Politics

How Decadent And Depraved Is The Ruling Class?

217 Comments

In recent times, the “one percenters” have received considerable criticism. The USA’s top 1% is estimated to own 40% of its wealth, and it wasn’t like this a few decades ago. There’s much to be said about the negative effects of vast extremes of wealth (observe any Third World country for the end result) and how this developed, but here we’ll set the sights higher and examine the oligarch class: the international coterie making mere millionaires seem like middle class suburbanites. Some are famous, but the public is quite unaware about many others.

Actually, some are okay folks. I’ve worked for two multi-billionaires. Besides cheapness and some prima donna moments (both come with the territory), those two were pretty normal. They were self-made; likely that helps. I did a week-long installation job for the daughter of one; a really great lady. On a shorter installation job, I’ve met the wife of the CEO of one of the world’s largest companies. We didn’t talk long, but she seemed pretty nice.

Unfortunately, others are quite decadent and suffer from a God complex, throwing around money to impose their will on many ostensibly democratic nations. Many Arab oil barons are notoriously dissolute and meddle with politics. The same can be said for upper tier Wall Street types, secretive globalist foundations, richer-than-God bankers, and international financiers.

Weird Ways of the Elite

An interesting documentary called Weird Ways of the Elite contains some pretty shocking charges. If even half of it’s true, that’s pretty disturbing. Actually, some is verifiable.

First we’ll consider what seems improbable. I’m pretty skeptical about some of it. David Icke makes a few appearances; he’s pretty “out there”; and I don’t buy his space lizard idea, which was hinted at. They’re just people, who have the unfortunate habit of acting like space lizards.

Concerning Illuminati bloodlines, as it describes, some families listed became rich relatively recently in the 19th and 20th centuries. Thus, connections to the 18th century’s Bavarian Illuminati are pretty unlikely. Really, we needn’t trace an org chart back to a defunct group of nihilistic whack-jobs who, at most, inspire some today. Modern covert power structures, though, are another matter entirely. In fact, hunting for improbable Illuminati ties is a good smokescreen for present-day globalist foundations and other meddlesome sorts. Babylonian lineages (if the oligarchs really believe it themselves) are even more fanciful.

How about the Satanism angle? The spirit cooking stuff is the real deal, and the Bohemian Grove certainly does exist, though this could be basically entertainment for bored plutocrats; a spookier version of frat parties. Aleister Crowley (pictured a few times) isn’t really a Satanist, despite his considerably eldritch symbolism. He kind of played with it, much like many 1980s rock stars. Other than that, I’m quite familiar with his OTO organization; there’s no overlap with the oligarch class, although they’d be tickled pink by several passages in Liber AL Vel Legis. Finally, we’ve covered the Shabbatai Zvi hypothesis, based on an actual antinomian oddball, though it’s a bit flimsy. So all that seems somewhat overblown.

How much is verifiable?

Twins separated at birth?

The documentary opens describing child abuse. This does happen in some wealthy families. (Whether it’s psychological conditioning—or merely because their parents are sick bastards—is debatable.) As for the featured twins, heirs to the Doris Duke fortune, our buddies at HuffPo wrote about them:

The teens say they grew up in misery, despite fabulous wealth that allowed them to own a pet lion and bring diamonds to school for show-and-tell. In a Rolling Stone interview published Tuesday, they detailed horrific abuse inflicted on them by their father at their South Carolina mansion before he died of a meth overdose in 2010.

Apparently some oligarchs act like the stereotype of “trailer trash”.

This goes way back. Sigmund Freud’s wealthy patients often were victims of childhood sexual abuse. Eventually he rationalized it away as them only having a complex. Perhaps overlooking incestuous skeletons in prominent closets avoided career damage. Freud was a sharp cookie, but really dropped the ball there.

Then there’s the strange case of the serial pedophile Jimmy Savile. He even schmoozed his way into the good graces of the British royal family. Despite likely hundreds of victims, he wasn’t prosecuted. Further, he was protected by his fellow media figures until his death. Need we mention Hollyweird and especially Roman Polanski? There are even more shocking speculations about what might have happened in Washington itself.

The documentary correctly describes the wealthy spending enormous sums on art, some of pretty dubious quality. (However, none of the several wealthy homes I’ve been in had anything like that. Actually, some do have good taste in art.) The featured painting of Saturn devouring his son was acquired by a baron, but later he donated that Francisco Goya collection to Spain’s museums. What about the really weird stuff depicting cannibalism, jars of maggots, and all that? Apparently some really like that garbage. One particularly disturbing featured item—among several others in that collection not shown—is the real deal; let’s just say I know someone who knows someone.

Buying organs for transplant is illegal as hell in most places, but not everywhere. Stories about waking up in a hotel bathtub full of ice are pretty far-fetched, but abductions for organ harvesting have happened.

What about blood consumption for life extension? If that occurs, it won’t help, since red blood cells only last a month on average, two at most. Still, Elizabeth Bathory did exactly that, if the stories are credible. Despite a certain prominence in cultural references, adrenochrome probably isn’t the real deal; sniffing coke is the drug of choice for the wealthy. Having known many cokeheads, I’ll stick to beer even if I win Powerball.

Finally, just as featured, many oligarchs are indeed buying disaster-proof luxury bunkers.

Conclusion

Ooh burn!

The ultra-rich aren’t demigods as they’re portrayed by tabloids; they’re just people. Even so, the oligarch class inhabits a rather different universe. Their isolation from the public is problematic even when they believe they’re acting benevolently. Celebrity airheads and champagne socialists live in gated communities, avoiding street crime and other ill effects of soft-on-crime policies, population replacement immigration, and other reckless leftist policies. Therefore, they wipe their feet on the common people while thinking they’re doing the Lord’s work.

The main problem is that they consider themselves “beyond good and evil”, as per Nietzsche. It’s always been this way. From my considerable research into King Henry VIII—actually an early forerunner of modern asshole dictators—he very much considered himself above the law. Indeed, he was the law. Still, he was a saint compared to some other nobles, such as Ivan the Terrible, Vlad the Impaler, Gilles de Rais, and again Elizabeth Bathory.

It’s still a problem in modern countries ostensibly based on the rule of law. The very wealthy can get away with quite a bit. For example, Ted Kennedy drove off a bridge in Chappaquiddick (probably while drunk) and left his passenger to die, but the judge let him off because poor Teddy had suffered enough.

The full range of behavior can be found among the ultra-wealthy. However, there are some psychological effects of being kissed up to all their lives, seldom being told “no”, and being exempt from the common man’s daily struggles. This leads to “trust fund kid syndrome”, irrationality, and hubris. However, they’re not as smart as they think; their miscalculations can be counterproductive or cause embarrassing revelations.

The oligarchs certainly have their share of sociopathy. Middle-class crooks are usually smart enough to maintain appearances and not take unnecessary risks. However, sociopaths who are effectively above the law know no such restraints. That’s where the problem is. Unaccountable plutocrats and “king-makers” have no business meddling with our ostensibly democratic countries anyway, especially with their irresponsible track record. They’re not demon spawn, but still, they can take their Feudalism 2.0 and go to hell.

Read More:  Is Genocide On The Elite Agenda?

217 thoughts on “How Decadent And Depraved Is The Ruling Class?”

  1. I’m absolutely convinced that the Deus Ex series are the most based games ever made. Just check this out. The first game was released in 2000 and they predicted the EU’s ambitions to create a superstate as well as the immigration crisis.

    In the game, the leader of the Illuminati is a man named Lucius DeBeers, which is a jab at the real life De Beers diamond company that was funded by none other than Nathan Mayer, the 1st Baron Rothschild himself. The game series makes an excellent job at portraying real life issues under the disguise of transhumanism.
    There are also some pretty good quotes from the game:

    Fun fact: The director of the first game is Warren Spector: a Jew.

    1. Dude, never thought I’d see someone posting about Deus Ex in a RoK comment section. If I could upvote your comment 500 times more I could. Those games were absolute genius. The first one still has one of the best crafted stories I’ve seen in not just video games, but any kind of entertainment.

      1. I have the first three Deus Exes, but I’ve never gotten around to completing the first two (and have never even played Human Revolution). Maybe I should get onto it.

        1. Go for it. Just keep in mind that gameplay for the first game is dated, so it might take some effort to get into it. But if you can move past that, you’re in for a gem of a game. I don’t know how the second game is, I’ve never played it, but Human Revolution is just as worth it.

        2. Second game’s called Invisible War. I think it’s an OK game, but I can’t judge it in the context of the wider Deus Ex series. If you want a copy, it’s available on GOG for $15 (Australian) or on Steam for US$7. There’s a mod called the Visible Upgrade that adds widescreen support and optimises it for modern computers (the game is 13 years old).
          I was first introduced to the Deus Ex series via Invisible War on the Official Xbox Magazine’s demo disc.

        3. You can try the GMDX mod for Deus Ex. It enhances texture quality and adds many nice aesthetic changes while remaining faithful to the original design.

        4. I never played them, but saw them there. I think I played Command and Conquer’s stuff, Warcraft 2 and 3, and Counter Strike back then. I did like the first 2 Max Paynes.

        5. I know, I’ve played the game many times. Or were you talking about Invisible War?

        7. No, I was referring to the first game. I only just started playing and I’m quite impressed with the story and gameplay. It’s a pity the new Deus Ex games toned down the socio-political critique.

    2. Human Revolution features a plot by 2 multi-billionaires in the field of augmentations to implant everyone who has augmented with a chip so they can be controlled, suffer mental illnesses like depression or hallucinations, or just start killing people. A literal one-world mind of whoever is holding the button.
      Scary.

