"All the World's a Stage We Pass Through" R. Ayana

Sunday, 27 November 2011

Native blood: the truth behind the myth of `Thanksgiving Day'

Native blood: the truth behind the myth of `Thanksgiving Day'
Thanksgiving: A Native American View


By Mike Ely






It is a deep thing that people still celebrate the survival of the early colonists at Plymouth — by giving thanks to the Christian god who supposedly protected and championed the European invasion. The real meaning of all that, then and now, needs to be continually excavated. The myths and lies that surround the past are constantly draped over the horrors and tortures of our present.


Click for podcast

Mike Ely's article is available as an MP3 recording. Click on the picture above.


Every schoolchild in the United States has been taught that the Pilgrims of the Plymouth Colony invited the local Indians to a major harvest feast after surviving their first bitter year in New England. But the real history of Thanksgiving is a story of the murder of indigenous people and the theft of their land by European colonialists–and of the ruthless ways of capitalism.


In mid-winter 1620 the English ship Mayflower landed on the North American coast, delivering 102 exiles. The original native people of this stretch of shoreline had already been killed off. In 1614 a British expedition had landed there. When they left they took 24 Indians as slaves and left smallpox behind. Three years of plague wiped out between 90 and 96 per cent of the inhabitants of the coast, destroying most villages completely.

The Europeans landed and built their colony called “the Plymouth Plantation” near the deserted ruins of the Indian village of Pawtuxet. They ate from abandoned cornfields grown wild. Only one Pawtuxet named Squanto had survived–he had spent the last years as a slave to the English and Spanish in Europe. Squanto spoke the colonists’ language and taught them how to plant corn and how to catch fish until the first harvest. Squanto also helped the colonists negotiate a peace treaty with the nearby Wampanoag tribe, led by the chief Massasoit.

These were very lucky breaks for the colonists. The first Virginia settlement had been wiped out before they could establish themselves. Thanks to the good will of the Wampanoag, the settlers not only survived their first year but had an alliance with the Wampanoags that would give them almost two decades of peace.

John Winthrop, a founder of the Massahusetts Bay colony considered this wave of illness and death to be a divine miracle. He wrote to a friend in England, “But for the natives in these parts, God hath so pursued them, as for 300 miles space the greatest part of them are swept away by smallpox which still continues among them. So as God hath thereby cleared our title to this place, those who remain in these parts, being in all not 50, have put themselves under our protection.”

The deadly impact of European diseases and the good will of the Wampanoag allowed the settlers to survive their first year.

In celebration of their good fortune, the colony’s governor, William Bradford, declared a three-day feast of thanksgiving after that first harvest of 1621.


How the Puritans stole the land


Early North America as Native peoples and Europe settlers collide
But the peace that produced the Thanksgiving Feast of 1621 meant that the Puritans would have 15 years to establish a firm foothold on the coast. Until 1629 there were no more than 300 settlers in New England, scattered in small and isolated settlements. But their survival inspired a wave of Puritan invasion that soon established growing Massachusetts towns north of Plymouth: Boston and Salem. For 10 years, boatloads of new settlers came.

And as the number of Europeans increased, they proved not nearly so generous as the Wampanoags.

On arrival, the Puritans and other religious sects discussed “who legally owns all this land. ”They had to decide this, not just because of Anglo-Saxon traditions, but because their particular way of farming was based on individual–not communal or tribal–ownership. This debate over land ownership reveals that bourgeois “rule of law” does not mean “protect the rights of the masses of people.”

Some settlers argued that the land belonged to the Indians. These forces were excommunicated and expelled. Massachusetts Governor Winthrop declared the Indians had not “subdued” the land, and therefore all uncultivated lands should, according to English Common Law, be considered “public domain.” This meant they belonged to the king. In short, the colonists decided they did not need to consult the Indians when they seized new lands, they only had to consult the representative of the crown (meaning the local governor).

The colonists embraced a line from Psalms 2:8. “Ask of me, and I shall give thee, the heathen for thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession.” Since then, European settler states have similarly declared god their real estate agent: from the Boers seizing South Africa to the Zionists seizing Palestine.

The European immigrants took land and enslaved Indians to help them farm it. By 1637 there were about 2000 British settlers. They pushed out from the coast and decided to remove the inhabitants.


