The Secret Circle That Controls Governments

Featured article from Jon Rappoport’s blog.

Who is in charge of destroying borders and separate nations?

One group has been virtually forgotten. Its influence is enormous. It has existed since 1973.

It’s called the Trilateral Commission (TC).

Keep in mind that the original stated goal of the TC was to create “a new international economic order.”

In the run-up to his inauguration after the 2008 presidential election, Obama was tutored by the co-founder of the Trilateral Commission, Zbigniew Brzezinski.

In 1969, four years before birthing the TC with David Rockefeller, Zbigniew Brzezinski wrote: “[The] nation state as a fundamental unit of man’s organized life has ceased to be the principal creative force. International banks and multinational corporations are acting and planning in terms that are far in advance of the political concepts of the nation state.”

Goodbye, separate nations.

Any doubt on the question of TC goals is answered by David Rockefeller himself, the founder of the TC, in his Memoirs (2003): “Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as ‘internationalists’ and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure-one world, if you will. If that is the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.”

Patrick Wood, author of Trilaterals Over Washington, points out there are only 87 members of the Trilateral Commission who live in America. Obama appointed eleven of them to posts in his administration.

For example:

  • Tim Geithner, Treasury Secretary;
  • James Jones, National Security Advisor;
  • Paul Volker, Chairman, Economic Recovery Committee;
  • Dennis Blair, Director of National Intelligence.

Here is a stunning piece of forgotten history, a 1978 conversation between a US reporter and two members of the Trilateral Commission. (Source: Trilateralism: The Trilateral Commission and Elite Planning for World Management; ed. by Holly Sklar, 1980, South End Press, Pages 192-3).

The conversation was public knowledge at the time.

Anyone who was anyone in Washington politics, in media, in think-tanks, had access to it. Understood its meaning.

But no one shouted from the rooftops. No one used the conversation to force a scandal. No one protested loudly.

The conversation revealed that the entire basis of the US Constitution had been torpedoed, that the people who were running US national policy were agents of an elite shadow group. No question about it.

And yet: official silence. Media silence. The Dept. of Justice made no moves, Congress undertook no serious inquiries, and the President, Jimmy Carter, issued no statements. Carter was himself an agent of the Trilateral Commission in the White House. He had been plucked from obscurity by David Rockefeller, and through elite TC press connections, vaulted into the spotlight as a pre-eminent choice for the Presidency.

The following 1978 conversation featured reporter, Jeremiah Novak, and two Trilateral Commission members, Karl Kaiser and Richard Cooper. The interview took up the issue of who exactly, during President Carter’s administration, was formulating US economic and political policy.

The careless and off-hand attitude of Trilateralists Kaiser and Cooper is astonishing. It’s as if they’re saying, “What we’re revealing is already out in the open, it’s too late to do anything about it, why are you so worked up, we’ve already won…”

NOVAK (the reporter): Is it true that a private [Trilateral committee] led by Henry Owen of the US and made up of [Trilateral] representatives of the US, UK, West Germany, Japan, France and the EEC is coordinating the economic and political policies of the Trilateral countries [which would include the US]?

COOPER: Yes, they have met three times.

NOVAK: Yet, in your recent paper you state that this committee should remain informal because to formalize ‘this function might well prove offensive to some of the Trilateral and other countries which do not take part.’ Who are you afraid of?

KAISER: Many countries in Europe would resent the dominant role that West Germany plays at these [Trilateral] meetings.

COOPER: Many people still live in a world of separate nations, and they would resent such coordination [of policy].

NOVAK: But this [Trilateral] committee is essential to your whole policy. How can you keep it a secret or fail to try to get popular support [for its decisions on how nations will conduct their economic and political policies]?

COOPER: Well, I guess it’s the press’ job to publicize it.

NOVAK: Yes, but why doesn’t President Carter come out with it and tell the American people that [US] economic and political power is being coordinated by a [Trilateral] committee made up of Henry Owen and six others? After all, if [US] policy is being made on a multinational level, the people should know.

COOPER: President Carter and Secretary of State Vance have constantly alluded to this in their speeches. [a lie]

KAISER: It just hasn’t become an issue.

This interview slipped under the mainstream media radar, which is to say, it was buried.

US (and other nations’) economic and political policy run by a committee of the Trilateral Commission—the Commission created in 1973 by David Rockefeller and his sidekick, Zbigniew Brzezinski.

When Carter won the presidential election (1976), his aide, Hamilton Jordan, said that if after the inauguration, Cy Vance and Brzezinski came on board as secretary of state and national security adviser, “We’ve lost. And I’ll quit.” Lost—because both men were powerful members of the Trilateral Commission and their appointment to key positions would signal a surrender of White House control to the Commission.