      1. There’s more:

        In this video, the woman gets a mechanical arm and everything is fine until she goes crazy when the augmented citizens get hacked. The American government then passes a law that enforces segregation between augmented and non-augmented citizens. This too reminds me of the immigration crisis: The elites bring in millions of immigrants who simply will not assimilate using the silly lie of multiculturalism. When racial tensions erupt, they will pass laws that tighten their hold over the population.
        As far as the game is concerned, we’re not too far away from the technology being portrayed:

        1. They always create conflict. Its how a minority can defeat larger better funded groups.

    5. All of Stanley Kubricks movies I only understood a decade or more after they came out. The Shining has been the most illuminating. That last photo in it? Was an actual photo with a guy right in front of Woodrow Wilson (the pres who created the FED and sold us down the river)giving the universal satanist sign of “as above so below”(no heaven or hell). The date associated with it is the forming of the Council of Foreign Relations the main group designated to manage the US secretly. And the whole story is referencing the change of the money system from gold to fiat. And also how this evil no talent pedophile father gives rise to a son who “shines”. And how that son eventually kills his creator. https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/9a1330fe5ecca73befec94cc960be1c4fd2b33aabc69235ae69174fe83eaecad.jpg https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/ccb8e94ab5ae0378733cfe662f087ac19501ada2bd82d55b4eb6c8e4190d9c04.jpg etely.

      1. Damn. that’s one creepy bastard. And what the hell is wrong with that guy’s nose?

      2. You misunderstand “As above, so below”. First of all, it has nothing to do with satanism. It comes from Hermes Trismegistus, an ancient Greek mystic. Second, it does not mean there is no heaven or hell. It is a theory that the macrocosm (the universe) and microcosm (human) behave similarly.
        But besides that, this is not the sign he is doing. The correct sign would be with his fingers pointing. He is probably just posing for the camera.

  2. I worked for a wealthy man in Miami in 1997. Best boss I ever had. Most wealthy people I have met, I like.
    Allow me to fantasize for a moment here (or mentally masturbate, to reference a previous article).
    One needs about eight-and-a-half million dollars (US currency) to be in the top 1%. That’s not a lot of money. However, being worth a billion US dollars, I don’t see why a wealthy person would give a care about public policy.
    A billionaire can live in a mansion, own an island comparable to Necker, receive the best financial insider information available, get any permit for any gun he wants to own and carry (believe it or not this is true in 99% percent of the nations and cities out there), bed a bevy of hot young beauties forever, ride in a Rolls-Royce, fly in a Gulfstream, party on a yacht, and do what ever he wants to do when ever he wants to do it no matter where he is or what the laws are there.
    I’m not hating or complaining; just pointing out facts. And I am happy for them in this regard.
    So when billionaires like the Rockefellers, Rothschilds, George Soros, the Kochs, etc., interfere in public life, it tells me this. In spite of their great wealth, they have no life. Nobody worth a shit wants anything to do with them. Any friends they have are bought and paid for. And they are attention whores.
    Punk ass politicians who accept contributions from that ilk are worthless. They are not serving the public, only serving their own ego and bank account.
    I like the article. About time ROK published an article like this.

    1. So when billionaires like the Rockefellers, Rothschilds, George Soros, the Kochs, etc., interfere in public life, it tells me this. In spite of their great wealth, they have no life.

      Does this apply to our current billionaire President as well?

      1. Considering that he is a billionaire, yet sees fit to be President, Yes. Good question. Next!

      4. Soros should run for president and face the flak instead of funding shadowy groups to overthrow civilization.

        1. Soros is a coward. And he is not an American citizen. He is barely human in appearance. But he would probably win by a landslide of historic proportions anyway. Good idea, obot.

    2. “So when billionaires like the Rockefellers, Rothschilds, George Soros, the Kochs, etc., interfere in public life, it tells me this. In spite of their great wealth, they have no life”
      I believe they have great lives, they simply guard their privacy from the public. That`s why you don`t hear much about their private lives.

      1. I believe that after a certain point, one starts developing a god complex, megalomania. It isn’t enough to be above your world, you crave to control and shape it.

        2. You can see that in a lot of non rich people as well. Look at the various fast food managers that are power hungry. The only difference is that money gives them a means to further spread their influence and protect theirselves from the backlash they may receive .

        3. psychopathy-generally they consider themselves gods or aliens..and start sleeping with family and push eugenics. The Roths at one point insisted on marrying first cousins to concentrate their wealth further. King Tut had a club foot because of his inbreeding. Nothing spells godliness like genetic diseases.

        4. While I agree, a fast food manager has earthly, mortal worries. Rent, food, gas-money, getting mugged, college, franchise-owner, etc. They desire to control, which is normal to an extent. But they don’t get to shape the fabric of their reality.

        5. You have all the power you want, all the money in the world, you’ve been to the moon and back. Even that becomes boring after a while. Everything gets boring. Nothing is new to these people they have tried everything they wanted and to an excess, too. What’s left after that? Depending on the individual inclinations, one either becomes a monk or starts doing good etc, or they move on to opioid infused and inspired weirdo shit.

      2. Yeah! Their private lives are great. That helps explain why they meddle in public policy, foreign policy, and crash currencies in foreign nations.
        Why not just mind your own business, have a beautiful private life, and enjoy your fortune?
        Maybe it’s because their lives ain’t worth a fuck. All they have is money. And they don’t know how to live.
        Do I know how to live?
        My business is picking up. This will be among the last times I am visiting ROK. No matter what happens, I don’t give a handful of shit about influencing public policy. Nor do I care what some so-called “elite” wants to see enacted. They can go fuck themselves. Man-to-man none of them will ever do shit to me.
        I wish you well Mr. Kersey. Looking at your picture, thank you for not shooting me.

        1. Congrats on your business EE!
          Understand entirely on cutting down on the online time, but please do try to come around every once in a while. Your input here has been very informative and appreciated! Take care and good luck. Go get ’em!

        3. I liked Malcolm Forbes. He made his money the old fashioned way; he inherited it. He also managed to relish in it and have fun. He hot air ballooned, he got a bunch of capitalist to ride with him on motorcycles across China with leather jackets with the name of their MC club; Capitalist Tools. He did it in public, in style, and laughing all the way. I hope and pray that I could do it as well. In fact a standard prayer of mine is, “Dear Lord give me the opportunity to show you that great wealth will not ruin my character.”

      3. They generally torture their children(plenty of videos on this). How else do you prepare them to for the world?

    3. money can and often is a means to an. If the end is power then mere accumulation isn’t going to get your rocks off.

      1. People say money can’t buy happiness. That is the greatest lie in history. If you are in a bad situation in life your chances of getting out of that situation is much higher if you have money. So yes money can buy you happiness because it can help you get out of life’s hardships. If you are sick you can afford the best doctors and medications if you have the money. If you have legal problems you can get the best lawyers to get you out of trouble. If you are not happy where you live with money you can go somewhere else.
        So if someone tells you that money can’t buy happiness they are full of shit.
        Money can buy you happiness just not 100 percent of the time probably more like 99.9998 percent of the time it will.

        1. “So if someone tells you that money can’t buy happiness they are full of shit.”
          I tell people this all the time. They think I’m the anti-Christ.
          You have plenty of money, then you are broke. Which of these two conditions did you find yourself happiest in?
          Me, I’ll take the money.

        2. Well tell them how do they eat and have a roof over their head without money? Two most basic needs for human survival are food and shelter.
          Last time I checked the hungry and poor in much of the third world is not happy. How can they be when many experience life and death situations everyday because they have limited or no access to food and often no shelter?
          You think these Europeans would trade places with the refugees in their countries? I doubt it. This also one of the reasons why refugees resent their host nations because they wind up around a group of people more prosperous than them. In other words if we minded our own damn business.
          The West would be wiser to stop creating situations where such people are forced into becoming refugees.
          Biggest reason for the refugee crisis has been the NeoCon wars from Bush Jr and Obama.

        3. That “10” many men lust for will NEVER have eyes for a poor man. Even when she’s desperate, poor pappy ain’t gettin’ her out of her panties.
          Money buys luxury and leisure. Money buys opulence. Money buys freedom.
          Like your comment.

        4. Money is the greatest lie ever invented by evil men to convert the wealth of others to theirs. Money is the means by which the privileged, religious and well-connected steal the labor of others through usury. You can be happy without (the love of) money. Just ensure you do not live above your ability to produce and live your days filled with productive labor.

    4. I think Billionaires participate in politics cause it’s the last thing left to stimulate them. As you said they got every material need fulfilled i.e. cars,pussy , homes etc. It’s never enough so what’s left is POWER i.e. political power. Power over people is a drug that these freaks can’t get enough of….

      2. Or it’s a bloated and mis-placed need to ‘give something back’ after a life-time of indulgence. People who consider political office a service are at odds with people who consider political office a source of power. I think women persue office for power, some men for the sake of attempting to improve society. Don’t a ton of them do it for the money? Those are the politicians that always come off as the most animalistic.

      3. And ensuring their vast wealth and power stay exclusively with them or within their tribe/people for generations.

      4. Yeah… thats exactly it….. a ‘raison d’etre’ is more important than wealth…. for 99% wealth is the target…. but after wealth what next ? Lie about and drink cocktails by the pool all day….. ?
        Now you have a platform and can build a bigger life purpose, more social acceptance…. thats what people crave most….. power not money…..
        Question is …. how badly are those corridors of power controled and manipulated by some twisted messianic cult satanist mansonic group think….
        It seems to be almost absolute in some cases… in others appears as just a circumstantial nothing….
        However knowing how effectively a cult group think can controll people and perpetuate itself… it wouldnt be surprising if some 1700s masonic crap or some messianic judaism has turned a giant game of chinese whispers that must be played to be allowed to join the power club.

    5. To be fair, I don’t know that the super-rich have a monopoly on being assholes. I’ve known plenty of low income sick fucks.

      1. I think being wealthy just gives assholes easier ways of expressing their shittiness.

        2. The ultimate way..to steal the wealth and genius of other people. When you go to Wall Street you have people who have generally devoted themselves to the art of conning. Could they even change a tire if they had to?