The shining City on the Hill

Where did the Plymouth and Massachusetts colonies of Puritan and “separatist” pilgrims come from and what were they really all about?

Governor Winthrop, a founder of the Massachusetts colony, said, “We shall be as a City upon a Hill, the eyes of all people are upon us.” The Mayflower Puritans had been driven out of England as subversives. The Puritans saw this religious colony as a model of a social and political order that they believed all of Europe should adopt.

The Puritan movement was part of a sweeping revolt within English society against the ruling feudal order of wealthy lords. Only a few decades after the establishment of Plymouth, the Puritan Revolution came to power in England. They killed the king, won a civil war, set up a short-lived republic, and brutally conquered the neighbouring people of Ireland to create a larger national market.

The famous Puritan intolerance was part of a determined attempt to challenge the decadence and wastefulness of the rich aristocratic landlords of England. The Puritans wanted to use the power of state punishment to uproot old and still dominant ways of thinking and behaving.

The new ideas of the Puritans served the needs of merchant capitalist accumulation. The extreme discipline, thrift and modesty the Puritans demanded of each other corresponded to a new and emerging form of ownership and production. Their so-called “Protestant Ethic” was an early form of the capitalist ethic. From the beginning, the Puritan colonies intended to grow through capitalist trade–trading fish and fur with England while they traded pots, knives, axes, alcohol and other English goods with the Indians.

The New England were ruled by a government in which only the male heads of families had a voice. Women, Indians, slaves, servants, youth were neither heard nor represented. In the Puritan schoolbooks, the old law “honour thy father and thy mother” was interpreted to mean honoring “All our Superiors, whether in Family, School, Church, and Commonwealth.” And, the real truth was that the colonies were fundamentally controlled by the most powerful merchants.

The Puritan fathers believed they were the Chosen People of an infinite god and that this justified anything they did. They were Calvinists who believed that the vast majority of humanity was predestined to damnation. This meant that while they were firm in fighting for their own capitalist right to accumulate and prosper, they were quick to oppress the masses of people in Ireland, Scotland and North America, once they seized the power to set up their new bourgeois order. Those who rejected the narrow religious rules of the colonies were often simply expelled “out into the wilderness.”

The Massachusetts colony (north of Plymouth) was founded when Puritan stockholders had gotten control of an English trading company. The king had given this company the right to govern its own internal affairs, and in 1629 the stockholders simply voted to transfer the company to North American shores–making this colony literally a self-governing company of stockholders!

In US schools, students are taught that the Mayflower compact of Plymouth contained the seeds of “modern democracy” and “rule of law.” But by looking at the actual history of the Puritans, we can see that this so-called “modern democracy” was (and still is) a capitalist democracy based on all kinds of oppression and serving the class interests of the ruling capitalists.

In short, the Puritan movement developed as an early revolutionary challenge to the old feudal order in England. They were the soul of primitive capitalist accumulation. And transferred to the shores of North America, they immediately revealed how heartless and oppressive that capitalist soul is.


The birth of the `American way of war'


European colonists attack the Pequot village
In the Connecticut Valley, the powerful Pequot tribe had not entered an alliance with the British (as had the Narragansett, the Wampanoag, and the Massachusetts peoples). At first they were far from the centers of colonization. Then, in 1633, the British stole the land where the city of Hartford now sits–land which the Pequot had recently conquered from another tribe. That same year two British slave raiders were killed. The colonists demanded that the Indians who killed the slavers be turned over. The Pequot refused.

The Puritan preachers said, from Romans 13:2, “Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation.” The colonial governments gathered an armed force of 240 under the command of John Mason. They were joined by a thousand Narragansett warriors. The historian Francis Jennings writes: “Mason proposed to avoid attacking Pequot warriors which would have overtaxed his unseasoned, unreliable troops. Battle, as such, was not his purpose. Battle is only one of the ways to destroy an enemy’s will to fight. Massacre can accomplish the same end with less risk, and Mason had determined that massacre would be his objective.”

The colonist army surrounded a fortified Pequot village on the Mystic River. At sunrise, as the inhabitants slept, the Puritan soldiers set the village on fire.

