Writing about a major hoodwink operation underway among the social
sector people, and among many of my friends.
Right now on these networks I see a conspicuous absence of people
choosing to talk about the ongoing US Elections. It's one of the
biggest issues but strangely it has become the elephant in the room
that people want to avoid. I take that as a sign that there is
uncertainty and confusion, and I think I know the reasons for that
confusion. People are following a standard narrative when asked, but
aren't proactively expressing it so I don't think they're really
saying what's in their hearts.. I sense more of an obligatory
compliance. It seems fashionable now to talk only ill of certain
people and there is an imminent threat in the air of excommunication
should one break the taboo.
There are simply too many links to track down and share here. I had
earlier thought I'll do a proper curated email, but there are too many
threads of info and I don't want to share this AFTER the election
results are out, as I want to stake my claim on what I've been
observing and share my conclusions and not be doing a post-facto
post-mortem of the matter. I've been afraid of even talking about this
with people as at first conversation I learn that it's going to take
forever, we don't have forever and in the meanwhile even I'll just get
damned, pinned as a misogynist or something. So anyways here goes.
The major corporate and banking elites that have been running the
world into the ground, seem to have successfully convinced
well-meaning and i-had-assumed-were-more-aware people to back their
chosen candidate for the US elections, Hillary Clinton. If you want
any specific names, then see : Goldman Sachs.
The mainstream media, which is lock stock and barrel acting like
Hillary Clinton's PR agents, has demonized Trump for the exact purpose
of instilling so much fear in people's heads that they become blinded
by this fear and blindly support the opposite camp. The media's
portrayal of him looks too bad to be true, and that's what got me
questioning. And I've found out that this portrayal is both deliberate
and unnatural. He's actually not the monster they've painted him to
What's happening is a classic case of a controlled situation spinning
out of control. The media's job was set, but the elites didn't count
on Trump actually turning out to be something more than just an
attention grabber. It has been told by countless participative
democracy proponents: one does not need to be a career politician to
be a good leader. Any human being is sufficient and can make the right
decisions if he/she is a free person and is not beholden to any vested
"Oh no, anything but Trump!" Really? How did we become so childish all
of a sudden? "Anything?" Really? Do you have any idea what you're
signing up for when you say "anything" ?
So here it becomes necessary to question the prevalent mood that Obama
is a good guy.
The Obama+Clinton regime of the past 8 years has not only continued
Bush's legacy, but taken it to even lower depths.
The core problem with US politics is not blunt-mouthed politically
incorrect people, but smooth-talking liars. Obama came into office
with a Nobel Prize in hand; he should leave with an Oscar for best
Acting. He said he'll stop war and he's created even more. He said
he'll reign in Wall Street and instead he made them more powerful than
ever. He promised justice, and he's industrialized drone assassination
programs that have a 90% innocent-kill rate, is using Kill Lists where
he can choose who he wants dead without any due course of law or
oversight, has signed record number of executive orders (an
unconstitutional practice started by Bush) and has given himself
powers to wage war anywhere in the world as and when he sees fit. This
isn't President Obama anymore; it's Emperor Obama. Very recently he
even vetoed to protect Saudi Arabia's government from lawsuits by 9/11
victims' families. Frankly he has acted like he has absolutely no
intentions of leaving the White House. And Hillary is right up there
in the Emperor's court, waiting in the wings to take over the title
and continue the Empire. The only thing saving these people from open
revolution is the illusion they're putting out of being nice, coupled
with the illusion that there is no other possible choice, with the
full complicity of the international mainstream media that has a
highly centralized ownership.
To vote for Hillary is to vote for war, for the banksters who have
already ripped us off trillions and are prepping to do it again, for
the elites, for pay-for-play ie favors given to people who donated to
her Clinton Foundation (which it turns out isn't even a law-compliant
NGO), for the Saudi rulers who have publicly declared to have
massively funded her and who routinely suppress women's rights and
execute nonviolent dissenters, for more of ISIS, for enormous
corruption, for American Imperialism, for endless wars, for more
secrecy, more mass surveillance, for a very real possibility of a
global nuclear holocaust with her nonstop warmongering towards Russia.
