Tag Archives: American Revolution

Largest Coup d’état In History: Overthrow Of The United States Of America Is On Like Donkey Kong

Journalist Alex Newman says this 2020 election fraud is the biggest in the history of the free world. Newman explains,

“This is on a whole other level. They are not just trying to steal our money, they are trying to steal our country, our future, our liberties and our constitutional system of government”

That is, by definition, treason. It is waging war against the United States. The fact that no charges are being filed and no investigations going on tells you everything you need to know about AG Barr, the DOJ and the FBI. . . . There is a coup underway right now, a coup d’état. . . Their goal is a complete overthrow of the United States of America.”

Join Greg Hunter as he goes One-on-One with journalist Alex Newman, who writes for many outlets such as The New American, The Epoch Times and his own site Liberty Sentinel.org.

Source: USA Watchdog

***

This Election Is Not Over… And The Media Knows It

Trump Campaign Adviser Jason Miller: ‘Concede’ Is ‘Not Even in Our Vocabulary Right Now’

Captured in Real Time: That Moment in Virginia at 5:12 AM Where they Took 373,000 Votes Off the State Totals

Sidney Powell Makes Explosive Voter Fraud Allegation: ‘They Had This All Planned’

Lin Wood on Why He Signed On to the Trump Team

SMOKING GUN: ELECTRONIC VOTE FRAUD CAUGHT LIVE ON CNN! #TheHammer #Scorecard (bitchute.com)

Explore All the Queen’s Agents and Corporations that Control the World

https://aim4truthblog.files.wordpress.com/2017/02/queen-of-england.jpgRuling the West with British brains and American brawn

We may not realize it, but we are still subjects of the British Monarchy. American history books and classes indoctrinated (propaganda) us into believing we had won the American Revolution. But we didn’t. We are still subjects of Queen Elizabeth.

The history books were written by the victors and their big publishing houses. And it was much easier to control the new colonies by letting them think they had won their independence, while the British Crown carefully laid their tentacles throughout America, tentacles that grew longer and stronger with every passing year.

We aren’t the America we think we are. That’s the big red pill. Most of us on planet Earth are still under the Queen’s rule.

To get started with the real history of who runs planet Earth, we suggest that you listen to this conversation between Betsy and Thomas. They will explain the big picture. Then you will be ready to read the report that follows.

Lizzie Owns it All

The Queen’s Prerogative

English law prohibits questioning the Monarchy about their personal holdings and business.

This is true of most of Europe’s royalty, whether enthroned or not. The wealth of the Monarchies is held outside of the countries that made the wealth. The British Crown’s offshore banks hold the greatest personal wealth in the world estimated at $35 trillion. Perhaps the British Crown still owns and controls its Commonwealth Nations, including the American “colonies.”

Monarchies are not supposed to be warlord bankers who create conflict and chaos to turn a profit or destabilize an economy for personal gain. But they have been for some time now, and history is a string of immoral wars caused by monarchies, the Vatican and other religions. Untold millions have died while kings and popes lived on to grab the wealth through well-established institutions that were created to control the commoner.

The Commonwealth of Nations, headed by Queen Elizabeth II, is made up of 53 nations, spanning the globe, accounting for one-fifth of the land mass of the Earth, and a very high percentage of its strategic resources and population. The Queen is a Knight of Malta and has vowed allegiance to the Pope through the largest insider trading club on the planet. The British Crown Agents are, in fact, also agents of the Vatican’s Knights of Malta.

The Queen is a Knight of Malta

The Sovereign Military Order of Malta (SMOM) took control of the power and wealth of the Poor Fellow-Soldiers of Christ and of the Temple of Solomon from within the Roman system. The SMOM controlled the banking and military power for the Vatican for hundreds of years through the first central bank, the Vatican Bank.

The Roman Catholic priestly order of the Jesuits (Society of Jesus) subordinated the SMOM in 1798 aided by Napoleon Bonaparte. This would eventually lead to the Jesuits installing British control over the Island Malta and the founding of a Jesuit College manned by British Jesuits. The Jesuits became somewhat crippled by this suppression in Catholic controlled Europe, so in order for the Jesuits to secure South American wealth they used Protestant banking houses and formed an alliance with the Venetian influences over Britain like the Pallavicini family who control the Monarchy and Rothschilds.

