Technocracy Ascending – Part 3: Green Sustainable Slavery
Jesse Smith
As detailed in Part 2 of “Technocracy Ascending,” David Rockefeller, Zbigniew Brzezinski, and the Trilateral Commission achieved a great deal in moving the world toward a new international economic order and global governance (i.e., a new world order).
Brzezinski understood the decline of nation states was a necessity for advancing a global order where the private banking cabal and transnational corporations assumed political dominance. In his book Between Two Ages: America’s Role in the Technetronic Era, Brzezinski stated that:
The nation state as a fundamental unit of man’s organized life has ceased to be the principal creative force: International banks and multinational corporations are acting and planning in terms that are far in advance of the political concepts of the nation-state.”
Technocracy Inc. was one of the early movements campaigning for centralized control at the expense of democracy. Though their initial aim was to transform the North American continent into a scientific dictatorship, the Rockefeller clan pushed these ideas globally. Working through their vast, interwoven network of corporate, academic, political, and philanthropic institutions, they advanced the globalist mindset with the United Nations (UN), often energizing the ideas and formulating the strategies. More on the UN’s role will be discussed later.
Source: Green Briar Picture Shows
While their agenda grew popular with elites of all stripes, they needed a way to sell the scheme to the masses and accelerate the groundswell for sweeping worldwide changes. Like the original technocrats, they sought a bloodless revolution and used fear and chicanery to usurp power.
Technocracy Inc. used the stock market crash of 1929 and resulting Great Depression to recruit those fearing total economic collapse into their camp.
Technocracy… is being hailed as a solution to an economic condition which now threatens to disrupt our economic civilization… figures indicate that unless a vast change is made in the political and economic system of this country, we may soon face a collapse of our present social structure, the downfall of currency, and utter chaos.”
The Technocrats’ Magazine, 1933
Decades later, the Rockefeller cabal turned to environmentalism and the threat of planetary destruction to enlist zealots fearing complete societal collapse. In the 1969 Rockefeller Foundation report, they boldly announced their claim, stating that:
Man is now degrading his environment at a terrifying rate. The cumulative effects of advancing technology, massive industrialization, urban concentration, and population growth have all combined …not only to create imminent danger to the quality of human Iife, but even to pose threats to life itself.” p.5
Coopting a Grassroots Movement
The Rockefeller coterie conspired to reshape the world and gain greater control of its wealth, resources, and people under the guise of saving the planet. Their challenge involved getting the populace to support the destruction of free market capitalism, nationalism, and democratic principles without noticing the end goal: the establishment of a global dictatorship ruled by public-private partnerships (PPP). The method of choice to undo the global order was none other than environmentalism.
Their brand of environmentalism differed greatly from the grassroots movement spawned by indigenous and disenfranchised peoples that campaigned against the poisoning of air, water, and land. With good intentions, these activists stood against nuclear fallout, harmful pesticides, pollution, and destruction of natural habitats perpetrated by megacorporations in the energy, transportation, defense, and manufacturing industries.
To crush the grassroots effort directed against industry titans (which accelerated after the 1970 Earth Day event in the U.S.), Rockefeller-influenced environmentalists stealthily shifted the blame for catastrophic ecological damage onto each individual. They first sounded the alarm that an ice age was soon to overtake the earth. Later, they claimed that modern conveniences like vehicle ownership and cheap energy powered by so-called fossil fuels contributed to dangerous increases in the earth’s temperature.
Over the past fifty years, they have cleverly induced both individual and collective guilt, leading to attempts to dial back gains achieved through industrialization and technological advancement.
Source: Boston Globe, April 16, 1970
Rockefeller-captured institutions and governments agreed on a plan to march the world toward technocracy by undoing the “man-made” evils triggering global warming through a novel concept called Sustainable Development. The sustainability initiative was born in conspiracy and continues through an endless series of research, conferences, books, speeches, reports, propaganda, agreements, treaties, legislation, and collusion within the public-private sphere.
While it is true that the literal term of “Sustainable Development” was not coined by the original Technocrats, most would be jealous that someone else beat them to it. The fact of the matter is that Sustainable Development is conceptually identical to Technocracy’s “balanced load.”
In short, the heartbeat of Technocracy is Sustainable Development. It calls for an engineered society where the needs of mankind are in perfect balance with the resources of nature.”
Wood, Patrick. Technocracy Rising: The Trojan Horse of Global Transformation, Convergent Publishing. Kindle Edition, (pp. 80-82)
M. King Hubbert was an original member of Technocracy Inc. and a major contributor for the Technocracy Study Course discussed in part 2.
Hubbert believed in peak oil theory and thought that earth’s resources and energy were finite and if exhausted or destroyed, man would cease to exist.
Growth, growth, growth — that’s all we’ve known… World automobile production is doubling every 10 years; human population growth is like nothing that has happened in all of geologic history. The world will only tolerate so many doublings of anything — whether it’s power plants or grasshoppers.”
M. King Hubbert, 1975
Marion King Hubbert, Source: Postcarbon, Fair use
His theories would later lead to demands to transition the world to a new “green” economy based on sustainability principles.
Engineering a New Green Economy
Whether acknowledged or not, the counterfeit green movement adopted Hubbert’s ideas and called for a restructuring of the global economy, altering the function of industries and individual corporations to fit this new economic paradigm.
Seemingly out of nowhere, as Brzezinski noted, the Rockefeller-financed shift to a “green economy” was sold to environmental organizations like Greenpeace, Friends of the Earth, and society as a whole under the guise of saving the planet, preserving wildlife, and creating a more just world.
However, when the altruistic façade is removed, it amounts to a technocratic takeover facilitated through a gargantuan civil society network operating within local, state, and national governments to upend democratic pillars.
The green scheme was designed to strip away individual freedom, wealth, property, and resources. In short, the purpose of climate agenda policies was to shift the world to “a more controlled and directed society” as Brzezinski noted in Between Two Ages. In Technocracy: The Hard Road to World Order, Patrick Wood later explained that the sustainable development agenda “is not about the environment but rather about economic development.”
Wood’s point can be seen in Principle 8 of the 1992 Rio Declaration at the UN Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED), where it indicated:
To achieve sustainable development and a higher quality of life for all people, States should reduce and eliminate unsustainable patterns of production and consumption and promote appropriate demographic policies.”
Source: “Towards a Green Economy,” UN Environmental Programme (UNEP), 2011
By 2009, calls for a green economy rooted in technocratic concepts began to permeate the universal political landscape. In 2011, the UN Environmental Programme (UNEP) pushed the concept further, stating:
In its simplest expression, a green economy is low-carbon, resource efficient, and socially inclusive. In a green economy, growth in income and employment are driven by public and private investments that reduce carbon emissions and pollution, enhance energy and resource efficiency, and prevent the loss of biodiversity and ecosystem services.”
“Towards a Green Economy,” UN Environmental Programme (UNEP), 2011, p. 16
Technocrats relish efficiency often at the expense of human freedom, dignity, and prosperity. Despite the fluffy UN jargon, the green economy is designed to punish wealthy nations by deliberately lowering living standards.
