It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

WW2, the MIC, and NWO which is The Post Nation State, or Planetary Institutional Chimera

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 5 2010 @ 09:16 PM
link   
I was not sure where this thread should go, because it applies to so many area's. Politics, conspiracy, the largely unrecognized relationships between institutions, public and private. One reason the really juicy conspiracies are so hard to pin down, is it has always been the procedure of our government and others, not to keep written records of our most sensitive discussions. This was easy at first, in WW2 recording technology was still very primitive and you required a stenographer to record anything of interest. Long before then however, it was realized there are some thing's you just don't write down. So finding record's on ET, sinister plots, or a "shadow government" (I'm not talking about a "Continuity of Government Protocol", which is a bunch of civil servant's located away from place's like DC, in the event of an untraceable strike by a WMD. That does exist, and it should). But to detect a government of false pretense is, to put it bluntly, not going to be easy. The amount of information the US Government alone has that is Classified in any way, shape, or form, exceeds by many order's of magnitude all the recorded information in the Library of Congress. That includes the dreaded tax code. I will warn a. of time, this post will be a long one. But it's my belief it is true. But with out any further verbal, shall I say 'calisthenics" which is a polite way of saying how a teenager anuses himself, I want to show you what we are, how we got there, and where we just might go from here..



To win WW2, we needed to reorganize America's entire government and private sector in to a structure, that for us as a people focused our national potential in the most effective and fantastic way. And proud of it, because we defeated a great evil. In doing so, we created an organizational structure not so much to execute a conspiracy, but to take advantage of our unique place in history. Many people don't understand that what they think is a conspiracy, is often the predatory behavior of opportunists. There are those who don't create conspiracies, but have a problem to solve, we had to deal with this problem, out of desperation. WW2 was one of those moments when HELL was unleashed, and we had to stop it..If we had failed, the world would be a very different place. The only reason we can bitch and moan is we defeated fascism. Your Grandparents, Parent's, and people like me will give you my definition of what fascism is. Part of it I know very well. The best definition of fascism I have ever heard is a metaphor as spoken by former supreme court Justice Potter Steven's when asked for a definition of pornography. He said he can't define it, but he he knows it when he see's it. And for a a simple start, let us start at the beginning. This so called NWO was what President Eisenhower called the military industrial complex, started in WW2 a time not that long ago, and a time most people today have no idea how close civilization came to implosion. To quote Winston Churchill, had Hitler won the war we would have entered "a new dark age". Did you know that during Europe's dark age's that we're from about 600ce to about 1380ce, many people forgot the concept of money? Barter was the only form of commerce. If there are any surviving 60's flower children out there, it may sound Utopian until you don't have anything the other guy want's, and it's not the coins in your pocket. All you want is food for your child, but he say's "you can't eat gold", but you know that. See my point?

This is how I think it began (1: Starting in WW2, we knew we had no choice but organize the TOTAL power that was the USA. And we did. We used the blueprint's of FDR's New Deal, and from that we created the most powerful military, industrial, and economic power the world has ever known. Then we got creative...

(2: In the 1960's, we integrated concept's that involved media, private corporation's and government. From there thing's got even more interesting.

Today we live in the age of the Post Nation State. The Quasi-Corporate Chimera. What may shock some of you to core is I think it may not be all that bad in the end. No, I have not fallen off the wagon. Please consider this: Technology like the internet is removing the source's of information management from government and corporate interest's. And we are in the middle a planet wide panic attack. The result is a moment of confusion by the power's that be. This "bubble of temporal awareness" will not last.

What that means is power no longer resides in one capital of any nation. The "power" is "world wide". Many feel this is the power of the so-called NWO. The truth is this so called NWO has been around for a very long time. This is the reality I hope to outline over the next few weeks. In brief, this is what I will try to co cover:

*The architecture of the New Deal, and how it was the template for WW2.

*Propaganda as poetry, How Hitler convinced an educated, cosmopolitan people to be barbarians.

*The unification of the private and public sector that would become what President Eisenhower called the Military Industrial Complex or MIC.

*The cooperation between the institution's, academic, corporate, and government.

*For a long time it was logical for academic institution's to cooperate, because it was natural to do so. Why would anyone be surprised when other organization's do the same ?

*How the American people interpreted and welcomed the MIC and Post National State (PNS) How to recognize the difference between what was and what is.

