposefully amped up to prevent us from being quiet and being alone.  These two things present the most danger to their plans, as they can not afford to have us realizing our own self-worth and intrinsic power.  Nothing scares the banksters more than a mass of self-actuated humans.

Finally, economics.  This may be one of the hardest things to extract ourselves from, which is why the banksters take such pains to control this aspect of life.  After all, we can not become self-actuated if we are in constant fear of poverty, want and starvation.  The 'closed' ecoomic system is the key to our slavery at all other levels.  The threat of losing our jobs and our property is enough to keep most of us tied to the mill stone.

So, combining these efforts, what is the most efficacious means to achieve real freedom and independence?  You're not going to like the answer, but history proves that it is the only way to go.

Get 10 like-minded families together.  Incorporate...yes, I said incorporate, because you need the protections afforded by that form of entity.  Combine your resources to buy a 100-acre farm.  Each family will receive 10 acres on which they can do anything they wish.  Each family can trade their personal output with the other families, or outside, as well.  Preferably seek other similar communities to trade with, and by trade I mean do not use bankster currency.  Set up your own educational system, legal system, etc., based on whatever philosophical background to which the community subscribes.

Think of this as a kind of colonialization.  You are building outposts in a wild and strange land, though it is not nearly as tough as it once was, since you can still have internet and satellite TeeVee and all the comforts of modern society, you are just finding new ways to extract that life from the control of banksters.  Ultimately, your community will generate its own power and possibly even sell some back to the grid as a means of income.  You will be nearly self-sufficient in food.  Your surroundings will be as wild or civilized as you like.  And you will own as much of your work and output as is possible in this world at the moment.

This is not a hippie commune or religious cult.  This is just people banding together in enlightened self-interest to help each other get 'off the grid' and 'out of the system'.  Yes, it's hard work and yes, you take full responsibility for your success or failure, but that is one of the key 'carrots' used by the banksters to keep us on the hook: unemployment insurance, retirement accounts, etc.  They take on some of the responsibility to make it all more attactive for you to remain a slave voluntarily.

These ideas are not new.  Emerson and Thoreau, among many others, pondered this kind of thing.  More recently, folks like Clif High have discussed 'self-organizing communities'.  Whatever you call them and however you create them, they have one thing in common: they are the only viable weapons against the insidious bankster slave system.

There are two kinds of slaves, those who dream of freedom and those who actively seek it.  I firmly believe that if the reader takes the time to thoroughly educate himself on the issues at hand, he will come to the same conclusion.  You can begin by listening to the folks on Radio Far Side.  I have carefully chosen them as representatives of some or all the ideas necessary to begin researching.  The work of John Perkins and Joseph Farrell build the Big Picture.  Folks like Frank O'Collins are building solutions.  The whole thing is a giant jig-saw puzzle to keep us from seeing the Big Picture clearly, and people like these are helping to assemble the pieces so we can see just how deep the rabbit hole is.

In the end, it is not enough to know the problem, we must also be about fixing it once and for all.  We owe it not only to our progeny, but to our species to end the tyranny of the banksters.  It is no mistake of history that just at the moment they have the means to complete their plan, we have the means to end them.

Most importantly is that we can not use violence or bloodshed.  The banksters are masters of that game.  The thing they can not fight, though, is peace and fraternity and unified, unblinking, unfettered humanity.  It is the nightmare that keeps them awake at night.  It is their deepest fear.

Now is the time!  Carpe diem!


INTERVIEW: Frank O'Collins on RadioFarSide

Can anything be done to fix the current state of world affairs?  Are there alternatives to the current systems of law, education and finance?  Is anyone thinking about new sane models for our society?

Today’s guest joins us from Sydney, Australia.  His name is Frank O’Collins and he is the founder and developer of the Ucadia models for a revitalized society.

Frank has extensive experience working in politics, finance and computer technology. Though not having a formal degree after studying music and economics, he has spent his life to date reading over 15,000 books and hundreds of thousands of excerpts while researching and acquiring competence in the subjects involved in the Ucadia system.  We encourage you to surf over to any of his websites linked on the blog to begin learning about his work.

Please welcome Frank O’Collins.

Frank's website:
TalkShoe series: Frank O'Collins

Thanks for listening!  Please send a link to your contacts today.


Money Grows On Cyprus Trees

What would you do if you woke up one morning and found that your money was not yours?  What if you found out that because your government was full of numbnuts and bucketheads you were 10% poorer than you were when you went to bed?