The Jesuits in 1840 put the Haus Sachsen-Coburg und Gotha bloodline into the position of Monarchy of Great Britain. This house is known today as the Windsor House which still rules the UK and the Commonwealth Nations. The same fate would eventually happen to the Vatican itself after suppressing the Jesuits in 1773. The Jesuit Order took control of the Papacy by 1814 and had enacted revenge once again for their persecution.

The Order of Malta and the recognized protestant divisions all play a role commanded by the Jesuit Order. This includes The Most Venerable Order of the Hospital of Saint John of Jerusalem controlled by Queen Elizabeth II. If you look at the last Grandmasters of the Order of Malta you will notice they came from Britain. Former-Grandmaster Andrew Willougby Ninian Bertie was a cousin to Queen Elizabeth II originated within the Grand Priory of England. The British arm of the Order of Malta controlling St John’s Wood is known as the Grand Priory of England. This location was once also a Knights Templar headquarters in Britain. The Order of Malta even owned Londinium (TheCityofLondon). TheCityofLondon was eventually rented out by the Order of Malta as their headquarters. The Jesuits took over Londinium in 1825 aided by the Rothschild family who had become the most powerful economic force in England.

When you take a look at many of the influential positions of power today, whether it is in banking, military, pharmaceutical or intelligence, you will always find Knights of Malta.

The Knights of Malta are mainly involved in working for and with the Black Nobility (royalty without an active throne), the Vatican, and the various Papal and Royal Orders, especially the Jesuits who are ultimately in control of the Vatican and the Military Order of Malta. The SMOM’s most powerful controlling inner-cores are the Order of the Garter and the Pilgrim Society which are controlled by the Queen.

When you look at who controls the financial world you will find it is the Equestrian Order of the Holy Sepulchre of JerusalemOrder of Malta and Opus Dei through the City of London Corporation and The Worshipful Company of Mercers and the more recent The Worshipful Company of International Bankers.

The Queen’s Offshore Kingdom

“One third of all world wealth is held offshore, and about half of all world trade flows through those tax havens.”   – The Tax Justice Network

James S. Henry, former chief economist at McKinsey & Company, estimates that wealthy individuals have approximately $35 trillion in private financial wealth tucked away in offshore havens with $6.1 trillion in UK dependent states.

As a result of this offshore accounting, it is estimated that 60% of global trade now consists of internal transactions within multinational companies. In total, it is estimated that this complex corporate offshore accounting multinational corporations avoid paying about $240 billion per year in taxes

TheCityofLondonUK is now the money laundering capital of the world with UK firms aiding corrupt officials and criminals from across the globe to hide trillions of US dollars of ill-gotten gains. British-based banks have helped hide more than $6 trillion in nefarious payments and criminal proceeds since 2000.

Cayman Islands benefit from the added support of being a territory of the United Kingdom. The Caymans offer a number of tax-free incentives and little financial regulation and oversight. Today the country is the world’s fifth largest financial services center. It plays host to over 10,000 mutual funds, over 200 banks, over 90,000 companies, and 140 trust companies. It’s the world’s top home for hedge funds and captive health insurance companies.

Bermuda is another piece of UK territory that has long been known as a tax haven. Bermuda’s tax system puts taxes on staff payrolls, but not on corporate earnings or investment income. Its largest customer for offshore transactions is the United States.

Guernsey belongs to the British Crown but makes its own laws on matters such as taxation. The island of 65,000 people has made a big push towards being an offshore finance destination, and its main street is lined with private banks, law firms, and accounting firms. 

Jersey is another small British Crown dependency in the English Channel. Jersey prints its own banknotes and makes its own tax laws. A culture of secrecy and non-disclosure in the island has resulted in Jersey housing an estimated $5 billion dollars of wealth per square mile. Half of Jersey’s tax avoidance trade comes from the UK. 