        3. Aye. Appearances count more than anything, and as long as you look the part, it’s really amazing what you can get away with.

        4. Notice most people who drive BMWs and Benzes drive like complete assholes? Its like look at me, I paid a fortune for a car that will cost a fortune to keep road worthy and reliable.

      2. To see someone drunk with power, one need look no further than the assistant night manager at a TGI Friday’s.

        2. They never stop talking. Blah, blah, blah…..I have 500 year old scotch….blah, blah, blah…..the wood was imported from the Antartic……blah, blah, blah. There is always some plastic blower hanging around that you know is there for the money. Bah, blah, blah……..

      4. Lot of working class people can be straight up dickheads, most rich people tend to hole up in their gated communities and rarely interact with others not of their level.
        There is a reason why you see more impulsive and self destructive behavior among the working class. The ultra rich do a lot of deviant things, but the working class do stuff that often ruins their lives. Look at the opioid abuse epidemic around the US. And speaking of opioids, its not only the medications that are abused but food and alcohol as well. Many Americans consume too much junk food, and much of it is because many of the junk foods contain substances that mimic opioids. Addictive processed foods with artificial flavoring.

      5. My experience was ?? The super rich & I mean the Multi millionaires, behave like gentlemen .. The just “Nouveaux riches” just a couple of millions, behave like piece of shit !! They think that they are the “Crèmes de la crèmes” in the pecking order & you are the stupid serf ??

    6. Money is not a life in and of itself. Money is a way to live the life you want, but you have to live it. I’m in good shape financially, damn good shape, but I still have a job because I want to be able to have said I did something respectable. Someday, if I can ever get going on writing, I may swap to author as a career, provided I can hack it, but you have to DO something worthwhile with your life.
      Second thing is to have interests and companionship. Were I to find a great chick to be with; I’d spend my time doing things with her. Month long RV trips across the country and Canada. Sail the shores of the country. Hike the Appalachian trail, etc. Money just free you up to do what you want to do. You must do it yourself, and then you must not become a slave to your stuff. Live modestly, but comfortably.

      1. I like what you say here. Agree whole heartedly.
        Want to write?
        My YouTube channel has a playlist called Russell Blake. Those podcasts will help you plenty. They have helped me tremendously.
        Search for my name and you will find the yellow brick road or the rabbit hole or the playlist I just named for you.
        See you all next week.
        God bless you.

      2. I was once watching a news show that was covering elite men’s clubs. One of the questions asked was what these guys did for a living. Of course, most of them had no need for an earned income/job. What the concierge said was, back before WWII many of the members were listed as gentlemen. That meant they did not work any job; they lived off the wealth they inherited. Since then, he said, no one wanted to be listed as a gentleman any more. It was shameful not to be a contributing member of the work force; not a parasite. Of course just because you list something doesn’t mean you actually work for a living. Venture capitalist, writer, composer, student, non-profit foundation head/board member, and other so called jobs are really do nothing excuses for work; it involves as much or as little as you want it to.

    7. When you have all the money in the world, you will rather quickly acquire all there is to acquire, experience all there is to experience.. and after that.. what?
      You will be still be empty inside. That leaves only a couple of things for you to do to pass the time. Find spiritual meaning, and/or use your considerable power.. to shape the world

    8. Its in America mostly where your ability with the women is based upon your income and and financial worth. Some other places other factors take into consideration. Also most men usually just want one special woman their for their whole life. It was the case with my dad and his dad before him. The idea of having multiple partners or repeatedly getting married was a sign of failure in their eyes.

    9. Not all the billionaires have beautiful wives. Look at Jeff Bezos and Bill Gates, they are the Hillary Clinton types, not what I would call feminine and beautiful. Mostly the career charging and social climbing types.
      Even those with beautiful wives, they don’t run around fornicating with multiple women. Its mostly the Hollywood actors and musicians that fornicate, also the athletes.
      Trump is a billionaire and openly said he strongly prefers traditional marriage and relationships. Its true he was divorced twice but go to give him the benefit of the doubt since he kept trying.

    10. Main thing is that money gives you the ability to do things you cannot do if you were not rich.

    11. power and money are two things you can’t have enough; most people with power say it’s like a drug, you alway need more

    12. I think that ‘poor’ people and the author of this article vastly under estimate the power of cult mentality.
      Being accepted and having a higher purpose is what motivates most people. Wealth is only a tool. To the ‘poor’ man who just wants a luxury vacation – all he thinks of getting rich is nice homes, private islands and private jets…. swanning about with sexy women etc…. but this veneer gets real old real quick… then you need a life purpose and a social circle…… or you’re just a lonely old rich guy….. friends without money tend to be there just for a good time on your dime…..
      Thats where the cult group mentality is so powerful and so easily draws the wealthy in. Sure some make a bit of money and dont care…. just go chill or run other businesses… but these are not elite…… they are just harmless rich….
      Elitle = wealthy + connected + socially accepted in those wealthy circles. Its not about money its more about power and being a do gooder – serving a higher cause…. eg Tom Cruise in Scientology.
      Now scientology is a fringe…. its cult mentality is clear to see but its not in the whitehouse, imf, un, world bank and corridors of power.
      The question is…. whether the ‘elite’ are powered and controlled by some kind of cult mentality. The satanist links are clear, as are the masonic links. Its made up stuff invented by humans…. however it can control and manipulate a person who accepts it and those who do not cannot rise further.
      Lets say you are Bill Gates… you start out as a normal chump… you get wealthy…. you have a choice… swim in that cult power group or back off and semi retire to a life of entertainments….. you’re invited to join the club…. slowly slowly more things are shown and more mind fuck is applied. Until at one point you are a pawn…. you can back off and ‘retire’ you’ve also been party to some ceremonies and things that could embrass, disgrace or put you in jail…. so you have to be careful……
      Wealthy people have a lot to lose… but its losing that social status and ability to influence and be ‘important’ – thats the biggest fear. 9999.9% of people will enjoy some level of wealth but then you either settle back and become a ‘normal person’ that is monied… or you move into corridors of power and those corridors certain seem to include worshiping a satanic goat headed figure, attending strange rituals and ceremonies, quite possibly animal blood sacrifices and even human sacrifices…. all just control mechanisms…… but clearly there is some cult mentality and cult group power control over those in power.
      All politicans and elites have this strange beady look in their eye like they know and have seen things they DO NOT want you to know about. They spout lies, confuse and obfuscate – theres something pulling the strings……

      1. Very good comment.
        And you are right. Once a person reaches a certain level of wealth, they are given a choice; ride with us or ride into the sunset. It’s hard to say where the cut-off is before they start coming around. But it exists. Beyond that point, you are theirs are you are gone.
        You may recall in 1999-2000, Microsoft was on trial. It was said the judge may break up Microsoft. What happened? Suddenly, Microsoft was allowed to continue in its present form. Long story short, Bill Gates climbed on board and started playing the game; their game.
        Celebrities, sooner or later, will have to make the same choice.
        When you become wealthy, unless you are rotten and corrupt, it’s best to lay low and enjoy your fortune. Pay your taxes and keep your mouth shut. Most of all remember you are in enemy territory. A million and one fuckers are looking to take a bite out of your fortune.
        There is always someone watching you, especially when you are rich.
        I really like your comment. I been up for 18 hours working, so I don’t know if my reply seems coherent or sensible. But I really like your comment. Well thought out. Well said. Accurate as a sniper.
        Good weekend.

    13. I have read in Arabia the Sheikhs order high class prostitutes to shit into their faces 😀
      I’m afraid too much money is not healthy. Some people don’t know what to do anymore they get bored, addicted to kinky stuff just to get a thrill or something. And I believe wealth can also lead to narcisstic disorders because everyone around you tries to crawl into your butt most likely.
      I totally believe that stuff like True Detective Season 1 and worse is going on out there.

  3. I’m convinced this is why aliens won’t visit Earth.
    Some alien ship came close to our planet, and the alien captain looked at Earth and said, “This seems like a nice planet. It’s got deep blue oceans, white clouds, forests… HOLYSHITBALLS! The entire fucking planet is run by a bunch of sicko pedophiles who dress up like teddy bears!!! Get the fuck outta here!! Tell everyone you meet: Stay the fuck away from Earth!!!”

    1. A species that has interstellar travel would have absolutely nothing to gain from our civilization, culturally or physically.

    2. No, they already tried to invade earth over a thousand years ago but failed.

  4. Oh, I think it’s fair to say that they are pretty damned depraved. And cunning, too. And exactly what they are capable of, is entirely open to debate. For example, are all of the men depicted in the graphic below legitimate geniuses – or are they handpicked, storefront actors.
    They all look like they just walked out of a gay bathhouse. In nearly all of these cases, the CEO in question was also a founder or a co-founder of the company. And yet, if a guy does his homework, and he checks the shareholder records, he’ll find out that most of these geniuses do not own the majority of the shares of stock in the companies they founded; and in some cases, they own an extremely small percentage of the shares. Which just might make a guy arrive at the conclusion that they’re all geniuses at tech stuff, but most of them are terrible businessmen. They’re wicked smart at inventing things, but they have lousy judgment when it comes to finances.
    Personally, I find all of this more than just a little bit hard to believe, as the odds that they would all look gay, AND have shitty financial foresight, are at least a million to one against this being the case. Upon closer examination, it appears that they’re all cartoon characters, propped up to play the role of geniuses who went to college, worked really hard, and invented a new website or tech gizmo in their garage, while the elite, behind the scenes, acquired the bulk of the company stock and busily gobbled up all the money. This, of course, gives motivation to the suckers who attend the elite’s universities via all those expensive student loans. That’s my take on it…opinions will vary. (Click to enlarge.)
    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/87459d7bf46144dbb8b09d8d3c69ed89748bb034fd41832d1228f7ab7a78af6f.jpg

    2. Musk’s family situation sounds pretty weird. Reportedly he had twins and then triplets with his first wife, Justine Musk, conceived through in vitro fertilization, after their first child, apparently conceived naturally, died from SIDS – like he finds the natural way of making babies distasteful or something.
      Then he married and divorced actress Talulah Riley, and he has expressed interest in dating actress Amber Heard. These seem like the kinds of women a closeted gay celebrity would choose as his beards.