If you live on a sleepy little island in the back corner of the Mediterranean Sea, snuggled between Turkey and Lebanon, that is exactly what happened to you.

Yielding to pressure from the IMF (big surprise there) and the EU, the Cypriot government agreed to steal nearly 7% of all Cyprus bank deposits up to 100,000 euro, and almost 10% of all deposits over that amount, and hand it over to the banksters.  (gasp!  shock!)

Why?  Because the government of Cyprus had been arm-twisted into buying Greek bonds as part of one of the many earlier bailout schemes.  When Greece defaulted on the bonds, the banksters wanted their money back.  Damn the little guy and his hard work and desire to save for some future reward.

The first thing we should all learn from this happy little event over the weekend is that your money is not yours.  The second thing is don't put any of 'their' money in 'their' banks.  Keep it in your mattress and make them work for it just like you did.  I have always found it helpful to keep as much of my liquid assets out of institutions I don't personally control as I can.

It's no small irony that Cyprus has been a major cog in what Joseph Farrell calls "the international bankster class" operations for about as long as the West has history.  In his book, Babylon's Banksters, Farrell traces the history of money and banking from the dawn of recorded history up to yesterday.  By the last page, you have a pretty good grasp on what just happened in Cyprus and would not be very surprised by it.

What the whole thing comes down to is that the euro, like many of the world's currencies, is private money created by private banks.  When they want some of it back, they are well within their theoretical rights to take back their 'property', which they only lent to you and me (at interest, of course).  We mere mortals, having agreed to use their property to conduct our daily activities, have wittingly or not agreed to their terms.  It's a simple, if rather obscure, contractual arrangement.

What causes me no end of head-slapping is that we mere mortals just don't seem to get it.  We act all surprised and shocked when we realize that our 'money' really belongs to someone else and we have just been allowed to use it, like borrowing the neighbor's lawn mower or something.  And just like the mower, we have to return it full of gasoline, regardless of what state we received it in (usually empty in this case).

A lot of conspiracy theorists talk about a 'one world currency' and how They are driving us into it.  Little do they know that a single global currency would not serve the bankster purposes.  Since the beginning of our history, They have fostered incompatible currencies and then sat back and reaped gobs of wealth being the only group that could convert one to another.  Actually, if there were a single global currency, it would put a major dent in their operations.

Rather, they want to simplify the math and create two or three (trilateral) currencies, which would need to be traded and converted in the course of commerce, thus paying them a fee on every international transaction.  It's little more than a carefully hidden private tax on business dealings.

As Joseph Farrell points out, even in the earliest times, the West used gold bullion, while the East used silver.  Thus, the traders in the middle reaped a tidy profit converting the bullion back and forth between hemispheres.  And just like Sparta (then) and Libya (now), anyone who didn't play their game got a good ass-whuppin'.

Back to Cyprus.  The Cypriots really don't have the right to be angry in strictly legal terms.  They consented to use private paper to conduct their business transactions.  Furthermore, they didn't raise a fuss when the IMF/EU arm-twisted their government into buying up a bunch of worthless Greek bonds to keep the game afloat a bit longer.  Now, when the chips are down and the chickens come home to roost, now they are upset.  Sorry Charlie, shoulda seen that one coming.

The only way out would be to follow the Icelandic model and repudiate the debt, sever all ties with the IMF/EU and throw the banksters in jail.  One caveat: they had better arm every Cypriot to the teeth and be ready for an invasion.  That's the bankster ace in the hole.  They always foster a healthy arms trade with belligerent groups and nations in order to have ready 'enforcers' for just those kinds of situations.  The one thing Iceland had going for it is that there ain't much there to fight for, other than some ideas.

Cyprus, on the other hand, has always been a key trading post between the Occident and Orient, at least for the past 12,000 years.  At one point or another, it has been occupied by northern, eastern, western and southern empires as a key trade route.  Cyprus has also served as an important hangout for banksters trading bullion back and forth between their playgrounds.  Right now, Cyprus is a key base for launching attacks on Syria, Lebanon and other points of interest to the Zionists.  It must remain within the Western hegemony or cause a significant rewriting of Mid East strategy.

I have to laugh at the headlines that claim this is a 'dangerous precedent'.  In fact, it is not a precedent at all.  The right to private property has long been established at law.