Theoretically, the shift would help poorer nations advance economically. However, those in impoverished nations rarely benefit as wealth has continued to shift upward, benefitting the top one percent.
As of 2024, Investopedia noted that “there are 2,781 billionaires in the world with a cumulative wealth valued at $14.2 trillion.”
The green economy has nothing to do with the environment, it is simply a wealth redistribution scheme where the poor and middle classes in all nations are fleeced by multinational corporations and private banks. This fact has even been acknowledged by a former working group co-chair of the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), who stated:
First of all, developed countries have basically expropriated the atmosphere of the world community. But one must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world’s wealth by climate policy…. One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy anymore, with problems such as deforestation or the ozone hole” (emphasis added).
– Ottmar Edenhofer, Co-chair, UN IPCC, 2010
Financing and Controlling the Global Technocratic Shift
The Rockefeller foray into environmentalism was a multi-pronged attack aimed at subverting the goals of environmentalists wanting to protect the planet from being dumping grounds for disease-causing toxic waste. Largely unbeknownst by the public, they poured millions of dollars into research, opinion and policy shaping, and education. From this flurry of activity, a new ideology was born proclaiming that mankind itself, through mere existence, was responsible for planetary degradation—not greedy, irresponsible, and corrupt corporations.
In addition to previously noted organizations such as the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) and Bilderberg Group, Rockefeller family members created and/or funded The World Bank, United Nations, Aspen Institute, International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN), UN IPCC, and the Club of Rome.
Each of these deeply interrelated organizations plays a key role in pushing Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW), the theory that human activity in industry and agriculture causes the earth’s temperature to rise due to increases in greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide (CO2) and methane.
This ideology was further cemented into the minds of men in The First Global Revolution: A Report by the Council of the Club of Rome published in 1991. Under the heading “The Common Enemy of Humanity is Man,” it states:
In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill…All these dangers are caused by human intervention, and it is only through changed attitudes and behavior that they can be overcome. The real enemy then is humanity itself”
(p. 115, emphasis added)
Through their philanthropic and venture capital arms including the Rockefeller Foundation (1913), Rockefeller Brothers Fund (1940), Rockefeller Family Fund (1968), and Rockefeller Philanthropic Advisors Inc. (1991) they contributed (at least) hundreds of millions to dozens of environmental organizations. Some of the most prominent included the Tides Foundation, World Resources Institute, Worldwatch Institute, Wildlife Conservation Society, National Resources Defense Council, Alliance for Climate Protection, Environmental Defense Fund, National Resource Defense Council, Sierra Club, and Union of Concerned Scientists.
Through a 1974 Rockefeller Brothers Fund (RBF) grant leading to the creation of the Worldwatch Institute (whose mission was to accelerate the transition to a sustainable world), the Rockefellers extended their goals “beyond traditional stewardship and conservation to predicting and ameliorating environmental crises.” This was largely accomplished through the publication of Worldwatch’s State of the World doomsday reports issued from 1984 to 2017, where they attempted to identify the world’s most pressing environmental challenges.
Through their Quality of the Environment program also launched in 1974, the Rockefellers helped pioneer climate research at U.S. universities such as the University of Michigan, University of California at Davis, Pennsylvania State University, and Utah State University.
They also played a key role in convening early climate conferences. Through foundation Fellowships in Environmental Affairs, they supported researchers who were instrumental in forging the alleged scientific consensus on man-made global warming. Those who opposed the theory often had their careers and lives destroyed by deliberate sidelining, censorship, and cancellation of grants and other funding.
The technocratic climate agenda steadily advanced through these NGOs operating in clandestine unison, but it took another Rockefeller minion to propel the faux climate crisis to the forefront as the most pertinent issue facing the world. His name was Maurice Strong.
Maurice Strong, The Green Apostle
I knew that what was said to be driven from the bottom up, from the grassroots, was actually being driven from the top down. I had come to this conclusion by following the interconnections among the NGOs active on the Agenda. Many of the NGOs shaping this environment debate were connected, like pearls on a thread. A central figure in all of these organizations was Maurice Strong, the secretary general of the Rio Summit.’”
Dewar, Elaine, Cloak of Green, James Lorimer & Company, 1995, p. 251
High school dropout Maurice Strong was born into a poor family in Manitoba, Canada in 1929. At age 18, he met UN treasurer Noah Monod and stayed with him for a brief time in New York City. Monod helped Strong get a job at the UN as a junior officer in the Security Section. During his time in New York, Monod also introduced him to David Rockefeller and Strong soon became a protégé. By his late 20s, he became a multi-millionaire from employment in the oil industry and went on to have one of the most extraordinary business and political careers of all time.
Maurice Strong at the High Level Dialogue on Global Sustainability. Source: Sergio Greif, Stockholm Environmental Institute, Flickr
Strong was a Rockefeller (and Rothschild) made man through and through. In addition to his connection to David, Strong also forged close relationships with his brother Laurance and Steven Rockefeller, grandson of former U.S. Vice President Nelson Rockefeller.
Laurance, the third son of John D. Rockefeller Jr., is most remembered as a devout conservationist. He served as a longtime trustee, president, and chairman of the Rockefeller Brothers Fund (RBF). He was also a member of the CFR, Trilaterals, and Bilderbergs, which Strong was also connected to. Laurance was a founding member and trustee of The Conservation Foundation established in 1947. In 1985 the organization became affiliated with the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) started by transhumanist and eugenicist Julian Huxley, and fully merged with it in 1990.
Strong, a lifetime affiliate, served as the WWF’s Vice President in 1977, serving under Prince Philip, who once said that if he were reincarnated, he wished “to be returned to Earth as a killer virus to lower human population levels.”
The Rio meeting was organized by the UN, with Maurice Strong as his Secretary General. It was attended by 172 countries, including 108 Heads of State and Government, as well as 400 representatives of non-governmental organizations. Source: Wikimedia Commons
Strong came to know Steven Rockefeller as a member of the Earth Charter initiative, which Strong created as part of the Earth Council during his stint as Secretary General of the Rio Earth Summit in 1992. Highlighting Strong’s work in advancing the global environmental agenda, Steven wrote [emphasis added]:
In the mid-1980s, he became a member of the World Commission on Environment and Development. The Commission’s report, Our Common Future, put the concept of sustainable development on the international agenda, and it included a recommendation that a new universal declaration or charter be drafted with the ethical imperatives and basic principles to guide a worldwide transition to a sustainable future…”
Former Soviet Union leader Mikhail Gorbachev, a staunch globalist and founder of The Gorbachev Foundation and Green Cross International, was an instrumental partner in drafting the charter. It was launched in 2000 with the support of hundreds of organizations and thousands of individuals. The document served as the building blocks for constructing the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) adopted in 2015 as part of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.