      1. Yeah, and he’s only a couple of notches above being idiot. His eyes are dead. Ever hear him speak. Same for Spencer Rascoff of Zillow. You can’t find pictures of his kids, except in rare cases. You can’t find any interviews with his mother – I’d think she would be proud. These guys are invented. They’re actors, which proves that acting is not relegated solely to Hollywood and the stage. And they have beards, as you mentioned.
        Of course, all of this dovetails nicely with the push to normalize homosexuality, to elevate it, to the point where it is revered. Any guy with a dash of cuck sauce in his DNA will feel proud…the betas will have hope, they will gloat, and strut around, “I’m thooo thmart”, etc.

        1. Musk also follows dumb transhumanist fads, like warning how AI’s could “summon the demon” and destroy us all, and just because the transhumanist nerds like Eliezer Yudkowsky say so. That tells me that his thinking about the world has more of a grounding in science fiction than in real science and engineering.

        2. What he talks about reads like an NWO script. He’s useful to the cause. All humans are idiots, all problems are caused by humans. (And a really, really, really smart guy says so. So listen up…)

        3. I favor the late, great Rick James, on the Judge Joe Brown show, and his way of describing his former friend’s gayness: “he had some sugar in the tank….up there, in his head. He tried to pass it off as accidental contact, but there was both hands, on both buttocks! Just cause I wrote Superfreak don’t mean I am one!”

      2. Anyone who’s interested in a long-term fling with Heard needs to bludgeon themselves to death.

  5. I’m pretty depraved. I can only imagine what would happen if someone threw a few billion dollars on my fire

    1. Oh god, parents, get your women indoors fast if that happens…and I wanna party with you, if it happens.

      1. First order of business would be to live my dream of having a series of threesomes with women from warring cultures
        English and Irish
        Indian and Paki
        Israeli and Iranian
        Russian and Chechen
        Southern bell and Black Ghetto chick
        Chink and Jap
        Greek and Turk
        Puerto Rican and Dominican
        Etc etc etc

        3. I don’t know. Didn’t seem particularly caustic. Maybe it was a Disqus glitch.

        5. “The Interwebs are vast, weird and unfathomable, and there be sea monsters.” – Gandhi

        7. I remember him saying that, right before he told me it’s poor form to drop names…

    2. I’ve had a pretty sheltered life. I wouldn’t know what to do with depravity.

      1. Well if you ever come into a few billion you can hire me to be the Virgil of Vice to your Dante.

        1. I have no real experience with depravity either. But I am sure I can pick it up on my own just fine. If I ran into trouble, I would give you a call.

    3. Growing up, I always fantasized about being a rock star so I could gain access to a neverending stream of easy pussy. Well, that never panned out, but I found another direction to go in that brought me exactly what I was looking for, and without most of the health risks. If I ever made it in music I would guaranteed be six feet under by now. I have a buddy that was in a hugely successful band right out of high school, and he developed a life ruining pill/alcohol addiction and doesn’t have a pot to piss in nowadays.

      1. For me it was all star short stop. All the vadge, much better health

    4. Well, I KNOW EXACTLY what would happen if someone “threw me” a few billion, and it is not a pretty picture! Depravity…it just might be my middle name…

      1. An old columnist for The Chicago Tribune, Mike Royko, once wrote a column about what he would do if he won millions on the lottery. He said the first thing I would do is hire the best divorce lawyer in the country. How many marriages that have survived getting the divorce axe from the wife would go this route? The second thing he said he would do is get rid of all his friends. He said that every one needs friends, but he felt secure in taking his new yacht to the Riviera and hanging a sign that said “I just won &20,000,000, will you be my friend?” would fill this loss quite quickly.

    5. shit i got late to the party !
      I have a perfectly clear picture of what women will do for me if had a billion dollar.. it will be not very pretty to see for innocent eyes hehehe

  6. Poor Nietzsche.
    Think about where and when the German language uses the word crown.
    Our beer has a crown.
    Our waves have a crown.
    Our trees have a crown.
    Our deer have a crown (actually called Geweih, but we call it Weihe, when we ‘crown’ someone).
    Our mountains have a crown.
    If we see a crown somewhere depends on honor, which we call Würde, and würde is the verb we use to create a subjunctive in our grammar.
    And that’s only one of the many reasons, why we call our vocabulary a Wortschatz – a word treasure, and never ever for only a moment would dare to call what other languages have any more than a vocabulary.
    Poor Nietzsche. Poor Schopenhauer. Poor Kant. Poor Wittgenstein.
    And poor world.
    And I don’t write this in an attempt to be arrogant, because that treasure is meant to be shared.
    That was the idea of the enlightenment and it doesn’t work with a trivial vocabulary.

  7. Savile didn’t smooze his way in with the elite, his family are low level aritocrats and he was employed by Lord Mountbatten to compromise politicians and celebrities via paedophilia and blackmail. He went to Thatchers house for Christmas dinner for 11 years in a row for discussions on the same stuff. Russell Brand is now doing the role for the Goldstein family (the other half of the Royal family) what Jimmy Savile did. Type into Youtube “Russell Brand is a paedophile”. The elite know how to identify and recruit their own kind (psychopaths).

    1. Well, people are sympathetic to eachother’s complimentary vices. Just look at how popular the latest ‘stop wanking’ post was. The difference between the upper crust and us here is that we don’t gather around in a circle-jerk at the idea of one. We sure like the fairer sex, though. We draw a line well before unnatural, don’t we gentlemen.

  8. Even with the finite resources of $10,000 dollars more a year, I could be Jay Gatsby (without the oneitis). A tenth of that could set you up here in the NW. It would at least keep the crafts flowing and buy enough new clothes and shoes to turn the right heads.

    1. 10k isn’t close to enough for that. That’s enough for but like 3 good suits a year or maybe 1 really nice Brioni

      1. When I searched Brioni: https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/32ef4a3dfe1d6bde5aa1fda94285cf383bdf39f78066d47ff97b9bfb440ed9be.png
        I suppose they make them for men, too. I like suits, but cheaper than that. I don’t want to have to be afraid to eat in what I’m wearing. I don’t want to worry about sitting the $100 (proportionality) pleats out of my pant legs. I like a $125 suit, $150. I paid less than 2500 for my car I drive now. Trust me, I could throw one hell of a soiree for even $500.

      2. If has the the money for Brioni, then ditch the trendy designer suits and have a classic styled suit tailor made.

        1. Bespoke suiting that is the quality of top of the line ready made suits which are then expertly tailored is spectacularly expensive.
          Not an issue for me, I don’t have the money for either.

        4. I have a rough year to get through before I can think about it.
          But I have been thinking about it.
          Full bespoke rather than mtm and two local tailors are available, with another in a nearby city.
          I want suiting to last me for years with proper maintenance.

        5. I generally wear Canali, Ferragamo or corneliani suits and have a few sports jackets from different companies assuming I liked them. I get everything, from my shirts to my suits to my jeans….to everything tailored and I am pretty happy. I would love to up my game to the next level but I can either wear the high end label of the brands I wear or the lower end label of the next tier up right now. Work hard through your rough year……getting through roughness is what allows us to deserve our spoils!

  9. HOW DECADENT AND DEPRAVED IS THE RULING CLASS?
    Be honest, what would you do if you were sure you could get away with it? There’s your answer.

    2. Buy all the beautiful farm-girls from the Midwest, and pee on their faces, and shit on their chest. Must’ve been a Saudi in my previous life.

        2. Good idea. Although I can’t imagine it with good farm-girls. But I’d totally shit in some disco slut’s mouth.

        3. It’s the act of spoiling something pure that really gets you off. It’s like buying an expensive piece of art, just so you can graffiti it.

        4. I did smth like that to a very pure ukrainian church girl once. Felt like a very bad person the next day. Seriously it was a crap feeling.
          Besides , punishing bad girls is awesome too.

        5. I’ve taken a few girl’s scalps, so I feel where you’re coming from.

        6. Back in my Navel days there was an occasion where a bar girl in Olongapo, PI challenged a bunch of sailors to shit on her face. She laid down on the bar and the guys would squat over her face. The trick was she would blow on their assholes and they just couldn’t get it done. Then a guy elbowed his way up to the front and got the job done. She was super pissed. He had failed to inform her that he was suffering from explosive diarrhea.

  10. One observation-Vlad Tepes actually was a patriot and hero. Otherwise nicely stated. The rich and powerful are truly satanic.

    1. He was also clever as hell at dealing with the Turks, as well as internal problems. Elizabeth Bathory was just a bloodthirsty murderer.

  11. The sorts of Alex Jones (in the US) and David Icke (in the UK) “have been exposing the elites” for some times. Yet, not only the elites tolerates them, Jones and Icke have actually been made a living out of their activities. Icke have been selling his books, some of hid DVD sold in millions, has been paid for his lectures. Alex Jones have built a small business empire out of his work of “exposing the elites”.
    Rationally thinking, you can only see what the elites have allowed you to see.

    1. Yeah, no one has sucker-punched Alex Jones. You have to attack our elites’ childish utopianism about race and immigration, like Richard Spencer, to get on their shit list.

      2. If you research you realize they are psychopaths to an extreme and eugenicists who want to kill just about everyone else. Their money is about power not comfort.