*During the cold war the level of hostility was managed in such a way so that thing's never got wildly out of control. Ask your self the question if you launch a very "effective" nuclear strike on your enemy, take out all his missiles, bombers, even his plutonium production capacity, you have the fall out that is guaranteed to ruin your may day parade. The US also had, our SSBM's and the Russian's knew we could be crawling up their Volga and they would never know it.

*But there was a time in our history when the power's that be thought they where loosing control and a nuclear war was possible outside of there direction. I have no doubt the Cuban Missile Crises was the moment the world came the closet's to full scale nuclear war. That would have bean OK but the powers that be didn't put JFK in the White House. How JFK and not Nixon became President is fascinating. Any way will follow this post with much more. For what it's worth, I have no doubt JFK was murdered because he destabilized the architecture of the system, call it a ripple across the matrix. I view it this way. Picture in your mind the following, I will keep it as simple and pleasurable as I can. A topographical representation of thought, OK I hear you thinking he's ******* nuts!. Give me a moment, and I will explain.

*The concept of MAD and how and why it became policy.
*The destruction of the old economic order, and the new facade.
*The current system as it really is..

Many of you have no doubt heard of the term "synthesia". It's when your senses get cross-circuited so to speak. In Western culture it has been associated with drug's like '___'A, '___', and Mescaline. It is the effect that when one sense like sound, is filtered through the brain and you hear the sound like everyone else, but you also get feedback that you feel as taste, or an image. What many people don't know is a lot of people have this as a normal brain response. It's not well understood. I know. Because I have this as part of my life. In my case it involves a lot more drama. (It's me would you expect any less?) It's very hard to explain, but when some one speaks to me to convey an idea, when I look at a painting, a picture a work of art, or hear music, I see what others do, but more, much more. To me someones words that convey an idea are seen and felt by me as a dynamic gestalt.

I have a lot to discuss, and this seems a good place to do it.




posted on Jul, 5 2010 @ 09:29 PM
link   
Are you suggesting that JFK coopted Television
and that's the only reason a puppet wasn't elected.
A mistake that has been corrected and never happened
again, at least, not in television. Wasn't Obama internet elected?
What side do you think he's on. And doesn't this mean that we have
an opportunity to scoop TPTB and sneek in a cell phone president elect.


David Grouchy



posted on Jul, 6 2010 @ 07:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by davidgrouchy
Are you suggesting that JFK coopted Television
and that's the only reason a puppet wasn't elected.
A mistake that has been corrected and never happened
again, at least, not in television. Wasn't Obama internet elected?
What side do you think he's on. And doesn't this mean that we have
an opportunity to scoop TPTB and sneek in a cell phone president elect.


David Grouchy


Kennedy did not co-opt television but used the medium of TV brilliantly. How his appearance was orchestrated indicated expert, behind the scene's packaging of JFK's persona. Nixon's failure to appreciate the visual and emotional impact may have been it's relatively recent use in the political medium. Just as Obama exploited the interactive experience that is the internet, JFK used the still young medium of TV. In a time when most people had B&W TV's, the contrast of light and shadow, was critical, often requiring heavy make up for a more "life like" appearance. Nixon was asked if he wanted make up. We know he refused. We'll never know if he knew how important it was. More likely at that time even people in the public eye did not know the effort required to act "smooth" on TV. It was a medium largely thought of as entertainment, not "serious" news. It's hard work to make it look like it's no work at all. Later people polled on who won the debate's had an interesting response. Those who watched it on TV voted overwhelmingly for Kennedy. Those who heard it on radio said Nixon clearly won. Like Obama and his use of the internet, Kennedy took advantage of those properties that would exemplify his attractive trait's, namely his appearance and physical charisma.

Obama took advantage of the Internet, and like Kennedy used TV's ability to package a message with greater texture. The internet gives users the ability to interact and affect political events. The greater the degree of involvement in a medium, the more relevant people feel they are. It's usually true As a medium it's appeal is to feel more like a participant then just an observer.
I mentioned JFK to point out the true reach of political power is limited. When the exercise of that power runs contrary to the wish's of certain cabal's, a reaction is not uncommon. What happened to JFK is an extreme example. JFK was not killed just because the "wrong guy" won, but because of the reaction to what he did. Not everything is a conspiracy from start to finish, but something's are. More often what appears like a conspiracy is opportunistic behavior. To say JFK was elected because he was more telegenic then Nixon is only partially true. He also had help. JFK was helped by element's of organized crime, in particular Sam Giancana, and the "Outfit" (mafia) out of Chicago. His win was by a razor thin margin. No doubt they helped. Winning the Presidency alone was not what condemned him, but what he and more specifically RFK did after he won. There was always associations with different groups on all sides, legal or other wise. Nixon pardoned Jimmy Hoffa (who RFK put in jail) when elected. Who was/is in bed with whom (in a manner of speaking) has always been a murky, shifting and opportunistic reality.