William Bradford, Governor of Plymouth, wrote: “Those that escaped the fire were slain with the sword; some hewed to pieces, others run through with their rapiers, so that they were quickly dispatched and very few escaped. It was conceived they thus destroyed about 400 at this time. It was a fearful sight to see them thus frying in the fire…horrible was the stink and scent thereof, but the victory seemed a sweet sacrifice, and they gave the prayers thereof to God, who had wrought so wonderfully for them.”

Mason himself wrote: “It may be demanded…Should not Christians have more mercy and compassion? But…sometimes the Scripture declareth women and children must perish with their parents…. We had sufficient light from the word of God for our proceedings.”

Three hundred and fifty years later the Puritan phrase “a shining city on the hill” became a favorite quote of conservative speechwriters.


Discovering the profits of slavery

This so-called “Pequot war” was a one-sided murder and slaving expedition. Over 180 captives were taken. After consulting the bible again, in Leviticus 24:44, the colonial authorities found justification to kill most of the Pequot men and enslave the captured women and their children. Only 500 Pequot remained alive and free. In 1975 the official number of Pequot living in Connecticut was 21.

Some of the war captives were given to the Narragansett and Massachusetts allies of the British. Even before the arrival of Europeans, Native peoples of North America had widely practiced taking war captives from other tribes as hostages and slaves.

The remaining captives were sold to British plantation colonies in the West Indies to be worked to death in a new form of slavery that served the emerging capitalist world market. And with that, the merchants of Boston made a historic discovery: the profits they made from the sale of human beings virtually paid for the cost of seizing them.

One account says that enslaving Indians quickly became a “mania with speculators.” These early merchant capitalists of Massachusetts started to make genocide pay for itself. The slave trade, first in captured Indians and soon in kidnapped Africans, quickly became a backbone of New England merchant capitalism.


Thanksgiving in the Manhattan Colony

In 1641 the Dutch governor Kieft of Manhattan offered the first “scalp bounty”–his government paid money for the scalp of each Indian brought to them. A couple years later, Kieft ordered the massacre of the Wappingers, a friendly tribe. Eighty were killed and their severed heads were kicked like soccer balls down the streets of Manhattan. One captive was castrated, skinned alive and forced to eat his own flesh while the Dutch governor watched and laughed. Then Kieft hired the notorious Underhill who had commanded in the Pequot war to carry out a similar massacre near Stamford, Connecticut. The village was set fire, and 500 Indian residents were put to the sword.

A day of thanksgiving was proclaimed in the churches of Manhattan. As we will see, the European colonists declared Thanksgiving Days to celebrate mass murder more often than they did for harvest and friendship.


The Conquest of New England

By the 1670s there were about 30,000 to 40,000 white inhabitants in the United New England Colonies–6000 to 8000 able to bear arms. With the Pequot destroyed, the Massachusetts and Plymouth colonists turned on the Wampanoag, the tribe that had saved them in 1620 and probably joined them for the original Thanksgiving Day.

In 1675 a Christian Wampanoag was killed while spying for the Puritans. The Plymouth authorities arrested and executed three Wampanoag without consulting the tribal chief, King Philip.

As Mao Tsetung says: “Where there is oppression there is resistance.” The Wampanoag went to war.

The Indians applied some military lessons they had learned: they waged a guerrilla war which overran isolated European settlements and were often able to inflict casualties on the Puritan soldiers. The colonists again attacked and massacred the main Indian populations.

When this war ended, 600 European men, one-eleventh of the adult men of the New England Colonies, had been killed in battle. Hundreds of homes and 13 settlements had been wiped out. But the colonists won.

In their victory, the settlers launched an all-out genocide against the remaining Native people. The Massachusetts government offered 20 shillings bounty for every Indian scalp, and 40 shillings for every prisoner who could be sold into slavery. Soldiers were allowed to enslave any Indian woman or child under 14 they could capture. The “Praying Indians” who had converted to Christianity and fought on the side of the European troops were accused of shooting into the treetops during battles with “hostiles.” They were enslaved or killed. Other “peaceful” Indians of Dartmouth and Dover were invited to negotiate or seek refuge at trading posts–and were sold onto slave ships.