    2. It’d do more damage to suppress Jones than it would to let him run free. Most of the world thinks he’s nuts.

        1. I don’t know anything about the man, personally, to give my own informed opinion on him.

        2. well does anyone believe that that wasn’t an act? Alex Jones has admitted that his TV appearances are an act – he did so when the wife he was divorcing questioned his stability on the basis of appearances like this. Aaronovitch gets to appear like the very picture of reason from his appearance here while anything ‘conspiracy theory’ related will be discredited by Jones ridiculous and overblown performance (particularly given that this is a British tv programme where decorum is more of an expectation …unless you’re working class that is). Aaronovitch is however a pretty dodgy character in his own right. For a start he’s written a book on conspiracy theories – in order to debunk them. Yet each week in the times I gushes ultra-liberal transformationalist guff usually about gender. It wasn’t so long back that he commented on the appointment of a feminist director of the globe theatre who was trying to turn all theatre parts gender neutral to say that in a hundred years or so we would all be looking back quaintly at the idea that character roles used to be gendered etc. In other words Aaronovitch is part of the real progressive conspiracy to transform humanity into something completely different without reference to what people on the ground think or want. All the stuff about Bilderberg is likely to be distraction by now. There are any number of ways in which conspiracies elite or otherwise can occur, and there is simply no reason for them to take place exactly in the venue we’re all looking at.
          The point here is that there is a rhetorical trick taking place. Conspiracy is happening all the time. It isn’t necessarily top down or absolutely hierarchical. People like Alex Jones blow up the whole thing to extreme proportions, and create a picture in the minds eye that informs us that ‘this is what conspiracy is’: elites sacrificing babies, cannabilising the poor, or fiddling with kiddies. That’s not to say that that might not happen, and indeed there is a transgressive sense in which power may require abominal behaviour (if not necessarily that abominal). But the real conspiracies are typically prosecuted at a lower level, through the financing and direction of academic work, social justice and transformative movements etc. Most conspiracy today I would say relates to social engineering, and is relatively benign rather than over the top demoniacal, although in previous centuries conspiracies often involved political revolutions that masqueraded as grass roots popular uprisings but were nearly always led from the top and often financed by big money

        3. Yeah spot on. Im thinking that many gay men are just taking the easier path of virtual signaling. I.e. they were always straight but they liked the priveledges that being gay came with. The top social engineers must be having a good laugh at those men sucking each other off when they arent even gay.

        4. I think that was his lawyers talking, attempting to make him look reasonable to win custody. The little I know of him makes me believe that he’s all-in on the shit he says.

        5. The conspiracies are real. Like Rockefeller the parents teach tgeir children to trust no one. That makes them master conmen ready to gain control of the businesses and ideas of others through fraud. Like Edison took advantage of Tesla. The FED(a private bank) has over 4 trillion in assetts about 20 percent of the US debt. We cant audit it and the owners are anonymous. That isnt a conspiracy? How did they get 4 trillion? Why was it alowed? How do we know Russia *gasp* doesnt own the fed?

        6. Alex Jones has been at it for decades though. I’d venture that he is one of those conspiracy nuts but plays it up like a bad guy wrestler for entertainment and money.

        7. there have always been people inclined towards their own sex, but that can be true at the same time as recognising that alternative sexualities are very much a result of social engineering and indeed in terms of identity politics quite deliberate manufacturing. The fact is there are more incentive systems in place for exploring your sexuality, on whatever basis than ever before, and men are susceptible this if perhaps rather less so than women so than women, for whom the identity implications are far less extreme

        8. I suspect you’re right about it being down to his lawyers. Re. Alex Jones I’d say he started out as the “real thing”, exposing bilderbergers etc. Now though he’s very much a part of the ‘alternative establishment’ something which as it has become increasingly mainstream may not be as far away from actual establishment as one might think (not least because there is a lot of money to be made, and an ‘alternative flock’ that needs to leading in the right direction. In this particular interview, he behaved like a complete nutcase – he’s always loud, brash and annoying but he’s cranked up the volume to an absurd degree here in such a way it’s hard to imagine he wasn’t trying to make the opposition seem good. Such a performance can please both sides so to speak. Firstly it can be designed to appeal to the “new sheep” who think by tuning into infowars they are going to become part of an opposition group, while at the same time working well to dismay and alienate anyone who might otherwise have been inclined to question the establishment narrative, which here is represented by David Aaronovitch an extreme gender radical and progressive, who will be hugely pleased to be able to distinguish himself from the nutty reactionary right in the form of someone who appears completely happy to play the loon

        9. well there are real conspiracies and false ones, and more frequently than either there are misrepresentations, speculative fantasies and sometimes deliberate disinformation that anyone who fancies themselves any kind of truth seeker has to try to disentangle . Alex Jones infowars channels increasingly looks like a fairly crude way of channelling all of that. Believing anything and everything while by his very personality managing to pretty much send it all up does far more to discredit the possibility of real alternative viewpoints that it does not validate them. Infowars in the mainstream is easy to control, although my suspicion is that Alex has a foot in both the dissent and the establishment camp.
          As for the Fed, it is an enormously powerful institution that was founded in extremely dubious circumstances, lacks real transparency and is without effective democratic accountability. The fact that it can still effectively make policy that pretty much affects everyone is appalling, but equally one has to be careful about what is alleged. I’ve heard that it does get audited. The real issue is whether it gets adequately and transparently audited. Likewise I’m not entirely convinced the ‘private’ ownership aspect is the issue. At least I’m not sure that isn’t a kind of misdirection. The real crime here is the feds power to control money (recall the famous Nathan Mayer quote) and in doing so create monetary inflation etc., inflating assets etc. Latterly this has amounted to a massive transfer of wealth from the middle classes to the rich for instance. I am not saying there isn’t more to it than that, but focusing on a difficult if not perhaps impossible to prove theory about private ownership (which usually ends in the suggestion that the Rothschild or Rockefellers etc are secret trillionaires) runs the risk of directing attention from the real crime going on right before our eyes: the creation of a society that can only function up to the eyeballs in debt, and a generation of property owners who don’t actually own their own property because the moment they can’t service their mortgages they will default to the banks. There are real conspiracies both behind the scenes and right in front of us

        10. That’s a good analogy. I would say it’s very much a career for him, and I’m not sure he’s particularly concerned about professionalism or subtlety. I find it difficult to watch his interviews actually. He often has very interesting speakers on his show, and they present sometime very clear persuasive and evidenced arguments only for him to pretty much shout them down and render their testimony pretty good for nothing as a result

        11. I’ve been saying something similar for a long time now, although lacking your eloquence.
          He flirts with some plausible subjects/conspiracy worthy of proper investigation or cause for alarm but completely discredits them and repulses the general population pushing the kooky conspiracy theorist stereotypes tainting anyone who would question such things.
          Those who do believe something is seriously wrong with the ‘matrix’ so to speak, desperate for answers can easily become misdirected or misinformed by people like him if they are fed enough bread crumbs of truth amongst the lies.

        12. that’s pretty much how I feel, although even now I’d rather believe I was wrong about that. At its best infowars provided everyone with an important source of alternative information and debate, but increasingly it just seems like pantomime, and unfortunately Alex Jones bears most responsibility for that. It’s as though he’s deliberately targeting the emotional types like some evangelical preacher. That’s exactly what we don’t need if we’re to ever get around all the misinformation out there

        13. Sounds like you are on the right track. That it is private is key, because at the moment they have 4.5 trillion dollars that isnt in Americas pocket(which it would be if it were publically owned, and we would have just wiped out 20% of the national debt). The fact that we already kicked two central banks and that the second one tried to assassinate a sitting president should give us pause. It shows how far they are willing to go to get what they want. If you look at the laws governing ownership in the central bank, its clear that over time major shareholders slowly push out minor ones whenever interest rates are high. And we do hear from time to time some of what they are doing with their money, just because its hard to hide that kind of cash. But that is the most important crime in my books, that allows them to commit other crimes. What did they do after they grabbed the FED? WW1, then WW2.

        14. I will reserve judgement on that. I do think central banking is the problem with respect to how it can create booms and busts, create value from nothing etc., and not to put too fine a point on it create a world of debt slaves reliant on continuous credit to it keep its head above water. The fact that it is owned by the member banks is something which may not be the real issue here. The fact that the fed’s balance sheet stands at 4.5 trillion is certainly a major concern but I was under the impression it is the assets etc that have been bought which represent the dubious nature of the fed’s program of quantitative easing etc. i.e. the shareholder banks don’t get to benefit from assets if they sell them – they can’t could use that money to buy coke, yachts or hookers etc. As far as I’m money printing works by the bulk purchase on a silly scale of assets: the central banks buy treasuries, corporate bonds, stocks, everything, creating artificial wealth and prosperity for those on the receiving end…creating in other words a load of massive bubbles, which is what the economy is suffering from / benefiting from right now depending on your point of view. In theory this is debt that is supposed to be unloaded but which can’t really be unloaded because of the potential consequences of doing so, not least the possibility that any such action on a substantial scale might tend towards recession. Moreover it’s largely because of these kinds of activities that the 1% have become richer than ever before. The savers have lost their money in real terms as the banks, beholden to the rich with their stocks and shares, have engaged in money printing. Likewise ever more property is being concentrated in the hands of the wealth and if not in the hands of the wealthy then in the hands of the banks who own mortgage debt etc. This is massive threat in its own right. If there is also a transfer of wealth involved through ownership of the banks themselves that is an entirely different matter, and if that is the case then it should be investigated, the fed should be properly audited, but to the extent that focusing on that may result in us not focusing on the criminality in plain site – the purchasing of assets with fiat magicked into existence – we risk doing the fed a favour by not looking hard at the rotten behaviour that is happening before our eyes. I mean, if the CBs lend enough money on property because is completely unaffordable on any other basis they could end up owning pretty much everything: i.e. communism for the poor, unlimited wealth for those who own the banks, but by this I mean the private banks rather than the fed. My feeling with regard to the fed, and all the CBs etc is that it is the control over monetary policy etc. that represents the real power, not the formal ownership. One can own everything yet one might not be in control, but the one who is in control might as well own everything.
          Re. the fed in history, and bankers wars, that’s no doubt a very interesting issue but the devil’s in the detail. I think it would be a lot easier to link the creation of the fed to the onset of the great depression than directly to the first world war, although finance of course is what permits such wars to endure c.f. say the early 16th century when the crown could not afford to go to war because parliament would not grant subsidies

        15. If they didnt have money they wouldnt have much. They try to use long term soft power(youll never read in a text book that a central bank tried to kill a president) and the media to shape perception. When that fails the guns come out. So don’t look at them as benign because they don’t have their guns out. When three airplanes including the VPs went off the runway, that was a shot over the bow. When a tower in England goes up in shocking flames(Trump is famous for his tower) , and a Rep is shot on Trumps birthday that is a fleshwound. Its easy to think someone is harmless, especially when they look and act harmless 95% of the time. That is their art. They are students of Machiavelli from day one. Betray or be betrayed. Trust no one, not even your own father.
          Yeah the depression they even admitted to, but the purpose of the war, was to drive us into debt, war is always the greatest cause of the bankruptcy of nations. If there wasnt a FED though they arent directly benefiting. WW1 cemented the FED, thats why it came immediately after.