Vance and Brzezinski were appointed secretary of state and national security adviser, as Jordan feared. But he didn’t quit. He became Carter’s chief of staff.

Now consider the vast propaganda efforts of the past 40 years, on so many levels, to install the idea that all nations and peoples of the world are a single Collective.

From a very high level of political and economic power, this propaganda op has had the objective of grooming the population for a planet that is one coagulated mass, run and managed by one force. A central engine of that force is the Trilateral Commission.

—One planet, with national borders erased, under one management system, with a planned global economy, “to restore stability,” “for the good of all, for lasting harmony.”

And one day in the future, a student would ask his teacher, “What happened to the United States?” And the teacher would say, “It was a criminal enterprise based on individual freedom. Fortunately, our leaders rescued the people and taught them the superior nature of HARMONY AND COOPERATION.”

—However, the rough, uneven, and challenging nationalism surfacing in a number of countries is evidence that many people are waking up from, and resisting, the Trilateral Collectivist trance…

Advertisements

The Infiltration Problem in Truth Media

Besides the outright fabrication of bogus figureheads in the ‘alternative’ media — infiltration of real alternative media figures is a key method used by establishment funded secret services to force opponents to align with their agenda; either completely silencing them, or making them a useful counter-intelligence tool — for example, making them adjust their content and talking points to exclude certain topics and mislead the audience. Even if the change was slight, it could be enough to break the essence of a movement and send it in the wrong direction.

This infiltration method stems from the CIA’s counter-intelligence Operation Mockingbird. Mockingbird is a long-recognized keystone among researchers pointing to the agency’s clear interest in and relationship to all major US news media.

To get an idea of just how pervasive and determined secret service intelligence is to guide public opinion: the CIA conducted a “formal training program” during the 1950s for the sole purpose of instructing its agents to function as newsmen.

Mockingbird grew out of the CIA’s forerunner, the Office for Strategic Services (OSS, 1942-47), which during World War Two had established a network of journalists and psychological warfare experts operating primarily in the European theater.

CIA staffer, Frank Wisner, maintained a top secret “Propaganda Assets Inventory,” a virtual rolodex of over 800 news and information entities prepared to play whatever tune Wisner chose. The network included journalists, columnists, book publishers, editors, entire organizations such as Radio Free Europe, and stringers across multiple news organizations.

 

 

It’s not a matter of ‘if’ you’re bought-out, it’s a matter of ‘when’ you’re bought-out, and if you’ll do it the easy way or the hard way.

Newspaper columnists and broadcast journalists with household names have been known to maintain close ties with secret intelligence. There are perhaps a dozen well known columnists and broadcast commentators whose relationships with the CIA go far beyond those normally maintained between reporters and their sources. They are referred to at the Agency as ‘known assets’ and can be counted on to perform a variety of undercover tasks; they are considered receptive to the Agency’s point of view on various subjects.


Secret services wanted Tommy Robinson to become a ‘known asset’.

Political activist Tommy Robinson detailed the workings of an Operation Mockingbird style infiltration attempt that targeted him in the UK — exposing the involvement of the state in manipulating legal processes to silence, coerce, and attempt to create double agents out of its ideological enemies, he got many offers to become a double agent working for secret service interests that would compromise his whole movement in exchange for his personal security and freedom.

Robinson told of how he got calls in the run-up to court rulings, with shady individuals using the justice system like bargaining chips to blackmail him:

“You’ll never have to pay it (the fine), come and have a chat with us.”

“We can make your life easier.”

“You’ll have to pay £365,000, we can make that go away.”

Through a grueling string of prison sentences, hefty fines, and repeat attempted character assassinations; Robinson detailed how the state was completely willing to misrepresent information, use loopholes, put him in life and death situations, and utterly bend the rules to make him give in and join their cause.


Infiltration is likely very widespread.

Robinson told of how he was given an opportunity by two men from the Metropolitan Intelligence Bureau “a secretive organisation based in Scotland Yard”.

These men offered money and a lucrative income post-jail in exchange for him helping them “unite the right” in their favour, claiming he would be “helping his country” by doing so.

Of course Robinson refused, they then said; “what are you going to do now when you leave jail, bearing in mind who you are?”

Luckily, Robinson had assets that would ensure his financial independence post-jail — but how many anti-establishment figures not as fortunate as Robinson have had no choice but to take on the sell-out offer? How common is it that infiltration by the secret service is successful, how many of those in the alternative media are puppets?

Russia “Threatens” UK: “One Does Not Give 24Hrs Notice to a Nuclear Power”

On the heels of UK PM May’s red hot rhetoric and ultimatum yesterday and Germany’s pressure this morning, Russia has cranked up their response to ’11’ on the Spinal Tap amplifier of global armageddon.