What is worth watching is how the Cypriots react.  Most likely, there will be some rioting and hording, but eventually folks will knuckle under or lose food and energy imports.  If they continue to stand up against the banksters, then the island will be invaded by more compliant forces...say, the Muslim Brotherhood from Syria.  Either way, the banksters seemingly hold the winning hand.

Really, the only way out of this mess is a tripartite attack on the bankster class:
  1. widespread democritization of hyper-dimensional energy (i.e.-zero-point energy);
  2. complete and utter rejection of GMO foods; and,
  3. the issuance of publicly-controlled currency in whatever form.

Short of that, we are all well on our way to the Cypriot model.  The banksters have already seized north of $8 trillion in the US, and similar reclamations of private property are running apace worldwide.  Cyprus is only the latest and currently most visible example.

The most likely outcome is that people will generally roll over and take it.  Why?  We've all been trained by religion to wait for some outside force to come in and clean things up for us.  This mentality has been carefully fostered by the banksters over centuries to keep us all complacent and docile.  In other words, Karl Marx was right on that score.

In the near term, the most likely outcome is that the Cypriots will riot and destroy each other's property, while leaving the banksters' property untouched.  You are not likely to see bonfires of euro notes, which is the real problem.  Instead, people will lash out at local businesses and homes, destroying the few things with which they really have to fight the real monster.

Furthermore, we are likely to see the same scenario played out repeatedly in other places.  The ideal response will be that of the US, where folks stirred for amoment, grumbled, then went directly back to sleep.  Instead of becoming angry, we will all run to the churches to listen to the bankster prophets tell us that our savior is coming...just wait (another 2,000 years)!

And so it goes...history repeats and rhymes and no one does anything really constructive to fix things.  It is said that we use roughly 10% of our brains' capacity, which happens to be the same amount of money being confiscated by the IMF from the Cypriots.  Maybe we are using the wrong 10%.


Linguistic Hegemony

You know?  I don't believe there's such
a thing as TV.  I mean -
They just keep showing you
The same pictures over and over.
And when they talk they just make sounds
That more or less synch up
With their lips.
That's what I think!

Language!  It's a virus!
Language!  It's a virus!
Language!  It's a virus!
  --Laurie Anderson

I admit I am guilty of linguistic hegemony.  I have made a fair living off of teaching English.  To be fair, I have also taught Spanish and German, but I go where the market is.

I also point out that I am fluent in four languages, conversant in another five, and have at least elementary command of an additional eight.  So I claim a certain amount of expertise on the subject at hand.  I have formally studied English, Spanish, German and Latin, and I have learned the rest by osmosis.  I have even learned a foreign language using another foreign language, which is a fun thing should you have occasion to try.

That said, I will tell you that empires are built on little more than language.

I find very few commentators or writers pointing out this fact.  They speak of economic, religious or military domination, but rarely, if ever, highlight the role of language in the maintenance of empires.  All other forms of empire are founded on the power of language to project them across time and space.

The Roman empire could not have stood for 900 years had not Latin been forced on all conquered peoples and nations.  In order to conduct commerce or access information or receive public appointments, one had to be proficient in Latin.  It was that simple.

If the Teutans wanted to trade with the Gauls or the Angles, they had to do so using Latin.  It was the only common means of communication available, and most people with any amount of education had already been forced to learn Latin as subjects of the empire.

Even now, there are five primary Romance languages (French, Spanish, Portuguese, Italian and Romanian).  Latin is still the official state language of the Vatican, which has no small amount of influence on global events, as evidenced by events of the past month.  And Latin suffuses dozens, if not hundreds, of languages worldwide.  The etymology of nearly every polysyllabic word I have written thus far is from Latin, with a smattering of Greek (another empire) and a grammatical base of Teutonic that is English.

Language is the mortar which binds many of our modern nation-states.  The United States could not exist without the use of American English as the common denominator.  Indonesia maintains its republic through the use of a Malayu dialect.  China's republic is held together with Mandarin, just as the vast nation of Russia is held together with a common language.  In fact, none of these monolithic political states could exist without a common language.

Most of the success of the Anglo-American empire has been founded on the international use of English as a sort of trading language.  Just as Arabic holds the Islamic world together, English creates the hegemony of the Anglo-American empire.  Those who wish to access the economic or intellectual benefits of the empire must perforce use English.  All the professional journals of any consequence, most of the translations of more obscure texts in other languages and the vast majority of international trade are available only to those who have a command of the English language.