Furthering his partnerships with shadowy banking elites, Strong collaborated with Edmund de Rothschild in creating the World Conservation Bank, which later became the Global Environment Facility (GEF). Since its inception in 1991, the GEF has “provided more than $26 billion in financing and mobilized $149 billion for country-driven priority projects relating to climate change, biodiversity loss, and pollution.”
Strong also has deep connections to Klaus Schwab and the World Economic Forum (WEF), serving a long tenure as its co-chairman. Schwab, himself a protégé of both David Rockefeller and Henry Kissinger, also credited Strong as a major influence, writing:
He was my mentor since the creation of the Forum: a great friend; an indispensable advisor; and, for many years, a member of our Foundation Board. Without him, the Forum would not have achieved its present significance.”
As founder and current co-chairman of the WEF, Schwab is recognized as the architect of globalist ideas like Stakeholder Capitalism, the Great Reset, and the Fourth Industrial Revolution. In 2019, the WEF launched a strategic partnership with the UN to accelerate adoption and funding for Agenda 2030 which spawned from Strong’s leadership as a member of the Brundtland Commission, head of the 1992 Rio climate conference, and role in creating Agenda 21, its precursor.
UN and WEF Sign MOU on Strategic Partnership Framework for 2030 Agenda. Source: UN Photo/Manuel Elías
Strong was the key figure spearheading the international environmental movement from the early 1970s until his passing in 2015. As the preeminent mouthpiece of global green technocrats, he advocated for the collapse of nation states, lowering the living standards of rich countries, and Malthusian-influenced population reduction to “save the planet.”
In the 1992 essay “Stockholm to Rio: A Journey Down a Generation,” published by the UN Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED), Strong suggested that nations would have to surrender sovereignty to global dictates, saying [emphasis added]:
The concept of national sovereignty has been an immutable, indeed sacred, principle of international relations. It is a principle which will yield only slowly and reluctantly to the new imperatives of global environmental cooperation. It is simply not feasible for sovereignty to be exercised unilaterally by individual nation states, however powerful. The global community must be assured of environmental security.”
Two years earlier, Strong gave an interview where he described a “fiction book” he desired to write, asking:
Isn’t the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn’t it our responsibility to bring that about?”
Interview in West Magazine, 1990
He reiterated the need for international degrowth in a September 1, 1997 edition of National Review magazine, proclaiming:
If we don’t change, our species will not survive… Frankly, we may get to the point where the only way of saving the world will be for industrial civilization to collapse.”
While serving as Secretary General of the Earth Summit, he commented that:
…current lifestyles and consumption patterns of the affluent middle class, involving high meat intake, consumption of large amounts of frozen and convenience foods, use of fossil fuels, appliances, home and workplace air-conditioning, and suburban housing, are not sustainable.”
Regarding population control, Strong is credited with saying:
Either we reduce the world’s population voluntarily or nature will do this for us, but brutally.”
He was able to spread his green gospel while holding key positions in a laundry list of organizations including the Aspen Institute, Rockefeller Foundation, Rothschild Foundation, International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), UNEP, IUCN, World Future Society, Lindisfarne Association, Temple of Understanding (Lucis Trust), and many more.
By now it should be obvious that Strong was a part of a powerful machine advancing an agenda that has deeply affected billions of people. His relations with globalist organizations like UN, WWF, and Club of Rome solidify his place atop the throne of those pushing the global environmental scheme.
The Club of Rome and the “World Problematique”
“The Earth has cancer and the cancer is Man.”
The Club of Rome, 1974
Strong was also an influential figure within the Club of Rome, the organization owing its existence to co-founders Aurelio Peccei and Alexander King in 1968, along with funding from the Rockefellers. The Club brought together an assembly of bureaucrats, scientists, and business leaders with Rockefeller, Rothschild, and Soros connections.
Aurelio Peccei and Alexander King, Source: Wikimedia Commons
In the early days, members discussed their plans at David Rockefeller’s estate in Bellagio, Italy. Peccei, King, and Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau would later co-establish the Canadian Association for the Club of Rome (CACOR) in the early 1970’s followed by associations in many countries worldwide including the US.
The Club of Rome posited that societal collapse was imminent due to “a cluster of intertwined global problems, be they economic, environmental, political or social,” defining them as the “World Problematique.” Their proposed solutions to man’s role in destroying the environment was dubbed the “World Resolutique.” Many of their recommendations derived from MIT computer models (prone to human error and bias) as discussed in The Limits to Growth report of 1972 and 1977’s Goals for Mankind.
Interdependence, population reduction, and a new global economic system were common themes in Club reports and publications. They would reappear in myriad publications, speeches, papers, articles, books, and meeting agendas. Consider the following excerpts from both the first and second reports to the Club as common examples (emphasis added throughout):
If the present growth trends in world population, industrialization, pollution, food production, and resource depletion continue unchanged, the limits to growth on this planet will be reached sometime within the next one hundred years. The most probable result will be a rather sudden and uncontrollable decline in both population and industrial capacity.
Without such a goal and a commitment to it, short-term concerns will generate the exponential growth that drives the world system toward the limits of the earth and ultimate collapse. With that goal and that commitment, mankind would be ready now to begin a controlled, orderly transition from growth to global equilibrium.”
The Limits to Growth, The First Report to the Club of Rome, Universe Books, 1972, pp. 23, 184.
The transition from the present undifferentiated and unbalanced world growth to organic growth will lead to the creation of a new mankind.
Now is the time to draw up a master plan for organic sustainable growth and world development based on global allocation of all finite resources and a new global economic system. Ten or 20 years from today it will probably be too late…
A world consciousness must be developed through which every individual realizes his role as a member of the world community… It must become part of the consciousness of every individual that “the basic unit of human cooperation and hence survival is moving from the national to the global level.”
Mankind at the Turning Point, The Second Report to the Club of Rome, Signet Books, 1974. pp. 9, 69, 154.
In 1995, the UNEP echoed these ideas in its Global Biodiversity Assessment, writing:
The problems associated with population growth and distribution and loss of biodiversity are reaching critical proportions in many parts of the world… population increases are likely to lead to higher deforestation, degradation of land and loss of biodiversity… A reasonable estimate for an industrialized world society at the present North American material standard of living would be one billion. At the more frugal European standard of living, 2-3 billion would be possible”
(p. 773, emphasis added)
The Club of Rome has continued to produce doomsday literature promoting global governance and a new economic structure throughout their history. A small sampling of their many publications includes:
- Beyond The Limits to Growth (1989)
- Globalization and Culture (2000)
- Humanity At the Crossroads (2001)
- World Economic and Environmental Order (2001)
- Globalization, Governance and Sustainable Development (2002)
- A New World Order Without Ideologies (2003)
- Sustainable Development and Governance (2004)
- Globalization And Civil Society (2005)
- Rethinking Civilization (2006)
- Towards A Global Ethic (2006)
In 2017, Dennis Meadows, co-author of the Limits to Growth report, argued that most of the world’s population must be wiped out if the rest were to maintain a high standard of living, saying:
If we have a very strong dictatorship which is smart … and [people have] a low standard of living… But we want to have freedom and we want to have a high standard of living so we’re going to have a billion people. And we’re now at seven, so we have to get back down.”