The “British” U. S. Federal Reserve

 Using the first major corporation in England as their model, the British East India Company, warlord bankers start wars for profit. Slavery and the looting of mines, gold, diamonds, minerals, and land is all in a day’s work for an imperialist. England’s imperialism has worked into the economic and banking practices worldwide and the Queen’s Crown Agents and Agencies have controlled global resources for centuries.

There is a linear connection between the Rothschilds, the Bank of England, and the London banking houses which ultimately links the stockholders of the Federal Reserve Banks to their subsidiary firms in New York and TheCityofLondonUK. The two principal Rothschild representatives in New York, J. P. Morgan Co., and Kuhn, Loeb & Co. were the firms which set up the Jekyll Island Conference at which the Federal Reserve Act was created and directed the subsequent successful campaign to have the plan enacted into law by Congress, and who purchased the controlling amounts of stock in the Federal Reserve Bank of New York in 1914.

These firms had their principal officers appointed to the Federal Reserve Board of Governors and the Federal Advisory Council in 1914. In 1914, a few families (blood or business related) owning controlling stock in existing banks caused those banks to purchase controlling shares in the Federal Reserve regional banks. Examination of the charts and text in the House Banking Committee Staff Report of August, 1976 and the current stockholders list of the twelve regional Federal Reserve Banks show this same family control.

The Queen Loves War Spoils

Now let’s look at the top shareholders of the top military contractors for America, who we call the Corporate or Bankster Warlords to see what connections they might have to the British Crown’s investments.

Vanguard Group, State Street Corp, Capital Research Global Investors, Templeton Investment Counsel LLC, Barclays Bank Plc, BlackRock Investment Management (UK) Ltd., Schroder Investment Management, Capital World Investors, Bank of America Corporation, JPMorgan Chase & Co., Bank of New York Mellon Corp, Black Rock Advisors, Black Rock Fund Advisors, Old Republic International, Wellington Management Company, BlackRock Institutional Trust Company, N. A., Evercore Trust Company, N. A., FMR, LLC, , Invesco Ltd., Franklin Resources, Goldman Sachs Group Inc., T. Rowe Price Group, Inc. 

What is worth noting about this list is that you can find some of the usual suspects: Rothschilds, Rockefellers, Morgans, Warburgs, and the rest of the Bankster Warlords behind some of these names.

To make things even more complex, so that we can never figure out who is in charge, every one of these corporations owns major shares in every other corporation. They are intertwined like a grape vine. If we look closer we find that every one of these corporations conducts international business and is invested in international military ventures.

This type of “corporate warfare” is transnational. It is beyond being international or global. These companies work outside of the control of America as a nation and have stronger ties to Britain than to America. They work against Americans with their transnational economic warfare and make money from both sides of any conflict.

Essentially, these British and international corporations are war criminals just like Henry Schroder, the Brit who funded both Hitler and England.  This type of banking warfare is common throughout British history. 

The Crown’s Money-Making War Machine

Essentially, all the conspiracies about the Queen of England have some merit after following the money back to the warlord bankers who set up the U.S. Federal Reserve. But unlike most conspiracy theories suggest, the Federal Reserve regional banks are not the true culprits. The true culprits are the original investors in the corporations, listed above, who serve the military through all types of wars – physical conflicts, cyberwarfare, and economic terrorism.

It is the interwoven fabric of the investments of the war-supporting corporations that have created a system that is inbred and tied to Britain…and then to Rome. Simply through the association of the royal families of the world who are members of the Knights of Malta you have an economic intelligence community that is comprehensive insider trading at a transnational level. The monarchies must protect their financial interests and pass wealth onto their family members. That is why so many of the richest families intermarry – to keep it “all in the family.”

The richest and most powerful people in the world belong to the Knights of Malta, the Equestrian Order of the Holy Sepulchre of Jerusalem, the Order of the Garter, the Teutonic Knights and other orders that vow allegiance to the British Crown and subsequently to the Vatican. If we wish to broaden the perspective, one can add that the Society of Jesus, the Jesuits, are involved at all levels and have worked tirelessly as the soldiers of the Pope to create the ultimate “insider spy network” for the Vatican Bank.