Oh, but it's a vote for women, so let's forget everything and cheer on
more absent-minded symbolism.. after a black guy let's put a woman,
yayy! It's "time" to have a female US President, just for the heck of
it. Let's give the status quo yet another blank frame of symbolic
expectations within which they can fill in whichever stooge of theirs
fits the generic description. And nevermind the fact that the Green
Party leader who is also contesting is also female and a better woman
and a better leader by far. People are so fixated on Hillary that it
looks like she's the only woman on this planet.
I'm realizing the importance of context in all of this. Disguised as
different political parties, I'm now learning that the US has had
actually one constant regime right from George Bush senior, through
Bill Clinton, George Bush, now Obama and now planned through Hillary
Clinton. They have all had the exact same funders, the same
puppetteers guiding these puppets. George sr. back-stabbbed Saddam by
one day telling him he can go invade Kuwait and next day saying it's
not allowed, and with that started the next leg of American
imperialism. Bill Clinton repealed the Glass-Steagal act which had
been preventing banks from becoming too-big-to-fail, and signed NAFTA
and other free trade treaties that have directly, massively,
contributed to a global acceleration in CO2 emissions and extreme
pollution, by allowing corporations to employ and mine as carelessly
as they want anywhere, transport goods across large distances without
any control, and still their products won't be blacklisted or taxed.
He also continued the trend of unilaterally bombing countries without
proper peaceful dialogue and destroying international law. In Bush's
time, 9/11 gave the excuse to do more imperialism (and mind, it wasn't
co-incidence) and then Obama has only continued it. All these years
there have been whistleblowers coming out and warning that these
people plan to invade a multitude of countries, and the mainstream
media purposefully ignored them. Bush also unilaterally withdrew from
the ABM treaty, which according to Russia is the single biggest blow
to international mutual peace. Obama took that forward and has now
placed missiles right on Russia's borders, with no way for even their
European hosts to know whether the missiles are carrying a
conventional or nuclear warhead. And after doing 100 times worse than
what the Soviets had attempted during the Cuban missile crisis, when
Russia objects to their country being put under direct threat, the
media has been painting the Russians as evil. Obama also did more to
severely deregulate weapons manufacturers, resulting in a
multiplication in the world's stockpiles of instruments of death, and
now there is little to no oversight on who's buying the weapons. They
might be selling to mercenaries, tyrants and it's ok. This has
directly caused the increase in human suffering due to weapon
violence. While he and Hillary have been rattling on about removing
the right of US citizens to bear arms, behind the scenes the American
domestic police agencies have, with Obama's blessings, amassed
unbelievable amounts of military weapons, ammunition, gear and
vehicles : enough to wage a civil war against their own people, with
more than a billion bullets stockpiled and waiting to be fired and
companies who benefited from this large purchase waiting to
manufacture and sell more. So that has got people questioning if the
move to disarm the population is being done to enable a dictatorial
takeover and not just stop mass shootings.
I have to dedicate another para to Ukraine and Syria. Western powers
funded and aided right-wing orgs in Ukraine to overthrow the elected
government, violated international norms and gave official recognition
to coup leaders, and now Ukraine is one of the most corrupt states in
Europe. When Crimea voted, democratically, to move from Ukraine to
Russia, and Russia moved in without firing a single bullet, the media
painted it as an evil takeover. When Donbass tried to do the same
thing, Ukraine behaved exactly the way a right-wing fascist government
does: they indiscriminately bombed them (even using weapons banned for
use on civilian areas by the UN), destroyed all possibility of civil
life or peaceful dialogue, and when rebels resisted the hostile
takeover, the media again painted the separatists as evil. If Russia
helped them, then as the immediate neighbour, with ethnic Russians
under fire, in a similar situation as India was when Bangladesh was
trying to separate from Pakistan, suddenly, the people who have been
intervening everywhere, are demonizing Russia for intervening,
equivalent to demonizing India for intervening when Bangladesh ceded
from Pakistan. And then Syria! The Obama-Clinton admin did the exact
same thing to Syria what Pakistan has been doing in India's Kashmir :
funding, arming and sending militants across from NATO member Turkey's
border, with the difference being that here the funding was to the
tune of billions of dollars and they did it to a much smaller country
with no capability to cope against such a hugely externally funded
armed rebellion. Imagine what would happen to Kashmir if Pakistan
suddenly got $5 billion to spend on the insurgency. The majority of
the "rebels" fighting the Syrian govt are well-paid foreigners! How
does one square that circle? And in all this free money flow we have
ISIS emerging, with the world's biggest cash flow among terrorist
organizations, and with not a single intelligence agency like CIA or
Interpol even attempting to track down their money flows which are So
easy to track and suspend.