From trying to destroy organized crime, how he handled Cuba, and was going to get the US of Vietnam, he managed to p**s off whole section's of power. People ask who wanted to kill JFK? It's less complicated to ask who didn't, which boils down to Jackie, Bobby, and the Boston Rotary Club. As far as Obama, being elected by the internet, as a medium that is more difficult to control from a central base, for now it remains a wild card. On one hand it gives people access to vast amounts of information, and more important it's manipulation. That may change. Something so powerful makes it's effect ultimately unpredictable. Governments fear "unpredictable" more then a full scale riot. They know how to put down a riot. For those like me who like the open exchange of idea's, one vulnerability of the Net is evident in it's fingerprint. It's multiple server decentralization is not as decentralized as it appears. And while it's likely to be noticed if an organization takes over TV and radio stations by force it's not as obvious if they replace management. The same would apply to the Net, but be even more subtle.

One last point on the "mood" that many had at high level's of the government, ant in particular the military. It may be the ultimate irony that Kennedy was viewed specifically after the Cuban missile crises as a loose cannon by so many. Excusing his associations with the mob, and his reckless womanizing, on all of which Hoover was taking notes (the old joke being if he slept around as much as people say, he'd be in a jar at Harvard), I think his actions prevented WW-3. The point may be mute but Nixon was Eisenhower's action officer for operation Mongoose. I think when executed Nixon would have gone all out and do what Kennedy didn't and was hated for, send in air cover. I would have, or there would have been no attack at all. But in October 1962 after we saw the missile's JFK was under enormous pressure to launch a pre-smart bomb "surgical" strike. Then a contradiction indeed. JFK"s caution at that point may have saved have million's because of tactical nukes on Cuban beach's, some controlled by men the rank of sargent's, and sub's shadowing our carriers armed with nuclear torpedo's.

I think taking advantage of an opportunity is not just simpler then the manipulation of events by a grand conspiracy, but whats behind many of them. It doesn't have the fingerprint of a conspiracy because it isn't. It's just people making the most of a situation, hey that's entrepreneurial. I believe most apparent conspiracies involve being a shrewd observer, and adaptive opportunist with a great sense of timing.



posted on Oct, 20 2011 @ 06:31 PM
link   
As I think I have sat on my butt long enough, its time I add to this post. The nature of FDR's New Deal and how it connects to the post national age, ahh, thats the one we actually live in now. Funny thing about what we call history, most of us notice it only after the fact. But friends trust me on this, history is a living breathing being that has own nature and accord built on the efforts of the life forms that create it. Thats us. We are as part of history as anything in our so-called-past. Getting back to FDR and the New Deal and how it relates to who and what we are and do now, FDR had a true gift handed to him at a time when the country was in a downward spiral where after the crash of 1929, where the stock market was organized under what can only be called to be kind, the cheapest of ponzi schemes. Lets face it. At that time people could do one of two things with their money. Stick it under the mattress, (which a lot of my relatives did, of course in one case the guys house burned down and his mattress and the money with in burned up with it) or put in in a bank. At the time before FDR all banks were in effect private institutions in effect crap shoots. Some were run well, most were not.

So after the crash of 1929 people logically, and rationally feared putting there money anywhere but under their bed. (HEY what happened to my one relative really did happen, he lost it all when his house burned down). The point was with your money sitting somewhere that wasn't backed up by the power of the FEDS or overwhelming force, call it the Army or whatever, are you going to trust its going to be "OK" to put it a place other then your own little bunker? (And lets face it how many of us can really afford a good one,hmm?) FDR realized the need to "spread the wealth" that is money just sitting there can actually be doing something constructive, like earning interest. And that excess money in addition to the original sum invested can be loaned out to others and since the original investment, what you put in the FDIC insured bank, that boils down to be backed up with a lot of guys with guns, should it come to that is not going away, in effect its a way for money to well breed, no sweating up the sheets required. (Pity really) So we have the beginning of the modern banking establishment.