The Club’s methodical work over the decades has led to many of the policies and technologies now being thrust upon society presumably “for the common good.”
Agenda 21 + Agenda 2030 = Global Technocracy
The applied doctrines of Agenda 21, Sustainable Development and the energy Smart Grid that have resulted from Trilateral interactions testify to their ideological grounding in historic Technocracy.”
Wood, Patrick. Technocracy Rising: The Trojan Horse of Global Transformation, 2014. Convergent Publishing. Kindle Edition, (p. 44)
Effective execution of Agenda 21 will require a profound reorientation of all human society, unlike anything the world has ever experienced — a major shift in the priorities of both governments and individuals and an unprecedented redeployment of human and financial resources. This shift will demand that a concern for the environmental consequences of every human action be integrated into individual and collective decision-making at every level”
(emphasis added, Source)
The plan put in place by men like Maurice Strong and organizations like the UN and Club of Rome to completely restructure the world is unprecedented in scope. Similar plans originating with Technocracy Inc. in the 1930s were often criticized and rejected.
However, the Rockefeller-influenced ideologies of man-made climate change, global governance, and a new international economic structure won over many who might have resisted these ideas in the past. If all their plans are successfully implemented, individual rights and national sovereignty will be annihilated.
Since its inception, many have tried to describe Agenda 21, but the best definition comes from the late Rosa Koire, author of Behind the Green Mask. Koire’s book is a must read for a detailed understanding of how Agenda 21 is implemented in local communities. While peering behind the green mask, she defined the agenda as follows:
UN Agenda 21/Sustainable Development is the action plan implemented worldwide to inventory and control all land, all water, all minerals, all plants, all animals, all construction, all means of production, all energy, all education, all information, and all human beings in the world. INVENTORY AND CONTROL.”
In less than fifty words, Koire perfectly penned the nightmare that is Agenda 21. Despite the noble pretense, it’s simply an all-encompassing plan to control every aspect of human life and nature from cradle to the grave. It is the global extension of the “scientific control of all social functions” as described by early technocrats.
To many, what’s transpiring on the world stage resembles fascism – to others communism – and to some, socialism. But the ring that rules them all is technocracy.
Agenda 2030 is the overarching plan to implement what began in Agenda 21. Its goal is to have all mechanisms of societal transformation and control in place by the year 2030. It is the ultimate bait and switch designed to dupe humans into voluntarily giving up their rights to save the planet from climate-related disasters, though predictions of doom never materialize.
Sustainable Development ideologues have created a de-facto religion surmising that the earth is dying, natural resources will soon become extinct, and there are way too many people living. These factors have increased CO2 in the atmosphere from all the breathing, farting, and farming causing the earth’s climate to be out of whack, spelling doom for us all. See how this all works now?
Now that the green mask has been completely removed, the “worldwide inventory and control” plan Koire mentioned should be evident. It is you and I that need to be reined in to save the planet. We are the CO2 emitters that need to be controlled and, if possible, eliminated!
As I’ve stated previously:
Today’s climate crusade is not a grassroots, bottom-up movement. It’s a top-down initiative seeking to redistribute wealth upwards and privatize all biodiversity and natural resources. Its real goal is captured in the infamous phrase, ‘You will own nothing and be happy.’
The good news is that many are now seeing through the mask of the environmental movement and are aggressively resisting. However, today’s technocrats have stepped up their efforts to seize control and are actively embedding themselves in every facet of society, including government.
Part 4 will explore this developing phenomenon where populism and technocracy have seemingly merged with the current Trump administration.
Jesse Smith is an American journalist and editor of Truth Unmuted, a news and opinion website dedicated to challenging globalist plans and ideologies like technocracy, transhumanism, the Great Reset, and Agenda 2030. Jesse currently lives in Mexico and writes about current events through the lens of a Biblical worldview. His articles have been published on Global Research, Activist Post, and TruthTalk.UK.
SUPPORT OFFGUARDIAN
If you enjoy OffG's content, please help us make our monthly fund-raising goal and keep the site alive.
For other ways to donate, including direct-transfer bank details click HERE.
Drill, Baby, Drill
Maybe they’ve suddenly got concerned about energy security, growth and funding a credible military!
https://www.lincolnshirelive.co.uk/news/lincoln-news/giant-110-billion-gas-field-9945997
Giant £110 billion gas field discovered under Lincolnshire
It could power the UK for the next ten years if a ban is lifted
Feb 14, 2025
A giant gas field thought to be worth £112 billion has been discovered under Lincolnshire. The fuel could theoretically power the UK for a decade and create thousands of jobs if it is tapped, according to the Telegraph.
The huge energy deposit is centred under Gainsborough, energy company Egdon has announced, and stretches into Nottinghamshire and South Yorkshire. Egdon is owned by American oil giant HEYCO, whose CEO George Yates will formally announce the findings at the Lincolnshire Energy Conference later this month.
It’s estimated that the gas field contains 480 billion cubic metres of gas – around ten times the UK’s annual usage – and would add £112 billion to the economy.
—
Ukraine Betrayed?! – Donald Trump Gives Russia’s Putin Upper Hand Over Ukraine
TalkTV
Feb 14, 2025 #talk #news #labour
Sir Keir Starmer has said Britain is committed to Ukraine being on an “irreversible path” to joining NATO after the US appeared to rule out membership for the war-torn country.
The Prime Minister bolstered his backing for Kyiv in a phone call with President Volodymyr Zelensky as global leaders gather in Munich for a major security conference.
Former head of the British Army Lord Dannatt joins Talk’s Alex Philips to discuss this further.
See the Zeitgeist Movement and “their” RBE solution.
And didn’t 2020 and Covid prove that we’re under one world governance now!
There are still small pockets of resistance.
In my area 7% of the population resisted and refused the jab. This will give these Global Elite Motherf…..s a lesson and something to think about!
Yeah, OK. Do you think that’s enough for any change to occur? I like the line from the film McVicar ” I might not win this one but I’ll be the best second you’ll ever see”
The indoctrination is too deep I fear.
I was just joking.
That wasn’t an endorsement but to show how the concept of Technocracy reappears repackaged generation after generation.
Brilliant well researched article.
Does anyone here know where some of those books mentioned in the article can be found online (free PFD/EPub links only please as I don’t intend to finance the global technocratic death cult).
The problem here is that Jesse Smith is an online Christian preacher and hence is not a reliable read. The “Biblical Worldview” is a large part of the problem as Christianity is not compatible with the truth, even though it may try to hijack the “truth movment”.
You can block and moderate as much as you like but this is the truth and it will eventually come out… Humanity will not move on and may not even survive if the entire Abrahamic narrative and all its doctrinal variants (Judaism, Christianity and Islam) is not understood for what it is: Satanic. There is no original pure doctrine that was later corrpupted by whatever denomination your family opposed. It was ALL evil from its inception in Babylon/Sumeria.