        16. I’m quite careful about what I attribute to unknown quantities. I have no doubt that modern banking has permitted modern warfare, which after all has to be funded, and when it comes to money and profit there are no boundaries of nationhood. Whether that means the fed is in any way directly responsible for world war I etc I couldn’t say. My point is I think it was directly responsible or at least fairly responsible for the great depression a thing (which at that time had not occurred) which was not unlike the kind of eventuality that it was supposedly designed to prevent. I am aware also of the idea that JFK might have been killed because he planned to bring back the government greenback i.e. have the government resume direct responsibility for printing money / monetary policy. I don’t know whether that’s true, and there are certainly other candidate theories for why he may have been targeted whether by the same or other forces. I am satisfied that it wasn’t just a lone gunman, but equally that doesn’t mean it was Janet Yellen, either literally (although you never know) or metaphorically.
          I would also be somewhat hesitant to attribute every other event that occurs as a false flag or whatever. I certainly don’t think the Grenfell Tower catastrophe was deliberate although it may well be criminal (in the prosaic sense that is). On the other hand those representatives who got shot? Certainly it’s worth considering if there might not be something else behind it – but the point here is we need to have reason to consider that there may be more than meets the eye rather than just assuming it, or leaping to conclusions, which incidentally is something which in a clinical sense can easily be related to paranoia. Indeed Richard Hofstadter back in the 60s I think considered that conspiracy thinking was reflective of what he called a paranoid style. Well I often think that paranoia may sometimes be perfectly rational, but equally it may be worth auditing one’s approach to the world to check for a kind of habitual paranoia. It doesn’t serve the cause of truth-seeking to assume anything is the case without at least some substantive evidence. In the absence of that all one is likely to achieve is discredit genuine evidence for wrong-doing when it is actually encountered (it is actually not paranoid in any shape or form to believe that JFK was the victim of a conspiracy even if one cannot assume it) while attributing to the elite, criminal or otherwise the kind of reputation that money alone could never buy. If you recall it’s said that where power is concerned it is better to be feared than loved, and the danger of reflexive conspiracy theory is that it automatically attributes almost god like power and omniscience to what are after all only human actors, and who quite possibly have no prior connection to each other than that which you give them. Possibly, that is. I am not saying they don’t, but it rather depends on how one approaches the matter. Once ‘the conspiracy’ moves from specifics, and specific actors to become everyone in a particular group etc. then that specificity is lost, and we no longer really dealing with a fully human situation. The long and short of it is, with respect to institutions like the FED, it is almost certainly responsible for great evil in the world, was born in circumstances that were certainly somewhat conspiratorial even if it wasn’t in itself the result of an actual conspiracy (and I am not convinced that it wasn’t – I agree with you that the bankers were determined to get their central bank one way or another) but now that it established, or rather has been established for a century now, it is very much a question of system which seeks to perpetuate itself with or without some kind of puppet-master or masters operating the machine from above

        17. Bernanke said to Milton Friedman “Let me end my talk by abusing slightly my status as an official representative of the Federal Reserve System. I would like to say to Milton and Anna: Regarding the Great Depression. You’re right, we did it. We’re very sorry. But thanks to you, we won’t do it again.” Milton has said there has been no severe recession without a severe contraction of the money supply, and no severe contraction of the money supply without a severe recession. So if you know nothing else than when they are going to happen, you can invest accordingly..and profit. He seems to be one of the good guys, he helped clear up many economic and social problems for me. To me the critical question is if they did it on purpose..and when you see all the famous people of the time warning of booms and busts because of the central bank, it becomes much more clear.
          Well the nature of a conspiracy is that it be secret, so you are never going to have full proof(though sometimes things come out much later). That is why it is so instructive to go back in time and see what has been done and how people have behaved. James Corbett likes solid proof too, so he is a good guy to look at in this sense.

        18. That’s an interesting quote, but it looks like its from a while back. Indeed from before the 2008 crisis, which provided the justification for QE. With hindsight I actually find that “But thanks to you, we won’t to do it again” a bit worrying. Given that Milton Friedman was the guru of QE, then it almost looks like Bernanke, who admittedly wasn’t the chair of the fed at that time was already planning to use QE to prevent a new Great Depression or whatever (indeed it’s worth noting that a limited form of QE seems to have been used to end the Great Depression, but as the full Bernanke quote suggests that the fed had not been proactive at that time when it came to increasing the money supply. As such it looks to me like he’s saying the existence of the Fed isn’t the problem, but the fact that the first time round it didn’t start printing money immediately because it didn’t think it had that role: consider the following quote from the same speech: “It was in large part to improve the management of banking panics that the Federal Reserve was created in 1913. However, as Friedman and Schwartz discuss in some detail, in the early 1930s the Federal Reserve did not serve that function.
          That’s some pretty staggering mental gymnastics as far as I’m concerned: the fed was necessary, but it didn’t do it what it should have done because it didn’t have the function (or the power or whatever) to print money from nothing. QE has made the rich even richer, but as a policy it’s widely seen as having failed to achieve its purpose. It’s supposed to be about a temporary stimulation of economies in trouble, with the expectation that the CB debt taken on through QE will be downsized and healthy interest rates normalised as the situation gets better. The problem as with Japan is that some of those temporary measures – as with Japan – seem to becoming a more or less permanent affair. According to the Fed the US economy is doing just fine, apart from inflation being slightly low now that QE has stopped, but there still seems to be no determination to decrease the debt level.
          As you say a great deal depends on whether these measures have been taken with the best of intentions or whether there is a scam-like aspect to any of them. I imagine the truth is probably a mixture of the two. The creation of the fed arguably served the bankers, the banking families and the banking system they presided over far more than the nations it was ostensibly set up to serve – and the great depression is at the very least a practical demonstration of that fact. The ‘second time round’ fed people like Bernanke get to ‘correct’ the mistakes of the past, through appeal to the theories of people like Milton Friedman, except even though the results seem to work temporarily they don’t have quite the effect they’re supposed to have (although admittedly the fed seems to think otherwise re. the US economy), but the silver lining in all this seems to be that the rich get massively richer as the assets they own rocket in price. But it’s all supposed to be in a good cause.
          Re Corbett, I’ve been receiving his email reports for donkeys years without actually reading them. I will have to check out what he says

      2. Hes clearly controlled and might even be bankrolled. He seems to be Israeli supported(his wife was jewish). I dont believe its a jewish conspiracy just stating what I have observed.

    3. “Rationally thinking, you can only see what the elites have allowed you to see.”
      I was surprised to discover I quite like David Icke, and that he comes across as generally thoughtful and intelligent. I’m fairly sure his ‘crisis’ – where turquose period – back in the 1990s was genuine, but it troubles me that he vitiates all that he ‘reveals’ about the elites and their power structures by anchoring it in the absurdity of his reptilian thesis. Is he controlled opposition, to use the conspiracy theorist jargon, tasked with revealing hidden secrets while making sure that all of it is plausibly deniable or rather implausible and therefore deniable? I’m not sure, but it’s worth considering that all of this stuff changes the subject matter, introduces new ideas and parameters, all of which can be quite useful to those who wish to introduce new agendas. As with the Snowden reveliations on suveillance introducing a subject in a critical way may effectively inoculate that subject from future opposition – look how passively we have all accepted the reality of living our lives in an NSA goldfish bowl?

      1. Plausible deniability is also useful for Icke (& others) if he is the real deal as a defense. ‘I’m just for entertainment; look at the nonsense I spout’. He was way ahead on Saville.

        1. yeah, that’s certainly possible, although he sounds very literal when he talks about reptilians.

    4. They used to be able to hide well. Now the only hope is confusion. Anyways they have gotten so arrogant and so lazy(think Hillary) that they are ripe for the fall. People who rely on theft are only successful as long as they are a minority.

  12. I wish their machinations were to implement Feudalism 2.0 (if it was something like the 1.0, or an improved version). Unfortunately it’s not.
    Feudalism was quite good, especially in comparison to Democracy, and it trends upwards (towards more social mobility and property rights). Lords would be quite independent from the King, restrictions on their behavior and what they could do with their property was non-existent; the tax burden on serfs was way lower than it is now and they had free choice to move to another, less oppressive Lord if they wanted to (and there were hundreds of lordships ready to take them, specially if they were high-value workers).
    whereas democracy, well… always trending downwards, social mobility disappearing (at least the one based on merit) and never the common man was more powerless in its own fate or had less stable property rights.