But why is this important to empire?  The answer is both simple and complex.

All language is symbolic.  When we speak or write, we are converting images and symbols in our minds into a form of carrier wave and transmitting them to others who are capable of decoding and rebuilding the images and symbols in their heads.  Every form of human communication is nothing more than encoding and decoding information to transfer and recreate images between transmitters and receivers.

The key concept here is that the images and symbols we have in our minds are cultural and experiential.  For instance, the concept of elephant will have vastly different images and symbols connected with it for a US school kid and his Thai counterpart.  The former will envision zoos and circuses, while the latter will see a common work animal.  Thus it is true that no matter what we say or write, it carries specific cultural meanings and contexts.  So anyone learning a foreign language must necessarily become immersed in the culture of that language, because language and culture are one and the same thing.  Language simply encodes culture and transmits it to the receiver.

By the same token, culture is language.  We typically call this phenomenon slang.  Each generation develops its unique slang based on its unique experiences, and as a way of identifying itself as distinct from others.  Some slang catches on in the general culture and becomes a permanent part of the language, while other forms fade over time and are eventually lost in meaning.

We need look no further than Shakespeare himself for clear examples of this.  The terms fish monger, nunnery and fishwife are all contemporary slang for whorehouse, pimp and whore, though modern readers of Hamlet will hardly get the pun.

So what's the point of all this, you ask impatiently.  I'm getting there.

Language has been the single most effective tool for maintaining empires in the squalid history of Mankind.    The English language has been shoved down people's throats for hundreds of years, first by the British empire, then later by the American empire.

Enforcement is simple.  If you want to do business with the empire, you need to use the language of the empire.  Plain and simple.  In so doing, the empire ensures that its culture is infused into subject nations, thus ensuring a market for its products and services.  One of the largest global cottage industries is teaching the English language, and by extension suffusing other cultures and peoples with the Anglo-American way of life.

Learning English gives access to English-language books, movies and music.  It brings with it a very subtle and likely permanent invasion.  The ideals, concepts and contexts that are the 'Western way of life' are encoded in the language and infect all who tap into the transmission.

The English language itself is a study in conquest.  At its core, it is a Germanic language and many English speakers will find they recognize a lot of German vocabulary.  Over this base is laid Latin, French and Greek.  In addition, English has picked up words from dozens of other languages, especially those of conquered peoples.  American English contains dozens of American Indian words.  Australian English stole many Aboriginal words.  British English has picked up a significant Indian vocabulary.

Another phenomenon, noted by myself and others of my acquaintance, that becoming fluent in other languages usually means creating entirely new personae, as well.  When I speak Italian, I find myself gesticulating wildly, or Spanish makes me feel romantic, while French turns me into a snoot.  It is quite obvious that learning and using other languages carries with it cultural viruses that infect the user and subtly change the personality.

Language is a curious thing.  It not only encodes, but is encoded.  It creates a culture, but is also created by a culture.  It is at once the chicken and the egg.

Powerful economic, political or military cultures leave their impressions in other languages, as they have been left in English, and the study of a language is a study of its cultural history.  Indonesian is embedded with Chinese, Arabic, Portuguese, Dutch and English...all empires that have squatted on this country.

English does have certain advantages over other languages.  It readily assimilates foreign grammar and vocabulary, and the syntax is flexible enough to accommodate a variety of dialectical forms.

Still, it is a tool of hegemony, like other languages of conquest.  It transfers and overrides other cultures and is the key to a number of 'thought viruses' that tend to infect minds.  Of course, this power behind the language is and has been dependent on the economic engine of the empire.  Without the financial might backing it, the linguistic hegemony may well collapse.

All of which should leave you with two distinct ideas:
1) You feel dirty now because I've infected you with thought viruses; and
2) You really should start learning Mandarin.


Beware The Ides Of March

OK, I gotta break down and say something about the new Papa Francesco.  There's just too much weird cool stuff going on around this one.

Before I get to the whole Ides of March thing, let's start with the name.  Francesco literally means "Frenchman".  In the good old days, the French were called 'Franks', and the word/name Frank has come into English (via German) meaning 'true'.  Obviously, the Franks had a reputation for being overly honest, or something.  At any rate, I can't imagine this bit of trivium was not considered in the whole naming ordeal.

Naturally, there's the allusion to San Francesco d'Asisi.  St. Francis is revered as a very humble man who dedicated his life to caring for the poor and did so by making a point of being poor a fault.  His reasoning was that the Christ owned nothing, and so should the devout Christian.  His order, the Franciscans, are called the Little Brothers of the Poor.