British Private Intelligence Agencies

The UK has many private intelligence agencies who are devoted to the collection, analysis, and exploitation of information for a profit. Christopher Steele, the author of the Carter Page Dossier was a former British spy, which shows you the unethical nature of “British spying.” Sixty3, Orbis Business International, Cambridge Analytica, and many other British private intelligence agencies sell propaganda as intelligence. Often these corporations have private contracts with the U. S. military and government and maintain top secret security clearances with the United States. Britain has not shown itself to be “honest spies” as is evidenced in the Iraq “weapons of mass destruction” lies and the current British disinformation coming out of Syria.

Some US $56 billion or 70% of the US $80 billion national intelligence budget of the United States was in 2016 earmarked for the private sector. Functions previously performed by the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), National Security Agency (NSA), and other intelligence agencies are now outsourced to private British intelligence corporations. Some prominent British intelligence agencies who maintain military and government contracts with America are:

Can we really trust intelligence from a country that has provided false intelligence many times? It was British intelligence itself that spied on Trump from the NSA’s headquarters in Fort Mead. “Lie to me once, shame on you. Lie to me twice, shame on me.”

Who Really Owns and Runs the Bank of England?

When the Jesuits were suppressed by the Pope in 1773, they used their covert power over England to have the Rothschild family become guardians over the Jesuit South American stolen wealth instead of depositing it in the Vatican Bank. This action started a banking war between the Vatican and the Jesuits who used the Rothschild family as the anti-Vatican Bank.  The Rothschild’s eventually became the guardians of the Jesuit treasury in TheCityofLondon. The Rothschild’s used The Worshipful Company of Mercers to create the Bank of England which now held the Jesuit wealth stolen from South America. The Bank of England’s efforts were focused on taking over TheCityofLondonUK from Vatican control.

The Knights of Malta have never been favorites of the Jesuit Order. This hatred of the Knights of Malta increased even further in 1768 when the Knights removed the Jesuits from the Island of Malta. The Jesuits sought their revenge one year later in 1798 using Napoleon.

The Jesuits subordinated the Knights of Malta in the same year and that was the true start of the take-over of TheCityofLondonUK which was still ruled covertly by the Knights of Malta. 

If you look at St. John’s Wood where the Order of Malta are based, you will see it is the old haunt of the Knights Templar in England since the time that TheCityofLondonUK became a sovereign Nation. If you look at one of the four of the most powerful Order of Malta headquarters in Rome, you will see that the Aventine Hill is another old Templar haunt which was their original World Headquarters.

The control of the Bank of England through The Worshipful Company of Mercers is what controls the global economy. The U.S. economy is fully controlled by the Mercers and Bank of England and has been since 1868. TheCityofLondonUK controls the U.S. Economy through the Royal Institute for International Affairs which subsequently controls the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR). The CFR has set U. S. foreign policy since its inception.

TheCityofLondonUK controls the  which subsequently controls the Federal Reserve of New York, World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. TheCityofLondonUK controls the U.S. Treasury monetary policy which commands all three of those globalist organizations through the Exchange Stabilization Fund.

Queen Lizzy’s Imperial Control of America

The British Crown and the British East India Company have never left America, and in fact, the Crown Agents still do their business to this very day. They have a death grip on the U. S. economy. From data management, to corporate banking, to the rip-off of American resources of gas, uranium, gold, and every other valuable asset in the United States, American wealth feeds directly into Britain, the Bank of England, TheCityofLondonUK, and ultimately to the British Monarchy – Queen Elizabeth II herself.

The American corporate mechanism for the continued enrichment of the British Crown is the same one used for the corporate sell-out of the American Republic: corporate lobbyists controlling Congress, corporate pay-to-play through the executive branch (Department of State, etc.), and the Senior Executive Service (SES) to maintain the bureaucratic status quo that sells out to global corporatism at every turn with no-bid contracts and cronyism that clearly shows that we are subjects of the British Monarchy.