Satan is much trickier than you realise, or he wouldn’t be Satan…. Do you really think he would not disguise himself as “God” and his minions as “archangels”?
For the non-mystical explanation :
jesusneverexisted.com
then, read DH Lawrence’s Apocalypse for an introduction to the more mystical view of what is wrong here.
Off-Guardian does not claim to be a Christian website yet these views are consistently suppressed or ignored here while Christian views constantly promoted…
What is not stated is that Christian dogma is opposed to vaccination and abortion NOT because of a need to uphold the sovereignty of humanity but because they want to enforce the belief that human bodies, even unborn ones, and of course their souls belong to the false god of the Hebrews…. Circumcision (male genital mutilation) is dutifully and widely done in the USA but never discussed. Wake up….
You are clowning around i the semantics. Its easy. Everybody can do it. Take the scriptures and go out in real life and check the scriptures out:
Is Christ’s memo about the Tax man and the Pharisee right or not right? Jesus IS right, he sees the hypocrisy in the Pharisee and the honest regret and prayer from the sinner the Tax man.
Is the Ecclesiastes right in its listing up all evidence of a human life’s absurdity, and its conclusion in the final chapter.
Yes, we can nod to the Ecclesiastes and recognize what is being said. And so on, and on and forth.
What you are talking about is not spiritual Christianity, but false interpretation by a variation of politicised religions where Satan yes is disguising himself.
This is, I believe, the Gnostic view of the Abrahamic “God.” And, interestingly enough, of all philosophic renderings concerning religion, Gnosticism is the most hated and condemned.
I’m not a Gnostic, so I’m only going by very superficial readings of Gnosticism.
Transgender + vax + “sex party drug” animal experiments unknowingly funded by US taxpayers is not as bad as the usual straight-up genocide via military means but still points at the aims of the transhumanist agenda
https://x.com/its_the_dr/status/1887864529570189492?mx=2
Ah yes, the sad downvoter
the author reminds us that, even though environmental concerns have been unscrupulously co-opted and put in the service of an oppressive domination project, those concerns are NOT all bs
this is a really valuable point in my opinion, since it gets us beyond this maddening logic used to smear opponents of megalomaniacal ecofundamentalist plans, by accusing us of being callous, selfish polluters or accomplices to pollution
by the same token, though, I think we should be wary of the idea that, just because the sinister globalists criticize the sovereign nation-state, a rejection of that world-government agenda amounts to a vote of confidence for the system in which each country is a world unto itself
there are also legitimate concerns with that system, which already represents an unhealthy concentration of centralized power, especially in large territories enclosed by national borders, like those of China, India, Russia, the US
Ever heard of the National Mafia of Cambodia in 1975 with an 8 million population.
The gullible always get what they deserve:
“That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger”
The problem is not the Global Mafia – it is “ordinary” people.
55 mins in re environmental/climate issues/johan rockström
It comes down to whether one is a redneck who thinks burning petrol is his god-given right or wether one understands that petrochemicals and the related industry are one of the top culprits for the destruction of nature.
if you don’t think the destruction of nature is happening or is a problem, you’d better pray you don’t run out of booze, drugs or medication. The “climate” agenda is designed to distract you from this very real situation.
The rise of AI would seem to usurp any potential rise of Technocracy.
Intelligent machines outperforming specialized human experts seems a phenomenon that’s here to stay and only increase. The human scientific expert seems something of the past. A relic from antiquity.
Maybe we should worry more about AI-o-cracy
Technocrats (or their underlings) will delegate tasks to AI, but will never hand over full control.
AI will be like NPCs in video games that get stuck when they bump into a chair. That level of ‘service’ will be fine for us plebs who will be given no choice, but our masters require more personal slaves to do their bidding.
Ehhh just for the cause of documentation for our statements, “opinions” or comments or what we call it, I should like to see real practical examples from real life where AI outperforms human expertise?
The reason for this reasonable question is that I see only AI outperforming human stupidity, not human intuition and human intelligence. Apologize for any inconvenience.
I tend to find the opposite question more challenging. In what ways does human thought or expertise outdo AI. We could talk of human ‘intuition’ but what does that really mean?
Deep Blue beats Kasparov. AlphaGo beats the ‘Go’ world champion. AI writes computer programs. Solves mathematical puzzles. It can cite, process and discuss any book, scientific or otherwise, ever written. The list goes on…
Humans, by way of contrast, forget. And they’ve only read a limited number of books or articles.
But the question is a good one, if not vital. Humanity’s future may well reside in finding a suitable answer to it.
Yes this was what you smoked and wrote, that you found this question the most challenging, but the answer is what I wrote to you.
By examining where AI outperform humans we realize it dont.
Kasparov is a human playing chess with humans. AI is a machine
.
Its like saying, “because a bicycle runs faster than a human, a bicycle is in reality a better performer than humans”. Horses?
These kind of argumentation we students made on college after smoking ganja at night. But to continue the long list of human achievements AI never can reach is human music. Eric Donaldson https://youtu.be/iCmdQiGrtIg
Indeed. AI could never ever write music or poetry or literature or any of those other arty emotional intuitive things that humans seem to enjoy. Until … maybe it actually does:
Break Free – Taryn Southern
I hear it only as noise.
Impressing but it is actually the same modern plastic music I hear from Taylor Swift and the other suckers Rihanna and Co, which I dont like either.
Our own kids say they wished to have lived in our times the 60-70’es where the real thing was ongoing.
It is what it says, artificial. Do you like plastic lolitas and/or plastic dildos? Porno movies? Its the same – artificial.
But you have a point. There is techno-pop. It has its own rytm and world to be liked by curious people. Artificial.
But it is still, can and will forever never be real. Dead meat. Here Art of Noise. https://youtu.be/6epzmRZk6UU
Now I know where Jim Carrey got his inspiration from
A society controlled directly by AI would be tehcnocracy in the most literal sense possible. A dictatorship ruled by technology, literally. So I don’t think it’d warrant a new word.
However, i believe the whole idea of the “government by ai” concept is that this way they could impose their will on the population via an algorithm which is coded by them to operate by their desired logic, in a closed-source manner where no one is permitted to view or analyze the code directly, concealing the inherent biases programmed into it. Meanwhile, it will be presented to the public as an objective, conscious, sentient thinking machine capable of superior logical reasoning far beyond the capabilities of the human brain (an absolute lie)
I’ll finish reading the article before opinionating. But I simply, once again, cringe to the point of nausea whenever Iencounter the notion of Earth’s resources being infinite. How is this even possible?
Even allowing that volcanism puts resources from Earth’s molten core into “our” part of the planet, they are still finite. If the Earth spews every last drop of its innards onto the land, there is no known mechanism for the planet to renew these elements. It simply – thank goodness – does not generate the heat and energy required to convert molecules into mineral matter. So far as we know, only stars can do that (unless that idea too is part of the New World Order propaganda).
Just having a lot of something does not make that something infinite. Every day my dog produces fecal matter- but rest assured the process is not infinite.
We won’t be exporting (much) into outer space. All we are doing is moving stuff around.