Among other things, we list Francesco as being the first time a pope has used that name, and so one assumes that this pope is making the point that he will be both 'truthful' and 'devoted to the poor'.

He's also the first American pope (yes, Argentines are Americans also) implying the "New World", and so one assumes that the Church is sending the message that it is focused on a New World (Order?).  Frankly, a devotion to a 'new world' of 'truth' and a focus on 'poverty' seems to fit the whole 'behind the scenes' thing going on here.

What really caught my eye, though, was the election of Francesco on the Ides of March.  There sheer amount of symbolism behind this fact is a bit mind-blowing, really.  Hang on.

In the ancient Roman calendar, the new year began on March 1st, with celebrations lasting for two weeks, culminating in a big festival on March 15th (could be 13th too, depending on the full moon).  Part of the celebration was the selection of a 'scapegoat'.  This involved finding an old man, dressing him in sheep skins and beating him with sticks to the edge of the city.  This was symbolic of casting out the old year and ushering in the new, and the origin of the English word 'scapegoat'.  Kinda brings old Benedict XVI to mind, when you think about it.

There was also a ritual where the high priest of the Jupiter cult, called the Flamen Dialis, would lead a sheep down the Via Sacra to a place called the Arx, or Citadel.  The Arx was a revered place where Roman legions had repelled an invasion around 340 BC.  The sheep would be sacrificed at the spot, which brings to mind one of the titles of the pope is The Shepherd who leads the 'sheep' of the Church.  Are we to assume then that this pope will sacrifice his sheep at the Arx (of the Covenant...)?

Hang gets more fun.

The Ides of March began a 'holy week' festival in Rome dedicated to Attis and Cybele.

Attis was a character in Roman mythology who was thrown into the reeds by a river as a baby in an attempt to kill him.  He was rescued by a bunch of shepherds (!) following the directions of the goddess Cybele.  Here's where it really gets good...

Attis supposedly died under a tree, so the festival included an effigy of Attis hung from a tree being carried to the temple by a collegium of temple priests (can you say College of Cardinals?), who would then mourn for three days (!) until Cybele (a.k.a. the Great Mother) raised him from the dead (!).  By the way, this is also the origin of the Christmas tree.

Forget the whole Moses thing about Attis being found in the reeds and stuff.  Let's just look at what Francesco did immediately after being crowned pope.  He 'ran away' to the chapel of Santa Maria Maggiore, which is dedicated to...guess who?  The mother of Jesus, or Magna Mater - the Great Mother.  And there in the chapel is, of course, a large effigy of a man hung on a tree who died and was mourned for three days before being resurrected.  Starting to sound familiar?

Are you getting the same feeling I am?  That there is some kind of weird occult festival/ritual being played out in front of the world and we just don't get it?  Let alone that Francesco is a member of the Jesuit order, who are considered the CIA of the Vatican.  Let alone that Papa is from Argentina, notorious home to a plethora of Nazis after the Big War, continuing a theme from the last two popes.

Yup, when you start scratching the surface, a familiar odor wafts up.  There's something rotten in Rome.  And don't forget that the festival of the goddess Esther (Easter) is just around the corner.

Any way you slice it, 2013 is going to be a fun year.  Queen Liz 2 is ailing to be followed by William.  Queen Beatrix is retiring, to be followed by William (2) of Orange.  Bennie just handed the keys to Frank.  And Missy Kate is fixing to pop in July.

Oh, and that Global Coastal Event thing from the web bots and the Far Sight Institute.

Just no getting around it.  Time to grab the popcorn, your favorite libation and settle in for the show.

I'm heading for the hills.  Anyone care to follow?

PS- Did I mention that March is named for the god Mars?  He's the god of war.  Or how about March coming in like a lion and going out like a lamb (sheep)?  Or that Julius Caesar was assassinated on the Ides of March not too far from where the Vatican is now?  Or that Easter will fall very close to the Vernal Equinox this year (which has a bunch a symbols attached)?  Or how about Missy Kate's baby scheduled to pop in July, which is named for Julius Caesar?


Quis Custodiet?

One of Indonesia's leading newspapers, Kompas, ran the above-the-fold headline today that said, "Political Corruption is Systemic."

Wait for it...