It is not known how many Indians were sold into slavery, but in this campaign, 500 enslaved Indians were shipped from Plymouth alone. Of the 12,000 Indians in the surrounding tribes, probably about half died from battle, massacre and starvation.

After King Philip’s War, there were almost no Indians left free in the northern British colonies. A colonist wrote from Manhattan’s New York colony: “There is now but few Indians upon the island and those few no ways hurtful. It is to be admired how strangely they have decreased by the hand of God, since the English first settled in these parts.”

In Massachusetts, the colonists declared a “day of public thanksgiving” in 1676, saying, “there now scarce remains a name or family of them [the Indians] but are either slain, captivated or fled.”

Fifty-five years after the original Thanksgiving Day, the Puritans had destroyed the generous Wampanoag and all other neighboring tribes. The Wampanoag chief King Philip was beheaded. His head was stuck on a pole in Plymouth, where the skull still hung on display 24 years later.

The descendants of these Native peoples are found wherever the Puritan merchant capitalists found markets for slaves: the West Indies, the Azures, Algiers, Spain and England. The grandson of Massasoit, the Pilgrim’s original protector, was sold into slavery in Bermuda.


Runaways and rebels

But even the destruction of Indian tribal life and the enslavement of survivors brought no peace. Indians continued to resist in every available way. Their oppressors lived in terror of a revolt. And they searched for ways to end the resistance. The historian MacLeod writes: “The first `reservations’ were designed for the `wild’ Irish of Ulster in 1609. And the first Indian reservation agent in America, Gookin of Massachusetts, like many other American immigrants had seen service in Ireland under Cromwell.”

The enslaved Indians refused to work and ran away. The Massachusetts government tried to control runaways by marking enslaved Indians: brands were burnt into their skin, and symbols were tattooed into their foreheads and cheeks.

A Massachusetts law of 1695 gave colonists permission to kill Indians at will, declaring it was “lawful for any person, whether English or Indian, that shall find any Indians traveling or skulking in any of the towns or roads (within specified limits), to command them under their guard and examination, or to kill them as they may or can.”

The northern colonists enacted more and more laws for controlling the people. A law in Albany forbade any African or Indian slave from driving a cart within the city. Curfews were set up; Africans and Indians were forbidden to have evening get-togethers. On Block Island, Indians were given 10 lashes for being out after nine o’clock. In 1692 Massachusetts made it a serious crime for any white person to marry an African, an Indian or a mulatto. In 1706 they tried to stop the importation of Indian slaves from other colonies, fearing a slave revolt.


Celebrate?

Looking at this history raises a question: Why should anyone celebrate the survival of the earliest Puritans with a Thanksgiving Day? Certainly the Native peoples of those times had no reason to celebrate.

The ruling powers of the United States organised people to celebrate Thanksgiving Day because it is in their interest. That’s why they created it. The first national celebration of Thanksgiving was called for by George Washington. And the celebration was made a regular legal holiday later by Abraham Lincoln during the civil war (right as he sent troops to suppress the Sioux of Minnesota).

Washington and Lincoln were two presidents deeply involved in trying to forge a unified bourgeois nation-state out of the European settlers in the United States. And the Thanksgiving story was a useful myth in their efforts at U.S. nation-building. It celebrates the “bounty of the American way of life,” while covering up the brutal nature of this society.

[Mike Ely is a participant in the Kasama Project, where several of his other historical writings are available.]







For further enlightening information enter a word or phrase into the search box @  New Illuminati or click on any label/tag at the bottom of the pagehttp://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com


And see

The Her(m)etic Hermit - http://hermetic.blog.com





This material is published under Creative Commons Fair Use Copyright (unless an individual item is declared otherwise by copyright holder) – reproduction for non-profit use is permitted & encouraged, if you give attribution to the work & author - and please include a (preferably active) link to the original along with this notice. Feel free to make non-commercial hard (printed) or software copies or mirror sites - you never know how long something will stay glued to the web – but remember attribution! If you like what you see, please send a tiny donation or leave a comment – and thanks for reading this far…

From the New Illuminati – http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com


Saturday, 26 November 2011

The Story of Your Enslavement

The Story of Your Enslavement






This is the story of your enslavement; how it came to be, and you can finally be free.