E.g. some people are still under the impression we “use up” water. It doesn’t work like that.
As for energy – that will be flowing our way from the Sun for billions of years, being converted into various forms, so no worries there.
Thanks Jonathan. Happy to see someone got it right by instinct. When one get the first key, the rest is so simple.
“Limited energy” while the sun is baking their white shirt sweaty and white bold heads dark red. Tsk tsk tsk.
Not to talk about the waves, the winds, the tide and low, magma, the fire, the ice expanding 10%, and the strongest variable creative yet secret energy force Einstein claimed mankind were not yet ready to understand.
I believe it’s misleading to say we don’t “use up” water. We convert much of it to a form which no longer sustains life – perhaps even way too much of it.
Using the fact that Earth’s overall supply of water based elements stays the same (if in fact it does) as evidence against ecological scarcity would be like saying cancer is okay because cancer cells are still human cells so they must be needed to sustain life. That which can no longer sustain life is for all intents and purposes “used up.”
The problem with the Sun’s energy is that it is a somewhat unreliable source of energy in terms of human civilization. While it helps grow food, it can just as easily destroy crops. Irrigation, e.g., cannot be achieved using the Sun’s energy. Besides which, since the Sun controls cloud formation, it can produce drought or flood.
A simple way of life would need nothing but the Sun’s energy and available water to sustain itself. A “civilized” existence cannot endure without man-made energy sources. Eight billion humans cannot survive using only those resources which are readily available. Yet the very act of creating mechanisms to sustain “civilization” puts the continued availability of Earth’s resources in jeopardy.
The reason why you dont understand it Howard, is that you will have to admit God’s existence if you get it right.
Christ say the reason why people get upset and divided, is because the truth will make them realize how dumb they were and how much they have sinned, which make them angry.
Our drinking water come from heaven and down to us. Wait 15-30 minutes rain cleaning the air, and the water hereafter are clean soft ready to drink for all living, plants, animals, birds, soil and us.
Non religious people collect drinking water from the ground water down and up, which they then claim are filled with pesticides and micro plastic yes?
Same goes for the other man made supply theories. They are all clean cut stupidity compared to the way God designed it.
And no, God is not our Nanny and Jesus does not love you…………….LOL.
Unfortunately, as tests show time and again, rainwater is highly polluted – in part by PFAS “forever” chemicals and in part by geoengineering toxins spewed into the atmosphere.
Maybe. But you say it yourself, by our own bad manners. From the beginning the design was ok.
I.e saying our proof of design yes
Second, where I live I am certainly able to collect pure clean water from the rain after waiting some 15-30 minutes.
But I live close to the Sea where it is more windy and thing get cleaned by the salt in the air.
But to the conclusion, if you wanna find the right calculations and reality, look up not down. Just a friendly advice.
What do you say about the abiotic and replenishable oil theory?
From a 2013 Forbes article:
“Oil and gas don’t come from fossils; they’re synthesized deep within the earth’s mantle by heat, pressure and other purely chemical means, before gradually rising to the surface.
…
Kutcherov points to a handful of productive oil fields in Vietnam and elsewhere that lay in hard rock such as granite. Traditional theory says oil shouldn’t be present there. Certain wells in the Gulf of Mexico have produced more oil than expected. The abiotic crowd says they are slowly being refilled from a deeper source.”
What if the notion of scarcity that’s being pushed down our throats all the time – the “end of the world” scenario – is just a lie to keep us in fear and forever controlled? And to justify the culling of human beings?
Is scarcity just a myth? I’m no communist but could the distribution of wealth be the problem? The fake (crony) capitalism?
I trust human greed more than I trust human theories. Greed tells me petroleum based energy is not limitless – else why the rush to capture every source of it? Why is the US so intent upon taking over the Middle East’s vast reserves if it flows so freely from below? Currently, the US is the world’s biggest oil producer. So why does it need to corner the market everywhere else if it’s own reserves are being replaced even as we speak?
As to wells having more oil than anticipated, who said geologists were 100% accurate all the time? I find it interesting that “we” accept the conclusions of geologists who tell us what we want to hear – e.g., that oil is made in the Earth’s core rather than from decayed organic matter. But “we” reject the conclusions of geologists who tell us, e.g., that various core samples show a correlation between higher atmospheric CO2 and extinction events.
No science is 100% foolproof. But human greed is 100% spot on.
Its evolution that is infinite, we came from the Earth, and the Earth came from the Sun.
Quite an article. Thank you.
First heard of Maurice Strong on Corbett Report. He did an episode on Strong years ago.
At least the end game is always the same.
Seems like everything is designed to transfer wealth upwards. And it’s working.
I think its essential to recognize the difference between ‘technology’ and ‘what people do with it’. Science and technology are just the tools that we humans use to achieve goals. We should be debating our goals and how technology will help us achieve those goals. Currently in our world the only goal is profit, the entire culture now believes that “there is no alternative” resulting in rather sterile debates over trivia and how life was much better before such and such a thing was invented. (BTW — It wasn’t.)
The recent rush to implement AI has really unmasked how ecological piety goes completely out the window when there’s money to be made. For many years now we’ve been urged to conserve power (no in of itself a bad goal) and have been ‘nudged’ along in that goal by escalating utility prices and coercive legislation. Us humble folk might get screwed over supply and pricing but we can feel good about it because we’re Saving The Planet. (The side effect of increased cashflow and so profit for suppliers is just a fortuitous coincidence.) Then along comes this Next Big Thing requiring huge amounts of power. Suddenly all the greenwashing gets forgotten, its back to unstoppable capitalism at its most raw.
Never forget that our governments think a 100W light bulb is an indulgence we don’t deserve. When they banned incandescent bulbs we should have predicted all that followed.
But AI? Here, have your own nuclear reactor!
I only now thought of this. And I’m not sure I understand my own thought. But, anyway, I’m thinking something along the lines of, “What if both environmentalism and anti-environmentalism are, well, conspiracies or something?” You see, I have heard both positions argued at one time or other, and the arguments are usually quite cogent and believable.
It is the way that the Author describes it.
Peoples and/or natives rightful “environmental” claims against chemicals in their rivers and agriculture and our food, were turned around so they appeared ridiculous in the MSM (MainStream Media), and the multi billionaires falsehood environmentalism like Maurice Strong and Rockefeller appeared as the do-gooders.
Smith alleges: “Seemingly out of nowhere, as Brzezinski noted, the Rockefeller-financed shift to a “green economy” was sold to environmental organizations like Greenpeace, Friends of the Earth, and society as a whole under the guise of saving the planet, preserving wildlife, and creating a more just world.”
Valid points Jenner.
Can’t wait for a reasoned response.
Thanks Johnny much appreciated, but I am not holding my breath.
Why, why, why Mr. Anderson? Why??