Why is it that people are continuously surprised by the obvious?  I mean, if you always do what you've always done, you'll always get what you've always gotten.  It's one of those basic rules in life that we all have to learn.

Corruption is endemic to ANY political system.  Any time a group of people is empowered to take the productive work of any other group of people for supposed services rendered, there will be corruption.  It is a fact of life that is as old as government itself, especially when that power involves a bureaucracy to maintain the systems of government.

The way it works is this: first a government will create a list of "services" that it performs for the general populace; then it creates a bureaucracy to shuffle the paperwork to obtain those services; then the piles of paperwork grow to the point that obtaining those services takes months, if not years; then the bureaucrats start taking bribes to "expedite" applications; then the politicians all want a cut of the bribes.

It's a very simple process from A to Z, and when the politicians and bureaucrats continue to get away with the corruption, it reinforces the system of corruption and it continues to grow and become more endemic until it either becomes completely stalled and untenable, or the people rise up and throw the bastards out.  History tells us that one or the other is inevitable.

One of the key signs of a fascist state is that the legal code becomes so complex and Byzantine that the average citizen is a felon just for waking up in the morning.  This creates a system of corruption as the citizens try to maneuver their way through this system without going to jail.  Naturally, the citizen is willing to pay whatever it takes to stay "free" and out of the tangled nightmare that is The System.  Naturally, the politicians and bureaucrats are willing to take the money to leave people alone.

Until the last couple of years, Indonesians have been very provincial.  They could not afford to leave the country, so they had no experience with other governments and other systems.  Therefore, they tended to see their own system as being the most corrupt, and others (like the US) as less so.

Indonesians demanded, and received, a governmental body called the KPK (corruption eradication commisiion), whose job it was to investigate and punish corruptors.  However, it too became corrupt as the politicians and bureaucrats, swollen with bribe money, were willing to pay the overseers a portion of their take to stay out of the spotlight.

It goes as far back as Ovid, the Roman poet, who asked the famous question, "Quid custodiet ipsos custodies?"  Who will watch the watchers?  It is a problem as old as civilization itself.

What it comes down to is human nature and what Lord Acton so rightly observed, "Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely."

The more centralized and remote power systems become, the more corrupt and uncontrollable they become.  It is a fact that cannot be disputed.  It is human nature to become more corrupt as the ability to catch and hold a person responsible for their actions becomes less of a threat.

Ultimately, this is the central problem with a global government.  Ironically, it is also the reason that it will never come to be.

The problem is this: as we plod ever closer to a central world government, the more corrupt those at the core will become.  In the end, they will factionalize and begin infighting the closer ultimate power comes to reality.  Finally, the whole thing will collapse as the sharks begin feeding on each other for every shred of power they can secure.

It has already begun.  Joseph Farrell, in his book Babylon's Banksters, makes a compelling case for the fact that the erstwhile global governors are already eating each other for ultimate control.  Ultimate control means ultimate corruption, and no system that is totally corrupt can stand.  It must, of its own corruption, collapse.

Many books have been written on the rise and fall of great empires.  Without exception, they are studies in corruption and decay.

Therefore, it stands to reason that the least corrupt governments are the most likely to survive and offer the best possible state for the citizenry.  Given the fact that large systems collapse, it is thus only small and controllable governments that work best.  For that reason, decentralized regional governments are the most feasible, and governments on the level of communities are the best.  It must be kept in mind, though, that any amount of power will corrupt any number of bureaucrats.

We end up with the most logical solution to this mess we humans tend to create: the government of ONE is the best possible form of rule.  If the individual becomes corrupt, he cannot infect more than what he can control, and all he can control is that which he owns.

Many people ridicule this idea as 'anarchy', but it is what the libertarians call "enlightened self-government".  The individual will do everything possible to protect what is his, thus he will avoid corruption in order to enlist the support of others (friends, family, etc.) in his effort to protect his possessions.  The theory is that the less corrupt a person is, the more likely others are to assist him.

In the end, 'anarchy' produces the best form of governance for any group of people.  Those who are least corrupt will engender the most support and goodwill from the most number of people, and so will be the most successful.

Vendors who routinely short-change customers will not stay in business for long.  In the same way, in an anarchic system, only those who are perceived to be the most honest will receive support of large groups of people.

Anarchy does not require voting, which can be corrupted (a la United States).  It does not require licenses, deeds, titles, or any other form of bureaucracy, since those who perceive you to be honest in your public dealings will most likely protect your interests against outside challenges.  Anarchy requires individuals to be honest, upright and competent.  It is the nature of that system.