Like all animals, human beings want to dominate and exploit the resources around them.

At first, we mostly hunted and fished and ate off the land - but then something magical and terrible happened to our minds.

We became, alone among the animals, afraid of death, and of future loss.

And this was the start of a great tragedy, and an even greater possibility...

You see, when we became afraid of death, of injury, and imprisonment, we became controllable -- and so valuable -- in a way that no other resource could ever be.

The greatest resource for any human being to control is not natural resources, or tools, or animals or land -- but other human beings.

You can frighten an animal, because animals are afraid of pain in the moment, but you cannot frighten an animal with a loss of liberty, or with torture or imprisonment in the future, because animals have very little sense of tomorrow.

You cannot threaten a cow with torture, or a sheep with death. You cannot swing a sword at a tree and scream at it to produce more fruit, or hold a burning torch to a field and demand more wheat.

You cannot get more eggs by threatening a hen - but you can get a man to give you his eggs by threatening him.

Human farming has been the most profitable -- and destructive -- occupation throughout history, and it is now reaching its destructive climax.

Human society cannot be rationally understood until it is seen for what it is: a series of farms where human farmers own human livestock.

http://www.setyoufreenews.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/171-0423102736-1984-movie-big-brother.jpg

Some people get confused because governments provide healthcare and water and education and roads, and thus imagine that there is some benevolence at work.

Nothing could be further from reality.

Farmers provide healthcare and irrigation and training to their livestock.

Some people get confused because we are allowed certain liberties, and thus imagine that our government protects our freedoms.

But farmers plant their crops a certain distance apart to increase their yields -- and will allow certain animals larger stalls or fields if it means they will produce more meat and milk.

In your country, your tax farm, your farmer grants you certain freedoms not because he cares about your liberties, but because he wants to increase his profits.

Are you beginning to see the nature of the cage you were born into?

There have been four major phases of human farming.

The first phase, in ancient Egypt, was direct and brutal human compulsion. Human bodies were controlled, but the creative productivity of the human mind remained outside the reach of the whip and the brand and the shackles. Slaves remained woefully underproductive, and required enormous resources to control.

The second phase was the Roman model, wherein slaves were granted some capacity for freedom, ingenuity and creativity, which raised their productivity. This increased the wealth of Rome, and thus the tax income of the Roman government - and with this additional wealth, Rome became an empire, destroying the economic freedoms that fed its power, and collapsed.

I'm sure that this does not seem entirely unfamiliar.

After the collapse of Rome, the feudal model introduced the concept of livestock ownership and taxation. Instead of being directly owned, peasants farmed land that they could retain as long as they paid off the local warlords. This model broke down due to the continual subdivision of productive land, and was destroyed during the Enclosure movement, when land was consolidated, and hundreds of thousands of peasants were kicked off their ancestral lands, because new farming techniques made larger farms more productive with fewer people.

The increased productivity of the late Middle Ages created the excess food required for the expansion of towns and cities, which in turn gave rise to the modern Democratic model of human ownership.

As displaced peasants flooded into the cities, a huge stock of cheap human capital became available to the rising industrialists - and the ruling class of human farmers quickly realized that they could make more money by letting their livestock choose their own occupations.

Under the Democratic model, direct slave ownership has been replaced by the Mafia model. The Mafia rarely owns businesses directly, but rather sends thugs around once a month to steal from the business "owners."

You are now allowed to choose your own occupation, which raises your productivity - and thus the taxes you can pay to your masters.

Your few freedoms are preserved because they are profitable to your owners.

The great challenge of the Democratic model is that increases in wealth and freedom threaten the farmers. The ruling classes initially profit from a relatively free market in capital and labor, but as their livestock become more used to their freedoms and growing wealth, they begin to question why they need rulers at all.

Ah well. Nobody ever said that human farming was easy.

http://www.cgsociety.org/stories/2006_01/wage_slave/banner01.jpg

Keeping the tax livestock securely in the compounds of the ruling classes is a three phase process.

The first is to indoctrinate the young through government "education." As the wealth of democratic countries grew, government schools were universally inflicted in order to control the thoughts and souls of the livestock.

The second is to turn citizens against each other through the creation of dependent livestock.