Hillary Clinton was very much part of this dishonest regime and is the
continuation of Obama's legacy; she is the anointed heir to the
"Oh, so you're saying Americans should vote for Trump?" >> see the
knee-jerk response in this statement? An absolute absense of
non-binary, realistic thinking. Either you're with Her, or you're with
Him. Suddenly any third option is intolerable. How about the Green
Party, Jill Stein? "Oh but that will waste the vote and make Trump
win" >> Gee, where have I heard that claptrap before? Suddenly
election is a chessgame and you're Viswanathan Anand. My ass. It's not
your bloody business to speculate, buddy. The voter's ultimate duty is
to simply pick who they think is best candidate, and leave the rest to
God / whatever their inclination is.
There's very few entities that have questioned the bluff that Hillary
should be voted for, and for that they have won my respect which many
others have, sorry to say, lost.
And what have I been seeing? Whether Jill Stein or Trump, they're both
actually quite good as presidential candidates. Yes, I actually think
Trump would is ACCEPTABLE whereas Hillary is not. So let's just flush
this guy's entire life down the toilet and assume hereon that he's
also a bad guy, ok? After all, that's what the media has instructed
you to do and you're an obedient little sheep, aren't you? I've seen
that the allegations credited to him are nothing more than cultural
blabber that my own father being his age carries - anyone who hasn't
ever said anything controversial has to be guilty of pre-planning the
whole thing like a career politician - which Hillary is and Trump
isn't. The argument that he's got some devious thing to gain in
comparison to all that he has lost (including his own private wealth
that he spent rather than be beholden to donors) just doesn't hold
water : the situation is simply too impossible when seen from the past
to give any guarantee of success.
I heard one person repeat another propaganda piece : Trump is a
monster! If he gets his hands on the nuclear codes then we're all
dead! >> He missed one critical point : Trump has absolutely no
intention of doing nuclear war with Russia. Hillary does. She's the
one you need to worry about keeping away from the nukes. Hillary wants
to intervene and invade everywhere; Trump does not.
When Trump and Putin talk about making peace on the planet instead of
destroying it, they're accused of bro-mance. Suddenly wanting my and
your family to stay alive is a crime.
And then come the Hitler comparisons. They say Trump is like Hitler,
after having committed the intolerable crime of not actually having
slaughtered thousands to millions of people, while Obama/Hillary who
have been actually doing the things that would give Hitler a hard-on,
are oh-so-puppy-like. You think Trump will slaughter everybody. Can
you please explain to me how?
You quote Mein Kampf to prove that oh, these selective personality
traits are matching. Hillary's ACTIONS and campaign strategies match
Hitler's. And the biggest point of all that everybody is missing out
about Hitler because it was cleverly not mentioned in our textbooks :
Hitler was completely funded, aided and armed by the dominant Western
corporate elite and Western banks of the day. IBM helped him track
down the Jews and Bayer and folks constructed the concentration camps
for him - do they care to mention that in their recruitment videos?
The mainsteam media of the day completely supported him as their
masters were among the elites raising him. Even Charlie Chaplin was
royally screwed for having dared to make "The Great Dictator".