    1. The democratic theory also makes ordinary people legitimate targets for political violence. In a democracy every voter bears responsibility for what his government does, as we can see in recent cases where Muslims attack crowds of random people in democratic countries, including the U.S. If you accept democratic premises, then this strategy makes a kind of perverse moral sense.
      By contrast, Hodgkinson’s attack on politicians last week targeted the individuals who exercise some agency over what our government does. He acted more in the spirit of Guy Fawkes’s Gunpowder Plot than the Tsarnaev brothers’ bombing of the Boston Marathon.

      1. Except he didn’t attack politicians in the act of treachery, oppression, or wrong-doing. He attacked them while they were playing baseball. That’s why people attacking Rand for his tweet are retarded.

      2. very well said.
        to add to that: you can also see this in war. war in the democratic era (which includes communism and nationalism, not just liberal democracy) always tends towards total war because it equates people with government, and government is no longer a territorial dispute between monarchs (sovereign land owners) but between peoples, which tend to become ideological in nature (my nation against your nation, my ideology against your ideology – which is a race to the bottom and has no definitive territorial objective, and can only end up in massive civilian deaths and total capitulation of the losing side).

  13. Nice article though I would have mentioned Scientology as being patroned by Celebs while being nothing more than a re-hash of Crowley’s OTO’s rituals. Hubbard stole his idea for Dianetics from Jack Parsons (who was a successful rocket scientist), and Jack Parsons was a disciple of Crowley. Few have more money than $cientology. Oh the tangled web we weave! lol

    1. that’s an interesting angle there. I’ve heard interesting things about Parsons. Enigmatic figure

      1. He was also cucked by Hubbard at the earliest opportunity. Smart guy but definitely beta.

    2. It was parsons and Hubbard who performed the Babalon workings at some Arizona desert. I have no doubt that the overwhelming amount of supernatural occurrences there has everything to do with their research. Yea – parsons founded the JPL (nasa’s jet propulsion laboratory). If you ever watched the film “the Martian” a there’s a scene when they are naming the rescue mission at the JPL headquarters; they named it “Elrond” as they exoterically explained in reference to tolkien’s work. In reality the esoteric meaning was “L.Ron”

      1. Part of the Babalon Working , at least in Crowley’s estimation, was to take it up the ass. Glimpsing ‘God’ indeed(!) Crowley was a nutcase who tried to use Goetia for his own hubris and Parsons was a stool pigeon. His intelligence came from himself, nowhere else. (Even Crowley wondered was Aiwass his own subconscious!!)

  14. OT: if any of you fellas had a woman or women call or text you today to wish you happy Father’s Day and call you “daddy” congratulations…life is good, ain’t it

  15. “connections to the 18th century’s Bavarian Illuminati are pretty unlikely. Really, we needn’t trace an org chart back to a defunct group of nihilistic whack-jobs who, at most, inspire some today. Modern covert power structures, though, are another matter entirely. In fact, hunting for improbable Illuminati ties is a good smokescreen for present-day globalist foundations and other meddlesome sorts. Babylonian lineages (if the oligarchs really believe it themselves) are even more fanciful.”
    Pretty sensible in the main. Re. the connection between the bavarian illuminati, the rothschilds (and in some readings the sabbatean Jacob Frank) this is sometimes presented as conspiracy fact. I’m not aware of any proof that Weishaupt (the illuminati guy), the rothschilds or Frank knew each other or were working together, but there are some pretty strange coincidences back then in terms of the proximity of the illuminati to the french revolution, the role of and politicisation of continental freemasonry etc. There is certainly some evidence that masonic lodges were involved in the french revolution. The illuminati are of interest primarily because of their method of organisation (which permitted the subversion of and commandeering of unwitting organisations – including potentially the masonic lodges) as well as the fact that in many ways they anticipate the ideals of much of what was to follow in the 19th century above all the rejection and declaration of war against religion – it could be a coincidence that marxism did pretty much the same, but equally it might not be. Lastly Jacob Frank and the sabbateans almost certainly were involved in some of the european masonic lodges and ideologically the revolutionary zeal of the revolutionary period in both the 18th and 19th centuries could easily be considered compatible with Franks desire to possess and subvert the institutions of Esau / Edom.
    It might all be guff, but I suspect it isn’t, even if those strands of proto-revolution and proto-subversion were not actually three sides of the same monster. At the very least there were some strange things going on in and immediately before the revolutionary period that should require far more attention than they are getting (and by that I mean by scholars rather than tin-foil hatters)
    “Finally, we’ve covered the Shabbatai Zvi hypothesis, based on an actual antinomian oddball, though it’s a bit flimsy. So all that seems somewhat overblown.”
    I’m not sure I can agree with this, although it depends what is meant. The Shabbatai Zvi conspiracy theories tend to focus on the ‘false messiah’ as a proto-revolutionary conspirator, or as someone who provided a revolutionary messianic ideology that Jacob Frank would weaponise in the following century (i.e. 18th century). There is relatively little in the way of hard proof of any such activity, although there is reason to think that Frank did adapt Zvi’s sabbatean ‘anti-nomianism’ (redemption through sin etc) towards a political and messianic purpose: at the very least there is good reason to think that Frankists were quite adept (no pun intended) at working their way into wealthy and powerful families, whether through conventional marriage or sexual blackmail, or other means. Certainly the suggestion that wealthy (jewish?) financiers like the Rothschilds may well have been able to ‘buy’ their way into high society and with it into institutional power.
    Regarding the satanist angle, this is an interesting one. The main thing here is to divest oneself of the idea that we are talking about something out of the Exorcist or the Conjuring. The satanist angle is antinomian transgressive angle. The whole of our culture is based on transgression of old law, so in that sense there is very little today that doesn’t have a satanic transgressive aspect to it. We probably owe a great deal to Mr Zvi in that respect. The issue of child abuse, and cannabilism etc is another matter though. I am in two minds about this. On the one hand I am fairly sure that exaggerating sins (and with it exaggerating conspiratorial claims) is a very effective way of distracting attention away from real crimes, which are likely to be less spectacular and therefore less criminal in contrast. I don’t however think the elite are sacrificing babies on a mass scale, although it’s quite likely there is a widespread child abuse problem and it could be that the transgressive ideology may well be a part of that (or alternatively it could just be because of the blackmail aspect, which is more pragmatic than ideological in that compromised people are people who can be controlled).

    1. An excellent post MM1. I hope you will consider writing an article about this. These are important issues. I myself have come to the conclusion that there is an occult basis to the culture of the world elites. It is difficult to say that without sounding like a nutter – but – that is my scholarly opinion. I think it significant, for example, that when the US invaded and occupied Iraq – for no justifiable reason – they sent out the military to make a base in the ancient site of the city of Babylon.
      You mention Sabaati Zivi, and I agree, his influence is probably part of our mainstream cultural patrimony. There are also more intricate and powerful aspects, as the continued influence of his ‘donmeh’ movement in the Turkish state is strong, and Turkey is now a powerful player in the ongoing crisis facing Europe. I think that both Judaism and Free Masonry are ethical movements, often subverted by false infiltrations.

      1. thank you, I might do so sometime. I do think the occult is important, but I am often at pains to point out that this isn’t a religious or superstitious claim. Most real power these days is occulted, insofar as it is not transparent or accountable even if likes to pretend to pretend otherwise, however at the risk of generalising, and to some extent speculating I would say there is also a more recognisably occult aspect to at least some elite culture, although one has to be rather careful about the nature of this. This may relate to many factors, including the fact that power and the occult have always gone together to some extent. The occult, or at least the magickal side of things, is ultimately a method of getting what you want in a non-transparent way. Very few of us are entirely up front about sharing our agendas or goals in a completely transparent way, as we know that that may be a very good way of having our plans upset on account of the calculations of others. With the elites and occult practice that may be taken to the next level. There is also the business of certain traditions that may play in the background so to speak, and which may amount to more organised and structured efforts to achieve the above, including where a spiritual aspect is involved. Zvi, Zivi, Tzvi (how many are there of writing that name?) and many of his successors were kabbalists of sorts, however the western esoteric tradition, inlcuding through theosophy, and the modern occult orders, are parallel and syncretic traditions, that have also drawn on a great deal of eastern and near eastern spirituality. With respect to making a base in ancient Babylon, that might well reflect that. I would say that, even where their occultism might not be that sincere our elites love to play games, and to communicate messages that we register, even if we do not understand, at the unconscious level. A recent example of this would be say the symbolic presentations / display of the reconstructed Arch of Palmyra, destroyed by evil ISIS (which obviously is also the name of a (mother) goddess. As some conspiracy sites have pointed out the Arch of Palmyra is actually an entrance to a temple of Baal. Baal of course was one of those heathen Gods that were anathema to Yahweh. But of course it is all plausibly deniable as it can be seen to represent the spirit of western defiance against evil ISIS
        https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/sep/20/palmyra-arch-syria-new-york
        https://www.theguardian.com/culture/2016/apr/19/palmyras-triumphal-arch-recreated-in-trafalgar-square
        Re. Judaism and Freemasonry, that is an interesting question. Judaism is certainly about ethics and morality, but whether that is necessarily understood in the same way for both jews and gentiles is a moot point. Certaintly the sabbatean heresy was a huge challenge to orthodoxy (which in Frankism it was viciously opposed to) although in more modern times the relationship seems to be highly complex. Freemasonry is a whole other thing. Was it subverted or was it designed that way? Was it only continental masonry or Anglo-Saxon as well? The G at the centre of the square and compass probably never stood just for God.

    2. ‘On the one hand I am fairly sure that exaggerating sins (and with it exaggerating conspiratorial claims) is a very effective way of distracting attention away from real crimes, which are likely to be less spectacular and therefore less criminal in contrast.’
      …and yet, sometimes the publicity is glaring, the PHYSICAL evidence is in the public domain and still no convictions.ie

      ‘I don’t however think the elite are sacrificing babies on a mass scale, although it’s quite likely there is a widespread child abuse problem and it could be that the transgressive ideology may well be a part of that (or alternatively it could just be because of the blackmail aspect, which is more pragmatic than ideological in that compromised people are people who can be controlled).’
      In respect of this, research Beyond Detroux.
      Be advised some v.v. disturbing images.