The Senior Executive Service hides in plain sight, but operates in a manner that aligns with the imperialistic intents of Serco and the numerous other corporations like British Petroleum, Shell, ICAP, British American Tobacco, SABMiller, American Standard Life, Rio Tinto, and Ixstrata among many others.

The History of Crown Agents

A Crown Agency was an administrative body of the British Empire, distinct from the Civil Service Commission of Britain or the government administration of the national entity in which it operated. These enterprises were overseen from 1833 to 1974 by the Office of the Crown Agents in London, thereafter named the Crown Agents for Overseas Governments and Administration. Crown Agents for Overseas Governments and Administrations Ltd became a private Limited company providing development services in 1996.

Crown Agencies nominally reported directly to (and were wholly owned by) the Crown, but in practice, reported to the Crown Agency Office in London, thus independent of the Colonial Office. This office became, in the late 19th century, the sole official British commercial and financial agent of all British protectorates and Crown colonies. The Colonial Office enforced a policy of sole usage of crown agencies for all purchases of goods for government use, creating a virtual monopoly over government retail supply within the colonies of the British Empire.

The Crown Agencies also became financial institutions, supplying capital, routes for investment, and pensions to all public works and government in British dependent colonies. Is it even reasonable to believe that after the American Revolution, American companies did not continue to do business with these crown companies for resources, goods and services? Life went on.

Crown Agencies trace their founding to the time of the British Empire and in 1833 the British government, hived off from the Colonial Office as a financing, stores, transport, and development office. Historians have argued that crown agencies, whose organizations operated across the British Empire in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, were the de facto administrators of British colonies. Crown Agencies wielded governmental powers through a maze of British territories, protectorates, dependencies, Mandates, and Crown Colonies which made up the British Empire of the late 19th century. After this, their mandate was reduced to “dependent” colonies (most of British Africa, India, and the West Indies), but they were given near monopoly rights over finance and supply of non-local manufactures for any public or government use. With the dissolution of the British Empire, many of these agencies reverted to control by their respective governments, became parts of the British government, or became non-governmental organizations (NGOs).

The British government incorporated the Crown Agency as a government mandated corporation tied to the Minister of Overseas Development, called the Crown Agents for Overseas Governments and Administration. In 1997, the Crown Agency was privatized. As a private limited company, the CAOGA has a number of contracts to provide governmental or para-governmental services throughout the world. Even though these organizations were “privatized” on paper, the power generally did not shift, it merely transformed into shareholder holdings and boards of directors. The term “Golden Share” developed to describe special rights given to the Queen in a stock company that gave her special preferential rights over voting and profit distribution—and thus ultimate control—like she had before.

While privatization allowed more shareholders, the Queen generally continued to control votes and profit distribution in wild disproportion to her single 10 pence voting share (Golden Share) in the mining mega company Rio Tinto PLC, for example. In addition, whenever one sees that British royalty populate a company’s board of directors, remember that these are people who pledged an oath of allegiance to the Queen first, company second.

The legal category of crown agencies still exists in some nations of the former British Empire. In most places, these have been replaced by government agencies, state-controlled companies, and (in parts of the Commonwealth) Crown Corporations. Canada and New Zealand maintain the category of government managed or owned entities called Crown Agencies.

Crown Agents International

Crown Agents International (CAI) is an international development company that works with governments, aid agencies, NGOs and companies in nearly 100 countries. Through consultancy, supply chain management and financial services, they help countries grow their economies, strengthen their health systems and improve financial management.

CAI is headquartered in Sutton, Surrey but has an established network of international offices, project offices or representatives in 40 countries.

CAI is one of the world’s leading experts in public procurement and supply chain management and they provide financial services to facilitate development, focusing on international payments and cash management, trade finance and investment management for donors, NGOs and financial institutions.

Crown Agents USA Inc.

The following descriptions of the corporation, Crown Agents USA Inc., are taken from their website, found at: http://www.crownagents.com/about-us/our-clients/us-government.

Our story begins in the 1700s, when colonial administrations employed agents to recruit people and procure and ship supplies to the colonies. Some agents had been authorized to manage British Treasury grants and they had become known (unofficially) as crown agents.