Hitler became Hitler not through deft populism as is mistakenly
attributed, but through complete assistance by the corporate and
banking elites. Mein Kampf is at the end of the day a propaganda piece
that does NOT mention the truth about how Hitler actually rose to
power : who helped him get there. If it wasn't for the western elites'
funding and complete assistance, he would've been just another
localized goon that would have vaporized quickly.
And then there's the total misunderstanding of human nature (with
thanks to Freud the perverted d**khead who made the classical
technocratic mistake of finding only the savage in people and not the
noble side that the Apaches had found, in their two wolves fable,
aeons before him). It wasn't frenzied mobs that brought Hitler to
power. Germany and Japan both fell to fascism precisely because at the
time they had the most DISCIPLINED and OBEDIENT populations in the
world. Germany was where the system of compulsory education began,
with the publicly declared purpose of creating an obedient public that
will do as told. An out of control population would have rebelled, has
far better checks and balances and would have screwed Hitler over
long, long before he could have gotten to any power position. No sir,
it was and always has been obedience that has caused the maximum
carnage on this planet.
The people of Germany were hoodwinked by the Western powers to be
their pawns, for the express purpose of destroying the Soviet Union.
The Soviets / Russians suffered unspeakable destruction : areas
greater than whole countries were completely flattened with extreme
prejudice: but it was their perseverance despite all odds that turned
the tide and defeated fascism. The Normandy landing by US/UK troops
was nothing compared to what the Russians shored up and it happened
AFTER Hitler had sounded the retreat, AFTER the Frankenstein monster
had turned on its own creators.
Ok, enough context. Back to present.
So among Clinton and Trump, which one is completely funded and aided
by the corporate and banking and media elites of today as Hitler was
back then? Who is out-spending the other, in TV ads by 50 to 1? Who
has taken massive corporate donations and who is using up 100 million
dollars of his own personal wealth to stay campaigning but not get
beholden to the corporates?
Follow.the.money. Have you even thought about it? Oh no, Trump is so
bad, Trump is so bad, we're physically incapable of intelligent
thought because Trump is so bad.
Oh, he wants to kick out the poor little puppies, sorry, illegal
aliens who didn't follow due visa procedures that any Indian would
rightfully expect anyone entering India for work to follow. Suddenly
that's so horrible. Oh, he wants the kind of borders for USA that
EVERY OTHER COUNTRY HAS where people who want to enter have to show
some papers and had better not be carrying drugs. That is soo bad,
he's going to kill us all, oohh ohhh STOP IT.
The academia, the media, and a lot of people reading this, think that
regular people are all idiots, that it's a crazed and deranged mob
rallying for Trump and attending his speeches in never-before-seen
numbers, and they know better than the people getting off their
couches do. Their contempt for normal people has reached its peak in
these days. What if that's not a mindless mob but a movement of real
people : people who haven't spent most of their lives living under an
academic rock and who know the reality that lies beyond the blackboard
: people who are not as easy to brainwash as our
degree-and-published-paper-chasing intelligentia are? What if, heavens
oh heavens, Sigmund Freud was wrong and people ARE capable of
distinguishing between right and wrong and are getting better at it
On climate change : guess what's going to bring the best control over
CO2 emissions across the world? Hillary's greenwashing just like
Obama's greenwashing after which he unleashed Tar Sands and is
currently shooting pipeling protestors with rubber bullets without
provocation? TPP and buddies? How about : the restoration of
country-to-country import taxes, the repeal of NAFTA and similar "free
trade" agreements? Doesn't simple logic say that the plan to bring
back US jobs, stop the out-of-control outsourcing will lead to a
better control over the globe's excess CO2 emissions?
Isn't a policy of leaving other countries alone to sort out their own
problems better than being Big Brother and intervening between
Childish governments clamoring for aid?
"Hillary is just another corrupt politician" - excuse me, corruption
is an act of crime, and once you put a criminal in charge of the crime
scene, guess what happens to all the witnesses?
Lot of cool stuff happening! Media has hoodwinked us long enough.
People everywhere are waking up. What's up with you?
Stopping here. Haven't included many things because it would take too
much time to explain the context around them : time I'd rather not
waste right now..