The minute I delegate power to someone else, then they -- no matter how honest and trustworthy -- will have the temptation to become corrupt and abuse your power, since it is not theirs and they perceive no loss to themselves in squandering what is yours.

The solution is deceptively simple, and it is the most likely to protect rights and property, but it is also the most difficult thing to convince people of this fact.  We have become so used to centralized government and we have become so spoiled by the ability to leach off the productivity of others (welfare, socialized medicine, etc.) that we cannot see any other solution.  Yet the logic is inescapable.

Under the system we currently subscribe to, we have only escalating layers of 'watchers', creating ever more vast bureaucracies, engendering ever more corruption and in-fighting for control.  It is an untenable system and must collapse of its own weight and corruption.

Two of the most successful governments on Earth are the Icelandic and Swiss systems because they leave the greatest amount of power in the hands of the individuals.  However, as we have seen in recent years, even those systems are subject to corruption, though they are the most able to deal with it, since the power is still closest to the individual.

In a system of delegation of power, the individual is most likely to get run over by that system, since the inherent mentality is that the good of the many is more important than the good of the individual.  But, the opposite is true.

When the individual feels secure in person and property, he is more likely to work on behalf of the group, since he will have surplus that he is able to deploy in the community to build the perception that he is a good and trustworthy person, thus reinforcing the desire of the community to protect his rights and property.

So-called anarchy -- or enlightened self-interest -- is the only system of governance that can possibly work over the long term, while preserving the rights and property of the individual.  It is the only system that is self-righting, automatically correcting corruption and similar problems.  There is only one weakness...

Humans have an in-born desire to serve a leader.  It is part of our genetic code and is pounded into our brains from birth, though education, religion and other community forces.  As long as humans view themselves as servants, both willing to hand over power and accept scraps from a master's table, then we will have the corruption and decay and power-hungry elites that we have suffered under for millennia.

It is only when we, as individuals, take full responsibility for our actions and well-being that we will throw off the yoke of government that is corrupt and ultimately self-defeating.

The only thing wrong with anarchy is that it has never been tried on any scale that could prove the point.  As a species, we have been so hell-bent on servitude that we don't even trust ourselves to act in our own best interest.  Rather, we must establish organs of State (and make no mistake, religion is an organ of State) to force us to do what we know is best for us in the first place.

If you do not delegate your power, then no one will have power over you.

So simple, yet so hard to achieve.


Sequestering A Nation

Here's something you are not likely to see anywhere in the mainstream media:

se·ques·ter [si-kwes-ter]
verb (used with object)
1. to remove or withdraw into solitude or retirement; seclude.
2. to remove or separate.
3. Law. to remove (property) temporarily from the possession of the owner; seize and hold, as the property and income of a debtor, until legal claims are satisfied.
4. International Law. to requisition, hold, and control (enemy property).
1350–1400; Middle English sequestren  < Latin sequestrāre  to put in hands of a trustee, derivative of sequester  trustee, depositary

I draw the reader's attention to the last two definitions, having to do with law, and the etymology of the word.  Focus on the use of words like debtor, enemy and trustee.

Now, if you've been under a rock lately, the US government is on the verge of entering sequestration.  A law passed about a year and a half ago required Congress to find a solution to the US debt or face 'sequester'.  Since Congress is the national law-making body of the US and it is chock full of lawyers, we can safely assume that the use of the word 'sequester' was chosen for its legal meanings.

Furthermore, depending on which set of conspiracy theories you subscribe to, the US has been under international maritime law since the late 1800s, about the time the gold fringe of admiralty law began appearing on flags used in political and religious settings.

Mr. and Mrs. America, you are either a debtor whose property (your country) has been seized to pay a debt, or you are an enemy combatant whose national treasure has been seized to repay war damages.  Take your pick; the result is the same.  Personally, I think it doesn't matter either way, though I come down on the side of the former.

In a nutshell, what has happened is that Congress failed to come up with a plan to repay the national debt to the holders of that debt, namely the 12 private banking houses that own the Federal Reserve.  As a consequence, the Federal Reserve has placed the nation in receivership under a Trustee, whoever that may be.

All property of US citizens, especially those which have mortgages, liens, etc., is now under the control of the Trustee and may be liquidated to service the debt.  Clear titles may be a bit stickier, but I doubt owners with clear title will have the knowledge or where-with-all to put up much of a fight when the knock comes at the door.