Why dont you use a search machine to acquaint yourself about the matter mister. I dont see you questions as valid. Here from your servant: https://www.rockefellerfoundation.org/fellowships-convenings/bellagio-center/residency-program/building-green-economies-residency/
So who is Anderson? Btw, you are not much of a servant. you are hereby dismissed. because:
You link me to some Rockefeller blurb whereas Paul Cudenec spends a book detailing how the Rockefellers, via various modes of interlocking and ownership, are in fact Rothschild.
Refute it.
..and Rothschild are in fact, via modes of interlocking and ownership, Queen Elizabeth, the British Empire yes?
Rothschild is only financial advisor to the British Crown, so wake me up when the Queen is hanging in a lamp post, as I used to say in the past.
The ring that connects them all closed!
What an excellent and very important piece of work, thanks to Jesse and Off-G. But again, what to do?
I am so tired of working in negative with people, trying to “wake up” sheeple who glue to their illusions, tired of poodles like Maurice Strong who profit from their arselickerei.
What about some psychological martial art?
The Rockefeller Clan claim we are too many yes, and all their sheeple and wagging poodles and prostitutes agree as long as they get well paid.
I think you and I would be able to survive and stand against most pressure, so the ones who really will suffer a well deserved death from this ehh say “scheme” is the Oligarch’s own wagging serf group yes?
Papa fixed the world’s problem no 1 for yr again. “You got it for free, and shall give it to your neighbours for free”. Roy Jones-can’t be touched https://ok.ru/video/9935717789
Your alternative update on #COVID19 for 2025-02-10. Fake: photos of dead bodies on Wuhan streets, refrigerated morgue trucks, overcrowded hospitals (blog, gab, tweet, pic1, pic2, pic3, pic4).
It began with brainwashing:
https://dissidentvoice.org/2025/02/brainwashing-is-not-a-form-of-personal-hygiene/
First it came via religious brainwashing, then fear of the ‘enemy’, worship of the Royals and then the glorification of Capitalism and/or Communism.
Now it’s Technocracy.
What they all have in common is $uiturd$ at the top exploiting brainwashed slaves at the bottom.
Welcome to the Inhumane Race.
The Race for Wealth and Control.
There are only a handful of Winners.
But what have they won?
Eleven minutes of hilarity from the people we trust(?):
Have you turned on alt media..?
that is exactly the same.
Not where I go.
That new ice age and running out of oxygen prediction in 1970 is hilarious, if it didn’t serve a very nasty agenda. We need to rid ourselves of the excessive fat-cat ‘scientists’ that come up with preposterous predictions all the time.
.
Having to choose between the release of the CIA’s JFK Assassination
files, and the release of Jeffrey Epstein’s Little Black book i know which
one i’d choose…
Twisted Truth In A Clown World
As sickening as it is to admit it – and even the most delusional MAGA
diehard cant deny it – a Kamala Harris presidency wouldn’t have pushed
the New World Order as far, fast, or deep as Trump has.
Think about it: Kamala would’ve been met with massive resistance at
every step, the right would’ve called out every dystopian move, and half
the country would’ve been on high alert.
But under Trump ? MAGA’s been too busy waving flags and screaming
“5D chess” to notice they’ve been cheering for AI surveillance, digital IDs,
cashless slave grids,, and Zionist war crimes dressed up as “patriotic
business deals.”
Trump didnt drain the swamp – he built a fucking throne on it and called
it freedom.
Meanwhile, MAGA’s holding the door open for the Beast System with one
hand while tweeting about how they’re fighting it with the other…
Clown World.
https://www.theburningplatform.com/2025/02/10/government-media-ridicule-733/
Billionaires backed Trump to take on The Deep State ?
I see it in many many comments.
Herr Jemini you guys are really longing back to the good ol’ days again, when Obama doubled the US public debt with -10 trillion USD..
I have never heard so many weird excuses and never seen to many lakes being filled up with tears.
Here they are, all your idols: US ex-Secretary of Healthy Hairy Harry and Team:
That’s about the same $absolute amount as the other side of the same coin idol, DJT, added during his co-n-vid stint.
I’m pretty sure that first one was Schwarzenegger’s disguise to elude assassins in “Total Recall”
They are all taking care of your health, and you are happy. You are happy man 🤒 . According to Klaus Schwab and a lot of notabilities.
Good point. Much like how we transitioned from the largest protests in history during the Bush regime’s invasion of Iraq, to the complete silence of the anti war movement under Obama’s regime as he expanded the imperialist campaign he inherited from 2 to 7 simultaneous unprovoked invasions of foreign nations
They’re all part of the agenda. I read in some book long ago that Democrats can do certain things and Republicans can do others.
As we see, Democrats can raise taxes, start new wars and fund existing ones, use mandates and dictates under the guise of humanity to help install the dictatorial grid. They can get away with more open censorship as they are seen as the humanitarian side of the aisle. Their narrative pushes the ideas of the collective, although they too are careful in how they spin that. But they don’t have to worry so much about those who see the erosion of any semblance of civil liberties as they are still somehow perceived as mostly doing good. All one need do is look at some of the more authoritarian parts of DEI for example to see this in action. Only a Democrat could so forcefully push the vax mandates. Had a Republican attempted to do that, particularly Trump, there could have been significant push back from the “humanitarian left.” And who knows, there may even have been some real questioning of the total lack of clinical trials, the number of billionaires created from all those mandates, the open corruption of government collusion with Pharma, the censorship, not to mention job losses for non-compliance. Our owners knew better than to allow that, hence the 2020 selection…
Republicans can cut taxes, start and fund wars (both sides obviously can do this, but either “side” can experience push back from its electoral base depending on the how the narrative is spun) and can also install their own “mandates” although theirs need to be done carefully so as not to arouse too much anger from their constituency. Republican dictates will use the focus of “freedom of choice” in instituting a mandate, but the goal of those is most certainly not freedom for ordinary people. Republicans can indeed vehemently push cutting government spending while Democrats would undoubtedly face much more resistance to that. Kamala Harris could not ever openly call for massive Federal spending cuts, her electorate would openly revolt against that, and we can see a bit of that with all the hysteria over cutting USAID. Never mind that many even on “the left” see USAID corruption and are fully aware of what that agency actually does, the very idea that any Republican cuts any government spending must be resisted at all costs.
The endless theater of supposed arguments between both sides nicely distracts from the overall agenda. At the end of the day, the country moves more toward open fascism (“open” being debatable as some see its tendencies sooner than others, but most do not see the overall trajectory when their own “side” is ascendant). Fascism here may be a simplistic term to use as I think what we really face is tech driven feudalism, but this does use some “communist” as well as “fascist” methodology, which helps create more confusion and division. Confusion and division are the name of the game. Blaming the voters for this is just icing on the cake. While our owners have pushed us to where we are today through endless lies and manipulation, far too many want to simply think “their side” would have done better.
While we argue incessantly over which puppet should be installed, the beat goes on. So, by all means, blame MAGA all you like, but they’re no more to blame in reality than the most “liberal” DEI Democrat, hard as that is to swallow. The brainwashing is generational and is so deeply entrenched that perhaps only total collapse would see the end of it. I doubt that though. Even through a massive and total collapse, I am willing to bet team sports mentality will neatly quash any tendency of the population to really wake up. Our owners will see to that, as they always have.