      1. thanks for the video link – I will look at it when I get a chance. I’m not sure what it covers, but I’m aware that there were people like Michael Aquino, of the Temple of Set,. involved in the CIA, and possibly in some of those dodgy programs we keep hearing about.
        Re. Dutroux, I’ve heard there’s some very disturbing stuff out there linked to that case. I am not by any means ruling out evidence of widespread child abuse networks I just think sometimes information is managed by spreading disinformation that appears worse rather than better. If people are conditioned to think their rules are demons from hell, and it turns out that their just very corrupt there’s a good chance they’re not going to get that worked up about it. What’s more, the elites in question, can point out that they’re being unfairly demonized and harrassed etc.

  16. If I had a few billion in disposable income and was surrounded by people kissing my ass and telling me how great I was, I would probably do the same stuff I do now… I would just do it in STYLE.

    1. Same. I’d just upgrade certain facets of my life. I would handsomely reward those loyal to me and those that harmed me would wish they never had been born-I appreciate and hate in equal measure where appropriate.

  17. I must protest sir!
    Using the image of Palpatine next to Soros is a grave injustice. Palpatine was actually worth following.
    🙂

  18. As the previous thread (regarding whacking) was deemed inappropriate for this sort of thing, I will do it here.
    Happy Father’s day to all you fathers out there.
    And remember, training your sons to grow up to be real men is your #1 task in life! More important than your job/career, more important than being a good husband. Those things are important, but training your son to be like you and to eventually surpass you is your MOST IMPORTANT job! Please do it well. Don’t let your sons end up like me.
    Take care and have a great day!
    (What’s left of it, anyway…)

  20. This article brings to mind Henry Nicholas of Broadcom – another Tech Billionaire (this is going back to the early 2000’s). My in-laws lived in the same neighborhood as this guy. His parties were legendary. His cul-de-sac was always filled with Ferrari’s and Bentley’s. There was constant construction, dumpsters on the street, tunnels being built into the property, Crazy Ass Shit. The neighbors were always up in arms, complaining to the HOA and the local news about the disruption.

  22. I have schlepped around some elite in a charter aircraft.
    You would be surprised how unhappy many of them seem to be, how distorted their perspectives, and some are just plain dumb drunks. On the other hand, I have also met some of the best people this way, and oddly enough it is often the ones who struggled who are the most generous.

    1. Concur
      I married one who grew up from nothing. Ultiately down to earth.
      The others i see at private airfields – not happy- but their pets are

      1. “not happy- but their pets are”
        rich women can certainly buy a lot of peanut butter lol………

    2. I remember showing some Argentines the starlight room in the top of one of the hotels in SF. Beautiful place, wonderful view of the city. The Argies were in heaven. You look around at the people there and almost no one talking..looked almost angry most of them. Wealth has its price.

      1. that because they do not realise wealth should be used with restriction. or once you obtained everything you want, nothing will be interesting anymore.

  24. Trump tweeted Happy Father’s day today. Leftist trolls started mentioning the fact he has 5 kids from 3 different women. The same Leftists support homosexual marriage and the right for transgendered to use women’s restrooms takes issue with Trump’s marital history.
    Go figure that Leftists are melting down. All their socially liberal views diverge from true human nature. No wonder so many deviants are Leftists.
    Despite divorce all of Trump’s adult children grew up into functional well adjusted productive citizens. He deserves Father of the year for accomplishing this feat. Leftists probably don’t care since most of them are disgusting people.

    1. Stop using the word ‘gender’ in any form when referring to biology. The proper word is sex. Research Dr. Money and his use of ‘gender’ rather than sex. What? ‘Last night me and my partner had gender?’ (Thank G Gordon Liddy for that one to demonstrate absurdity.
      No, those wierdos are trannies and transexuals, not transgendered.

    2. But isn’t funny to watch them vomit all over themselves every day over some new stupid shit? What a bunch of malcontent losers!

  25. The elites wear their mothers dresses and rub themselves in peanut butter. Most are Godless, so even with their elevated worldly status they will wind up in hell.

  26. Ask Donald Trump and his little rat servants who will do his bidding and still knowingly get fucked in return.

    1. Nobody expects Trump to do anything. Main thing he did was remove the facade of political correctness. The process of change will take decades.

  27. I don’t know what’s wrong or right with all this… all I know is it gives me a pounding headache and makes me want to shower.

  28. As an interesting aside the pictures up top are from a freaky little party the Roths had in the 70s Oddly it wouldnt come up on google but would easily come up on alt search engines. Shocker google is a tool of the wealthy.

  30. Pedophilia, sex-trafficking rings, etc. — there is probably also an element of Satanism in the mix as well.

  31. I check back into the ROK comments, and “This user is blocked” is the only other active post. I’m starting to think some of you gentlemen work tomorrow. Make it a good week.


  33. Tell me if you find some resemblance with present SJW..
    Hervé Ryssen. The Jews and the Russian Revolution

  34. ”Stories about waking up in a hotel bathtub full of ice are pretty far-fetched, but abductions for organ harvesting have happened.”
    ((bernard kouchner))

  35. On the religious aspect, I firmly believe that Satan works harder on the powerful and influential than he does on your average Joe.

  36. Order out of chaos. That is their motto. Let the lizard people/ Illuminati theories flourish as they make our lives worse and worse.

    1. Icke and any other ancient alien/new age/etc “researcher” are controlled opposition. Real deal truthers saw through them and so the elites needed a new breed of controlled opposition – a “Christian” one. So they presented to us Alex Jones

  37. You gotta give credit to the media and the Enquirer-type appetites of the consumer-drones that make up the bulk of our country. I submit for your consideration, any living Kardashian. Fame unattached to any real contribution to the world. You never hear about the good people.

  39. I dunno, this kind of pooh-pooing of the whole of politics is getting pretty threadbare. The idea that all of these facets of society are currently (improbably) coalescing into hell on Earth sorts of lays the “politicians are idiots” argument to rest. Whether there is an ‘Illuminati’ or not, to laugh at the idea there is some overarching group planning it all is to completely deny things like UN agendas, the CFR, Trilateral Commission, Bilderbergers, or conferences like Davos. All of which, being widely documented, are pretty unavoidable.
    As for satanism….its very obviously widespread, at the very least among the entertainer class, and heavily implied among the political class. The higher up one goes, the more it tends towards Lucifereanism instead, but all those pentagrams and baphomets (not to mention the push for genderlessness / gender inclusiveness), reflected in Transhumanist movements and Progressives alike, are pretty hard to miss.
    “I know a guy who knows a guy” hardly makes one an expert in a field, therefore considerably more reasoned proof is required than this mildly scoffing piece. Many, if not most, regard these topics as, at best, fun distractions. Myself, I think they may be more important than many topics, and should thus at least be given the courtesy of serious consideration.
    Good article, good topics, but too dismissive to be taken seriously….

  40. A good documentary to watch is Aaron Russo’s “America From Freedom to Fascism”. He talks about being friends for a while with one of the younger Rockefellers and how the long time term goal is power on their part along with their wealthy friends. Well worth a watch.

    1. One of the things they discuss is the Rockefeller funding and starting the feminist movement

  42. Epstein Lolita Express ?? Slicky Willy a big guest, Randy Andy as well & lots , lots of them ??

  43. On Crowley or anyone who thinks they’re so technically smart by saying they aren’t satanists or Satanists arent this or that – the universal duality is all there is. There is the omnipotent/omniscient/omnipresent/eternal Alpha and Omega (a loving and personal creator. He goes by Yahushua Hamasiach). He exists outside of space and time. Within space and time is his creation which includes the fallen one – the deceiver. He manifests in many forms and ways. His minions are also very powerful and have deceived humanity for millennial. Some ancient and contemporary cultures even call them gods (with a little g). In the end, they will all die like princes and gods. So no matter what “belief system” you are part of; occult or formal religion – if you do not profess with your mouth he is Lord, you are a satanist. Anything that opposes or denies the most high is a satanist. Atheists are satanists (and I don’t just mean the leveyan literal definition of their branch of satanism).
    Springmeier and other researchers study of illuminati hierarchy gives us this:
    The fallen one
    His angels
    9 overseers
    13 bloodlines (Rothschilds, rockefellers, Astors, Li, Warburg, Kennedys etc)
    Council of 300
    Then the policy groups (which include many bloodline members)
    Bildeburg
    Trilateral commission
    CFR
    Lucis trust
    EU
    UN
    Brookings institute
    Occult societies:
    Illuminati in totality
    Palladium
    Order of the trapezoid
    Memphis mistriam
    OTO
    33rd degree Scottish rite freemasonry
    Blue lodge freemasonry
    Laveyan satanism
    TST
    Knights of Malta
    Order of the garter
    And so much more etc…

  44. Having money and power is not about owning the best cars, live in the most luxurious mansions, or fuck the best pussy, etc. It’s about being able to run the red light legally.
    Like an animal that tasted human blood, once they’ve done that they want to do everything other people legally cannot.
    That is what the richest and the most powerful enjoy the most. Doing the little things, the minor things that separates them from the masses.
    Social contract no longer applies to them. And, like celebrities on substance abuse, they push themselves further and further into the forbidden territory.
    Rebellion with impunity, behave like children, big money allows you to do that.

  45. I remember when the Beebs got in a car accident while drunk driving and I believe that absolutely nothing happened to him, a fine perhaps but like I said, nothing. If the person had been killed it might have been another story.
    That’s when it solidified that you can be rich/famous enough to be above the law. He is famous enough to get away with driving while drunk and hurting someone. If he had killed someone his owners might have hung him out to dry. Only they are rich enough to kill someone.

  46. Well, what you see in the video below was the opening ceremony of the Gotthard tunnel in Switzerland.

Comments are closed.