It is very difficult to rule human beings directly through force -- and where it can be achieved, it remains cripplingly underproductive, as can be seen in North Korea. Human beings do not breed well or produce efficiently in direct captivity.

If human beings believe that they are free, then they will produce much more for their farmers. The best way to maintain this illusion of freedom is to put some of the livestock on the payroll of the farmer. Those cows that become dependent on the existing hierarchy will then attack any other cows who point out the violence, hypocrisy and immorality of human ownership.

Freedom is slavery, and slavery is freedom.

If you can get the cows to attack each other whenever anybody brings up the reality of their situation, then you don't have to spend nearly as much controlling them directly.

Those cows who become dependent upon the stolen largess of the farmer will violently oppose any questioning of the virtue of human ownership -- and the intellectual and artistic classes, always and forever dependent upon the farmers -- will say, to anyone who demands freedom from ownership: "You will harm your fellow cows."

The livestock are kept enclosed by shifting the moral responsibility for the destructiveness of a violent system to those who demand real freedom.

The third phase is to invent continual external threats, so that the frightened livestock cling to the "protection" of the farmers.

This system of human farming is now nearing its end.

The terrible tragedy of the modern American system has occurred not in spite of, but because of past economic freedoms.

The massive increases in American wealth throughout the 19th century resulted from economic freedom -- and it was this very increase in wealth that fed the size and power of the state.

Whenever the livestock become exponentially more productive, you get a corresponding increase in the number of farmers and their dependents.

The growth of the state is always proportional to the preceding economic freedoms.

Economic freedoms create wealth, and the wealth attracts more thieves and political parasites, whose greed then destroys the economic freedoms.

In other words, freedom metastasizes the cancer of the state.

The government that starts off the smallest will always end up the largest.

This is why there can be no viable and sustainable alternative to a truly free and peaceful society.

A society without political rulers, without human ownership, without the violence of taxation and statism...

To be truly free is both very easy, and very hard.

We avoid the horror of our enslavement because it is painful to see it directly.

We dance around the violence of our dying system because we fear the attacks of our fellow livestock.

But we can only be kept in the cages we refuse to see.

Wake up...

To see the farm is to leave it.









For further enlightening information enter a word or phrase into the search box @  New Illuminati or click on any label/tag at the bottom of the pagehttp://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com


And see

The Her(m)etic Hermit - http://hermetic.blog.com





This material is published under Creative Commons Fair Use Copyright (unless an individual item is declared otherwise by copyright holder) – reproduction for non-profit use is permitted & encouraged, if you give attribution to the work & author - and please include a (preferably active) link to the original along with this notice. Feel free to make non-commercial hard (printed) or software copies or mirror sites - you never know how long something will stay glued to the web – but remember attribution! If you like what you see, please send a tiny donation or leave a comment – and thanks for reading this far…

From the New Illuminati – http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com


Friday, 25 November 2011

Was the “War on Terror” Really a Cover For a New American Narco-Republic?

Was the “War on Terror” Really a Cover For a New American Narco-Republic?
Corporate “Freedoms” a Money Laundering Bonanza

By Gordon Duff


Years ago, Michael Ruppert, a long time friend and former Los Angeles police detective, discovered the largest drug ring in history, headed by the CIA, importing tons of cocaine into American cities. 

Ruppert, aided by DEA and FBI “rogue” agents still loyal to the United States, began his own war on drugs. His website, www.copvcia.com and publication, From the Wilderness, exist in a ghost like state. 

Ruppert was threatened, fled the country to Venezuela, then to Canada, was poisoned but survived, taking two years to recover.  He was the subject of this 2009 Oscar winning documentary:


Ruppert broke the drug story first, and, as you note from the video, was one of the first to note the depth of the financial crisis that is evolving as I write.

Years ago, when he traced the flood of drug money into the US, buying police, buying governments, UN controls were subverted and funds flowing into political races was limited.  You could buy a crooked cop but you couldn’t buy a president, though a couple seem to have been “rented,” something we will be looking into in the coming weeks.

Thus, Americans have found themselves in a new position.  They have to ask themselves this question:  When is a person less than a person?


Who Unleashed the Corporate Furies Upon Us ?