And the effects of that have changed drastically since the structure that was set up in the 1930's and then had to break all the rules to deal with WW-2, and then emerge into what Ike warned us about, but would seem so few listened, the military industrial complex. Hey, we had no choice but to break all the rules to win WW-2. Trust me on this. I assure you, had the original fascists won that war this world of many offering their thoughts freely would never have come to pass. So be it. But hat happened during and just after WW-2 and set the stage for the modern world is going to be the subject of my next post. Just why did it end up this way, and if you don't like it,what can you as a nice person (that is important) do about it? Quite a lot actually. The future does not fall in our laps, we make it, every day we exist. So shall we do better tomorrow?



posted on Oct, 21 2011 @ 03:48 PM
link   
reply to post by arbiture
 


So its time to add to the former post, so be it. So what exactly happened, that is something we can point to you know, put our finger on that which happened in that so dissociative state between the reorganization of the U.S banking system that was the direct result of the realization that a "rabble" of private parties alone (are you listening Ron Paul?) could not by itself reinforce a more concrete structure. That is to take the privately earned wealth of the people and use it to build upon itself an economic system that was by its nature self-re-enforcing. OK, perhaps if I put it this way. When YOU make money, doing whatever you do, what do you do with the money that because of the nature of wealth is organized and managed, put it to use NOW. You are left with in effect one of two main choices. You can take your money and dig a big hole and stick it in there. Why in 100 years do you think if you stick dollar bills the currency of the U.S. Government that when some pore sap digs them up and assuming the U.S. Government still exists they will still be legal tender?

As a professional technological-historian, I find it so fascinating that economics, that is how you use, control and manipulate money is seldom taught in any high school, let alone where by the ages of 12 or 13 most should begin the basics concepts of what money is , what its true value is and what do you need to know to protect yourself from predators in the future. Money can exist in one of two forms, an instrument of what is real, and tangible, and 100% translatable in to something else. Thats what most people call "hard money" Or it can have an "assigned value" that which can vary based on how it preceptorial worth is valued in the end, future. When Nixon took us off the gold standard I know of several of my own relatives who had to be (gently) talked of the edge of tall buildings. The words they use I need not repeat, but as a child at the time I asked the question why was gold so valued? The answer didn't satisfy me much. At the end of the day, being the pain in the ass little scientist I was then as am now they said "oh its holds its value over time" Really, thats quite interesting. How? And they said well, "it won't tarnish when exposed to the elements" Oh I said, (remember I was just a kid) I said it looks pretty?

They said well sure. Now what I did not reveal at the time to the people I was speaking to was I knew gold had certain practical benefits in how it was a terrific insulator against heat and certain types of nasty radiation as some of our space probes will be exposed to. I also then that given what we had to work with in the 1960's that gold was a superb electrical conductor, and we had little to work with at the time, gold did a lot of things really well, for that time. What we knew then. But guess what? We know more. Our fixation on gold as hard currency in my world only goes so far. Can you eat it? Can it wash away your sins? (Guess what gang, only we, not gold or any tangible so-called money can change what we will be from what we are today) Only each of us can do that. And what gives me joy? Knowing that its true. Next entry will be on the private communications between FDR and Churchill per what they talked about. Hint to as to who in the U.S. at the time would have able to tap the closed, private lines of the President himself? Two parties at the time. One was named Hoover, (the FBI) the other the U.S. Army Signal Core, that became the National Security Agency. Anyway, it is part of my history, which makes it part of yours. Some of what they discuss is profound and the rest? Well is not so much. What I like so much about the great characters of history, their human beings. Don't worry, the true secret stuff, I wont tell. No, I will not reveal personal flaws to embarrass the two men in question, long since dead. What may I ask would be the point?



posted on Oct, 21 2011 @ 05:03 PM
link   
Part of what I try to talk talk about is based on history, "or the template of the now, built from what was" What do you think? Give up making poetry? Fat chance. Part of this is based on the recently declassified transcripts of private, or so they thought, communications between FDR and Winston Churchill that occurred between early June 1940, when FDR had a "private line" put in to the white house, and White Hall. In truth that line went directly to Churchill's private bunker. He didn't trust MI-6 at the time. (Good for him, Kim P.and all that group) At that time the main "arbiture" no pun indented of who controlled American communications protocols at that time was was AT&T or American Telephone and Telegraph. This was ostensibly a private American corporation. But when it was known they would be (until forcibly broken up in 1984) the dominant carrier of communications in and out of the United States, they were offered a prize most dear . Work with us, at the time for the most part the U.S. Army signal core, and we will do what we can to help you, with whatever we hear. How that mechanism was eventually put in place become one of the great technological power plays of the last 100 years. Why? Because all that flowed from it was intrinsically linked to it from day one, hang on it gets even more interesting...



new topics

top topics
 
0

log in

join