Sustainability is a vague word, but it sounds good to me. I mean, “unsustainability” doesn’t sound very good. I have trouble understanding these complicated conspiracies. I guess, if they are not going to do anything about pollution, and all they want is to get more power, well, I can see that that is bad. But I like the idea of a system of energy and technology that doesn’t have a sell-by date. I
That’s exactly why they use that word! You can’t argue against one-word positivity.
It’s no different to Harris saying her policy would be… joy! Can’t go against that, can you? You want people sad?
Me too. They caught me with “green”. I love green and have always seen everything green in a positive light.
I mean there cant be something wrong with green can there? I am all in for green, especially if they pay dollares for it.
Then there is a 100% feeling of a common cause and happiness around the word green.
The “apples” don’t fall far from the tree:
“John D. Rockefeller’s father, William Avery Rockefeller, was a traveling snake-oil salesman who posed as a deaf-mute peddler and hawked miracle drugs and herbal remedies. The smooth-talking huckster dubbed “Devil Bill” alternately fathered children—including the future industrialist—with his wife and mistress, the couple’s live-in housekeeper. The itinerant William Rockefeller also lived a double life posing as an eye-and-ear specialist named Dr. William Levingston, and in 1855 he secretly married another woman.” 😳
https://x.com/WallStreetApes/status/1888702429601968311
This SA man is just crying out accusations, no evidence we havent heard before.
To balance the story a little, you know the apartheid system they had yes?
You also know the Dutch people that inherited SA, some of them own farms at a size of Belgium and even today they refuse to leave just some m2 to SA’s poor population for some small houses and small land.
Ghetty, poverty, slum, and apartheid, versus multi-billionaire white farmers from Europe with their own private semi-military guards with machine guns on their land, maybe it is not the right cocktail for a friendly neighbourship yes?
Yeah, but you leave “some m2” of farmland to most black men in SA and they either haven’t got a clue what to do with it or are too damn lazy to do anything with it. They rather be drinking and fornicating.
He’s a true story – a good friend of mine had a few boats and had licences for areas of coastal seabed to farm for abalone (an expensive delicacy in SE Asia). He’d farm it, send it to a processing plant and ship it abroad. He’d farm was a very rich (white) man.
The government decreed he give away half of his licences to indigenous black men. He did so.
But they didn’t have boats – so he leased them some boats.
They didn’t know how to retrieve the abalone – so he bought back their licences for cash.
With that cash, the went to the liquor store and got drunk and went a-fucking.
End of story.
We are too advanced and they are too far behind to make a team succeed. They need time alone to develop and progress, while we make white elephants and blame them for not understanding electronics and automation.
I Eritrea they finally got peace after long colonial wars instigated by West.
They started to rehabilitate the old railway and old trains to make the line from Asmara to Massawa function. For you whites a poor achievement, but locally it was a big victory. Just an example.
The real problems presented by a class of overlords determining the nature of human civilization is their ability to weave the obvious, common sense and constructed myth narratives as a cloud over clear thought. I admit to having fallen victim to many of the ideological ploys described here. It takes many, many years to completely see through the lifetime of programming they deploy thru education, media, government, “leader” led organizations, and finally thru peer pressure that self-polices clear thinking.
My main concerns have always been industrial pollution; hording of wealth + authority by a tiny minority of sociopathic, egotistical rich and; any circumscription of the right of individual autonomy to socially, benign, self-determination. Given a life’s start free of oppression and surrounded by access to truth, I believe in human being’s ability make excellent decisions for themselves and Humanity. There will always be a bell curve of rich to poor, smart to dumb and sane to crazy. But safe access to all of that growing up, is necessary. To have this we need to have a conscious society that self-governs this access without the rich leader class deciding our past, present and future like these Haoles pointed out in the article. We have a human culture that insists on having or being Parent over Children. And this “leader” class of people are not capable of making sane, useful and nonviolent decisions for human beings.
I think the assassinations, the Wars, 911 and the Bankster hose-up of human wealth, then LOCKDOWN/w Great Reset goals, has exposed the selfish intent of the Parent class. They won’t relinquish authority. They are driving their totalitarian technologies over us, thinking we will succumb. Their efforts are spectacularly failing for all to see. They are driving the desperate in the West to swing wildly back to the false binary Conservative, hoping for better. The false Liberal binary, which includes the above insane yellow brick road to behavioral totalitarianism, has blown their loony cover. It’s now wide open for us, the human collective, to begin self-governing, sans the Bad Parent class and it’s endless bullsh*t. Like described above.
“Sustainable development” means sustained corporate profit. Forever. No matter what. Once you realise this it all makes perfect sense.
Said development would include tearing down every tree and wiping out every other species if necessary. As long as production and consumerism can be maintained indefinitely so the elites live like gods. Nothing else matters to them.
OMG: Off-Guardian scores a Bingo!! Ok, any frozen clock is correct twice a day, but still.
The Green Greed for greenback$, legendary. This is hippy generation stuff, dreamed up from too much hash: brains gone up in smoke, but mouths and indignation growing bigger. Experts in wasting other people’s tax money, sustainable green diarrhea till economic death.
What articles would you be happy for them to print.?
You seem miserable anytime I visit the comment board.
This one it good, so I am glad.
Missing here: any criticism of the CPC in China or Islam around the globe.
Let’s go after the BAD guys first. The not so bad guys will have to wait.
An example of your not so bad from New York state of Salman Rushdie’s stabbing on stage, on video now in US court: Alleged attacker Hadi Matar, 26, has pleaded not guilty to charges of second-degree attempted murder and second-degree assault.
don’t believe your eyes: Hadi is the victim. Rushdie the perp. Woke logic on Islamic steroids.
How was the trial not completed years ago???
At least Biden didn’t give him a pardon.
Maybe there is more fake in this story that both antonym and the public are aware of.
I mean since everything is fake anyway, why should this Hadi story be different?
Remember they were warming up to the Osama Bin Laden and the 40 Ali Baba Moslem Mountain Goats did 9/11 because they hated America.
You must’ve missed this https://off-guardian.org/2022/11/25/china-the-worlds-first-technate-part-1/
Didnt you get enough moslem hate after 9/11?
After a couple of years they turned the MSM to China, and now we have the whole Western media apparatus hating orange man.
You wait and you will get your pound of flesh.
“the 1970 Earth Day event”.
The founder of which, Ira Einhorn, was later discovered to have a woman’s body in a suitcase in his closet.
He was only helping the depopulation cause. Also: what’s this “real” jive all about, Eddie?
The Real Donald inspiratio, maybe ?
That’s King Cyrus.
He was environmentalist. Not saying all environmentalists are punishing their girlfriends this way.
But probably after advise from Rockefeller, US kept him in safe and comfort until his 79 years old where he died of natural causes.
Yes, he was just composting the body for mother Gaia. The whole world is totally two tier, not just our own dear Kier.
Trying to figure out what they want.