At one time such discussions involved race or ethnicity, sexual orientation or religion.  Now we have one answer:

When that person is not a corporation with sufficient liquidity, be it from oil, weapons or even laundering narcotics profits, to buy political power under the wild and irresponsible definition applied by 5 Supreme Court justices.

This is more than legalizing bribery or even money laundering.  It is an open admission that, not only is America not a democracy, it is no longer a republic.

The term “monarchy” implies leadership.  Even “kleptocracy” implies a measure of order, though that order is, in itself, criminality.


Burning Down Around Our Heads

As pointed out by Vladimir Putin, America has become “parasitic,” not just on the world, eating resources, bullying, coercing, but it has chosen to feed off its own population and has, in that process, officially certified “humanity” as an inferior subspecies suitable for being bred as draft animals, even for food.

Corporations and those that serve them, our governments, our police forces, our military, are in symbiosis with a parasitic species that will eventually have to be eradicated if mankind is to survive.

Read the news, apply these descriptions, these definitions, this nomenclature.  Is this a working hypothesis?

This is where the Supreme Court’s decision to allow unlimited corporate political contributions comes to the surface.

This 5/4 vote, with the 5 crooked judges, the ones who put Bush in office after he lost an election, the ones who continually vote away our rights, got away with something akin to murder.







Over the last few decades, an international mechanism has been put in place to control money laundering.


Money Laundering is an 'Official' Franchise Now

States that fail to follow rules on bank transactions, movement of cash, the endless flow of bribe money, drug money, that has bought and sold governments for centuries, have been isolated and eventually brought under control.

This left the real money laundering to intelligence agencies with their private contractors, their private air forces that move cash by the ton, the CIA and Mossad not the only ones by far, the French, the Russians, the Turks more than involved along with Pakistan’s ISI and India’s RAW.

Diplomats have laundered cash, drug money, particularly any Bush envoy and even members of congress, both House and Senate, have carried financial instruments worth hundreds of millions from nation to nation to circumvent UN conventions on money laundering.

Without such laws, there can be no free governments, no free elections.

Then the US Supreme Court did a very strange thing.  It decided that corporations could send unlimited money on elections as part of their “free speech’ as “individuals.”

There is nothing in the Constitution that establishes corporations or gives them rights over normal humans.  In fact, a corporation can now be the most powerful person in America if not one stockholder is American and the corporation has only one “registered agent” in the US, and even he doesn’t have to be an American citizen.


Did the Supreme Court Destroy the Republic ?

What isn’t said is this:  The Supreme Court decision fully circumvents UN conventions on money laundering.  Any normal legal controls that would prevent the movement of bribe money, drug cash by the billions, is now considered, according to US law as “protected speech.”

Yes, the Supreme Court made corporations “people.”  It also turned “money” into “speech.”

This is how corporations talk and any attempt to enforce international laws is now, by US law, an infringement on the “free speech” of corporations.

So if a dictator somewhere or a drug baron, cares to buy congress, and, I assure you, they already have, the FBI can do nothing.

There can be no investigations, Interpol can’t be involved, the UN can’t stop it, no international court has authority, as it does in every other nation.

American criminals are now, not only above the law, they constitute our government itself.


Was America Raped ?

The driving force behind this change was the need to provide “political expression” for the $80 billion dollars of drug money flowing out of Afghanistan.

This money would no longer be secure unless 100,000 US troops was there to provide security for the drug production, aided by 100,000 more private contractors, all paid for by the US government.

It is the same government that is now bought by that same money as carefully arranged by 5 members of the US Supreme Court carefully appointed for this purpose and others.

Those others include sitting silently by American leaders become war criminals, invasions, kidnappings, torture, constitutional rights violated, habeas corpus suspended, and not one word from the Supreme Court because Justices like Clarence Thomas, ducking impeachment for financial issues for years, are allowed to run our government, a front for the drug barons.

Massive incontrovertible evidence now indicates that the Bush Administration, at some point, recognized drug revenue as a powerful political tool to control America and much of the world.  Working off the “Bush I” model, the Iran/Contra drug cartels, at some point, perhaps as early as 2002, America went “rope-a-dope” on the War on Terror and guarding our southern border with Mexico and “full speed ahead” with flooding the world with narcotics.