If the latter case of war damages is true, then the US has lost some war somewhere and is now a captive nation of war under an as yet unseen reparations tribunal.  Therefore, all property of the State is under the control of the victor(s), who may opt to liquidate or remove the property as repayment of damages from the war (c.f. Germany post-WW1 & 2).

It is possible that both definitions are intended by the sequester law, as the debt holder may perceive Mr. and Mrs. America as potential combatants once they realize what exactly has taken place, especially if/when they become aware that their birth certificates make them 'property' of the State and thus, under the control of the Trustee.

All of which sheds new light on events of the past several years.  The increased use of domestic surveillance is to allow the Trustee to keep an eye on any and all 'property', whether human or material; the wholesale buying of ammunition by government agencies to enforce the Trustee's rights; the privatization of prisons; the Supreme Court decisions debasing the rule of law; and the list goes on.

You see, once the US is under receivership, then the rule of law is suspended.  The only thing with any force is the rule of the Trustee.  As an agent of the Trustee, the presidency becomes a de facto dictatorship, making Executive Orders the will of the Trustee and the only form of law in the country.

Think of what happens when an individual files for Chapter 11 bankruptcy.  The court appoints a Trustee who is in charge of enforcing the court's orders on the property and income of the individual.  The court decides which bills will be paid, how much and when.  If necessary, the court will begin liquidating property in order to pay off debts.  Various law enforcement agencies can be employed to protect the interests of the debt holder and prevent the individual from interfering with these proceedings.

Sound familiar?

Once the sequester law takes effect, most likely the president will be appointed Trustee in order to maintain the appearance of 'normalcy'.  This will prevent the 'property' from figuring things out too fast while the debt holder liquidate the holdings of the nation.  In the event the population figures out what is happening, then the command and control system, which has been built up over the past 15 years, will kick in to protect the interests of the debt holders from irate former owners.  It's kind of like when the sheriff comes to oversee the auction of a foreclosed property.

What does this mean for expats?  Well, open your passport and find the words "property of the United States government".  That should be enough.  It is conceivable that all passports will be rescinded and the holders forced to return to the US, or at best be restricted from traveling while a full reckoning of their personal holdings can be completed.  Much of this scenario depends on what happens and how fast it happens back home.

A lot of folks are going to read this and poo-poo the whole thing.  They will default to 'business as usual' mode and tell themselves this would 'never happen in America'.  These same people will refuse to read the sequester law, nor will they look up the word 'sequester' in a law dictionary (or any dictionary really).  These are the people who chided the EU for their 'austerity' efforts, little realizing that it was all a sneak preview of what's to come.

At the moment I am writing this, each US citizen is in hock to the tune of over $1 million dollars for the national debt, the budget overruns and all unfunded liabilities (government handouts).  The debt holder wants his pound of flesh...NOW!

In light of all this, let's review the events of the past 15 years...the Clinton budget balancing act, the offensive wars to control energy centers, the gold repatriation efforts, the bearer bond busts, the currency and computer wars, the growth of Russian and Chinese economic influence, the bank bailouts, the controlling interests in major US corporations (AIG, GM, et al.), the movement in Germany to exit the EU, and even the recent snubs of the new SecState John Kerry.  They are all symptoms of a nation desperately trying to pay off its debts, and of other nations in the know trying to unload their dollar-denominated assets and distance themselves from the US.  Think of the latter as vendors who smell a rat and stop extending credit to a buyer.

The Big Game is about to come to a crashing halt and 99% of Americans are blissfully unaware of what is being waved under their noses.  All this attention to 'sequester' is little more than the PTB giving themselves an out when the SHTF.  They can say, "Hey, we've been talking about this for years!"  The problem is, they've been using covert language that most ignorant Americans don't understand and wouldn't bother to look up in the dictionary, if they even knew how to use one.

My question is, once the sequester law goes into effect, will the media and their controllers open up finally?  Or will they pretend as if nothing has happened to try to keep the Big Game going just a little longer?  I come down on the side of the latter.  Can't wake 'em all up at once.  It will make it far more difficult to liquidate and get paid.

Without gloating, I have to say, "Told you so," and so did a lot of other people.  Ron Paul comes to mind, along with Gerald Celente, George Ure, and a bunch of other rather bright folks.

The deed is done.  It remains only to see how the masses react when the fog clears and the Big Tit runs dry.