Having made clear this morning that:

“We have certainly heard the ultimatum voiced in London,” Russia’s top diplomat Sergey Lavrov said.

“The spokesperson for the Foreign Ministry has commented on our attitude to this,” he added referring to Maria Zakharova branding of May’s appearance in Parliament as a “circus.”

Russia faces warning from Germany too, as Reuters reports Merkel and May spoke this morning about the nerve agent attack. Merkel condemned the attack and stated that she was “taking very seriously the British government’s view that Russia might be responsible.” Merkel then said Russia “needs to give prompt answers to the British’ justified questions.”

But then, Interfax reports Russian Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova turned up the heat dramatically, warning (or threatening):

“One does not give 24 hours notice to a nuclear power” adding that the “Skripal poisoning was not an incident but a colossal international provocation.”

She also slammed the British for “not using a single international legal mechanism to probe the Skripal case.”

Additionally, in a series of tweets the Russian embassy in the UK said:

“Moscow will not respond to London’s ultimatum until it receives samples of the chemical substance to which the UK investigators are referring.

“Britain must comply with the Chemical Weapons Convention which stipulates joint investigation into the incident, for which Moscow is ready.

“Without that, there can be no sense in any statements from London. The incident appears to be yet another crooked attempt by the UK authorities to discredit Russia.

“Any threat to take ‘punitive’ measures against Russia will meet with a response. The British side should be aware of that.

View image on Twitter
View image on Twitter

Russian Embassy, UK

@RussianEmbassy
6/7 Any threat to take “punitive” measures against Russia will meet with a response. The British side should be aware of that.

“Today the Embassy sent a note to the Foreign Office reiterating that Russia is not involved in the Salisbury incident and outlining the above mentioned demands for joint investigation.”

The embassy added:

“UK Ambassador Laurence Bristow was summoned to Russia’s ministry of foreign affairs, where first deputy FM Vladimir Titov strongly protested the evidence-free accusations by the UK authorities of Russia’s alleged involvement in the poisoning of Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia.

“It was stated that the actions of the UK authorities are a clear provocation and that the Russian Federation was not involved in the incident that took place in Salisbury on March 4, 2018.”

* * *

Meanwhile, the Press Association reports that Russia has warned Britain to “consider the consequences” of mounting a retaliatory cyber strike after the Salisbury spy poisoning.

In a fresh sign of the escalating diplomatic tension sparked by the case, the Russian Embassy cautioned against “such a reckless move”.

The Government has not publicly disclosed the options under consideration but reports on Tuesday suggested one possibility was a cyber counter-attack.

Responding to the speculation, the Russian Embassy in the UK said: “Statements by a number of MPs, ‘Whitehall sources’ and ‘experts’ regarding a possible ‘deployment’ of ‘offensive cyber-capabilities’ cause serious concern.

“Not only is Russia groundlessly and provocatively accused of the Salisbury incident, but apparently, plans are being developed in the UK to strike Russia with cyber weapons.

“Judging by the statements of the Prime Minister, such a decision can be taken at tomorrow’s meeting of the National Security Council.

“We invite the British side to once again consider the consequences of such a reckless move.”

Additionally, Zakharova stated that British Prime Minister Theresa May apparently has no actual facts concerning the poisoning of former Russian military intelligence Colonel Sergey Skripal and his daughter Yulia.

“No one knows anything, including Theresa May, who has no actual fact in her hands,” Zakharova told the 60 Minutes program on the Rossiya-1 television channel.

Finally, following reports that Britain’s media regulator Ofcom said Russian broadcaster RT could lose its UK licence if Theresa May’s government determines that Moscow was behind the poisoning of a former Russian double agent in England this month, Russia’s foreign ministry threatened retaliation:

“…not a single British media outlet with work in Russia if London shuts RT.”

The news comes as Nikolai Glushkov, a Russian businessman and close associate of late Putin critic Boris Berezovsky, was found dead in the UK, according to reports. As reported earlier, Glushkov, a former deputy director of Aeroflot, died at the age of 68 at his London home in New Malden, according to Russia’s business FM radio station.

The cause of death has not been confirmed.

The 68-year-old’s body, which had ‘strangulation’ marks on his neck, was discovered by his daughter, according to Russian newspaper Kommersant. Glushkov was twice charged with fraud in Russia and was a close ally of Mr Berezovsky, who was once one of the most powerful businessmen in Russia and played a pivotal role in Vladimir Putin’s rise to power during the late 1990s.

Berezovsky fell out with Putin in 1999 and fled to Britain, while Glushkov was charged with money laundering and fraud and subsequently jailed until 2004.

This escalation is far from over.