Whether you believe Afghanistan was involved in 9/11 or are a part of the ever increasing numbers who view 9/11 as a Bush conspiracy, one fact is inexorable. 


Who Did the Supreme Court Put Under the Gun ?

America has built the largest drug empire imaginable in Afghanistan, not just “looking the other way,” but spending millions on improving opium harvests and building a heroin processing industry.

American military and intelligence resources have been used to distribute drugs worldwide and handle tens of billions of dollars in narco-profits.

The US Supreme Court went as far as to, by a 5/4 margin, as is so often the case, legalize drug profits to be flooded into the American political system. 

The “corporations” given unrestricted rights to “donate” to campaigns are doing so with laundered drug money, now approaching a billion dollars an election cycle, buying, not just members of congress but governors as well, invariably Republicans for some reason.

The numbers themselves are staggering.  Between 60 and 80 billion dollars in heroin is now produced in Afghanistan, distributed worldwide, trucked into Russia, flown to Europe and America.

At the same time, America’s border with Mexico sits open, for a decade now, 8 years of Bush administration partnering with the Mexican drug cartels, trucking narcotics across America with full continuity into the Obama administration through the Department of Homeland Security, CIA and Pentagon.


Another Narco Victim Down - Many More to Follow

It isn’t like anyone doubts this.  We talk of 30 million illegal aliens but not of the truckloads and planeloads of drugs that enter the US every day. 

Fleets of vehicles distribute narcotics across the US, to municipalities whose police, whose courts, whose local governments are increasingly being paid, not just to look the other way, but to fully participate. 

Yet all we see is a half dozen photos of Marines walking through poppy fields in Afghanistan, not the dirt cheap heroin that children in Americas schools can buy on the playground.

In fact, there is no reporting of any of this at all, not even in the midst of the “Operation Fast and Furious” scandal where Homeland Security and the Drug Enforcement Agency were caught arming cartels with weapons used against American law enforcement personnel.

The real findings from “Fast and Furious” were more than guns, but one of the dozens of times law enforcement stumbled over the mechanism of America’s narcotics driven economy.  When is the last time you heard about the “War on Drugs?”

The answer is simple.  America changed sides.  Talk to your children about drugs, how cheap they are, how easy to buy.

Then take a good long look at your government, your police, your courts, your judges and prosecutors and the gang in Washington. How serious is the drug problem in America?  Why isn’t it being reported anymore?  Who has that kind of power? Why the silence?


Not the Fields of Glory From the War Poem

Think money, enough money to buy anyone, anywhere.  Where do you think the mysterious millions come from that pay for our elections. 

It used to cost $10 million to run a presidential campaign.  Now some members of congress in rural areas, nearly unopposed, spend that and more.

Our last congressional election cost $1.2 billion and nobody knows where that money came from and nobody can ask.

Asking is now illegal.

Tracking down money, bribes, drug money, it doesn’t matter, kickbacks from crooked banks, part of the trillions stolen by defense contractors, “following the money,” as long as some of that money is paid to politicians is now a violation of “free speech.”

In fact, with a little checking, there are very few crimes that have not been “legalized” for corporations, for members of the government.  They are all above the law.  They can’t be sued, only those that speak up can be arrested but are usually murdered.

Now, sometimes, out of “kindness,” the drug barons simply remove them from office using a flood of cash sent into the US with the help of the Supreme Court.

If you think any of this is made up, find a law enforcement official and send this to him.

Ask if it is possible to investigate corporate campaign donations, even if it is knowingly drug money.









For further enlightening information enter a word or phrase into the search box @  New Illuminati or click on any label/tag at the bottom of the pagehttp://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com


And see

The Her(m)etic Hermit - http://hermetic.blog.com





This material is published under Creative Commons Fair Use Copyright (unless an individual item is declared otherwise by copyright holder) – reproduction for non-profit use is permitted & encouraged, if you give attribution to the work & author - and please include a (preferably active) link to the original along with this notice. Feel free to make non-commercial hard (printed) or software copies or mirror sites - you never know how long something will stay glued to the web – but remember attribution! If you like what you see, please send a tiny donation or leave a comment – and thanks for reading this far…

From the New Illuminati – http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com