On April 1, 1833, the British government appointed the first Joint Agents General for Crown Colonies, George Baillie and Edward Barnard. Although appointed by the British Treasury‚ the Joint Agents General were accountable only to the governors of the 13 crown colonies that they served. They managed grants, raised capital, recruited personnel and shipped supplies for their clients.

Since our incorporation in the United States, we have provided technical assistance services and support to U.S. Government agencies, including the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC), Department of State (DOS), Department of Defense (DOD), and the United States Trade and Development Agency (USTDA).

We are an international development company that partners with governments, aid agencies, NGOs and companies in nearly 100 countries. We help countries grow their economies, strengthen their health systems and improve financial management. We have permanent offices in 22 countries and presence in another 18 through our project offices and representatives.

We are a limited company owned by a non-profit-making foundation. The Crown Agents Foundation is our sole shareholder and oversees our ethos and activities. The Crown Agents Board is responsible for the company’s corporate governance. We were founded in 1833 and operated as a British statutory corporation for many years before being privatized in 1997.”

Contracts with USAID

As an implementing partner of USAID, Crown Agents USA Inc. provides expertise in the areas of procurement, public financial management, logistics, health systems strengthening, private sector development, monitoring and evaluation, and agriculture. Here is a list of contracts that Crown Agents USA Inc. has with America that American’s themselves could easily accomplish:

United States Agency for International Development (USAID) contracts:

For example, here are three Crown Agents USA Inc. contracts with USAID associated with this single “Indefinite Delivery, Indefinite QUANTITY” USAID Public Financial Management contract (Read: a blank check):

Crown Agents USA Inc. Washington DC Federal Vendor Contracting Profile[1]

AIDOAAI1200038 $23.7m[2]

AIDOAAI1200038-AID391TO1500001 $6.6m[3]

AIDOAAI1200038-AIDOAATO1400007 $19m[4]

  • Worldwide: Supply Chain Management System  2005-2015
  • Worldwide: Farmer to Farmer Special Program Support  2008-2014
  • Worldwide: USAID – Deliver I & II Project, 2006-2015
  • Worldwide: Agribusiness & Agriculture Value Chain Development Assessment 2010-2014
  • Worldwide: Agricultural Knowledge and Program Support Work, 2010-2015
  • Worldwide: Climate Economic Analysis for Development, Investment, and Resilience 2014
  • Worldwide: Business Growth Initiative, 2006-2011
  • Worldwide:  Evaluation Services IQC, 2010-2015, subcontractor to AMEX International
  • Worldwide: Macroeconomic Foundations for Growth IQC, 2011-2016
  • Worldwide: Policy, Planning and Learning-Learning, Evaluation and Research 2015-2020,
  • Worldwide: Rule of Law IQC, 2013-2015, subcontractor to Democracy International
  • Worldwide:  Rural Agricultural Income and Sustainable Environment 2004-2015
  • Africa: Indoor Residual Spraying I and II IQC, 2006-2012
  • Africa (COMESA countries + Tanzania):  Support for Food Security Activities
  • Asia and Middle East: Asia and Middle East Growth Best Practices Project
  • Bangladesh: Feed the Future Design and Initiation Project, 2012-2014
  • Bangladesh: Trade Facility Activity, 2013 – 2018, subcontractor to IBI International
  • Bangladesh, Haiti, Rwanda, Tanzania, Uganda, U.S.: Feed the Future System 2011-2013
  • Egypt: Technical Assistance for Policy Reform II, 2006-2009, subcontractor to Bearingpoint
  • El Salvador: Access to Financial Services Program, 2011-2014
  • Ethiopia: Health Center Renovation and Coordination Project, 2006-2009
  • Ethiopia: Agriculture Growth Program – Agribusiness and Market Development 2011-2016,
  • Guatemala: Policy & Regulatory Support for Economic Growth Project, 2011-2015
  • Liberia: Roberts International Airport Equipment Procurement Program 2008-2010
  • Malawi:  National Distribution and Management of Long Life Insecticide Treated Nets to Public Health Facilities Nationally in Malawi, 2011-2015
  • Nigeria: Nigeria Expanded Trade and Transport Program, 2012-2016
  • Pakistan:  Support for Privatization Activity 2014
  • Rwanda:  Private Sector Driven Agricultural Growth 2014-2019
  • Tanzania: Strategies for the Prevention of Corruption Bureau, 2007
  • Tanzania: Staples Value Chain 2011-2016
  • Turkmenistan: Agriculture Technology Program, 2012-2015
  • Zambia: Production, Finance and Improved Technology Plus Program, 2012-2016

.

Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC) contracts:

  • Ghana: Financial Management and Procurement Assessment Services Project, 2005-2006
  • Honduras: Procurement Oversight/Advisory Services, 2006-2011
  • Kenya: MCC Kenya Threshold Program, 2007-2009
  • Mongolia: Procurement Agent Services, 2008-2013
  • Morocco: Procurement Services Agent and Procurement Oversight Advisor, 2009-2014
  • Namibia:  Procurement Agent Services, 2009-2010
  • Tanzania:  Procurement Agent Services and Oversight Advisory Services, 2008-2014

.

Department of State (DoS) contracts:

  • Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs Impact Evaluation for Small Business Development Centers, 2012-2015
  • Middle East, Africa, and Asia: Impact Assessment for the Global Innovation through Science and Technology Initiative, 2012-2013
  • Sustainable Buildings Initiative, 2012-2013
  • Evaluation of the International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs Transnational Crime and Rule of Law Programs in the Russian Federation, 2012-2013
  • Bureau of Economic and Business Affairs M&E of Bureau Programs, Projects, and Activities Agricultural Biotechnology Outreach Funds, 2012-2013
  • Office of Weapons Removal and Abatement, Bureau of Political Military Affairs Program Evaluation, Balkans, 2012-2013
  • Office of Environmental Quality and Transboundary Issues Mercury Program Evaluation, 2013-2014
  • Evaluation of the Nexus Dialogue on Water Infrastructure Solutions, 2014-2015
  • El Salvador and Mexico: Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs Impact Evaluation for Small Business Development Centers, 2012-2015

.

Department of Defense (DoD) & United States Trade and Development Agency (USTDA) contracts:

  • Vietnam:  USTDA National Single Window Customs Project, 2012
  • Global: DOD’s Cooperative Threat Reduction Integration Contract II IDIQ, Subcontractor to Raytheon, 2011-2016
  • Botswana: USTDA Procurement Advisory Services to the Ministry of Minerals, Energy and Water Resources, 2015

 

British Control of American Uranium Enrichment

Another British corporation that has taken over the uranium enrichment market in America is the URENCO Group that has gone to great extremes to hide the fact that Britain, Holland and Germany own and run the largest uranium plant in America. The URENCO Group is a nuclear fuel company operating several uranium enrichment plants in Germany, the Netherlands, United States, and United Kingdom. It supplies nuclear power stations in about 15 countries, and has a 29% share of the global market for enrichment services in 2011. URENCO uses centrifuge enrichment technology in New Mexico subsidized by U. S. tax payers.

In July 2012, it was reported that a sale of the government interests of URENCO was being sought. URENCO, headquartered in Stoke Poges in Buckinghamshire and registered in the UK, is one third owned by the UK government, one third by the Dutch government, the rest by two major German utilities, E.ON and RWE (one sixth each).

URENCO also owns a 50% interest in Enrichment Technology Company (ETC), a company jointly owned with Areva. ETC provides enrichment-plant design services and gas-centrifuge technology for enrichment plants through its subsidiaries in the UK (Capenhurst), Germany (Gronau and Jülich), the Netherlands (Almelo), France (Tricastin) and the U.S. (Eunice, New Mexico). 

URENCO USA

Somehow, the British owned URENCO company has the uranium market cornered in America. Located in southeastern New Mexico, the URENCO USA facility began operations on June 11, 2010. URENCO USA is the first enrichment facility to be built in the United States in 30 years and the first ever using centrifuge enrichment technology.

URENCO uses the U. S. National Enrichment Facility (NEF) as its plant for the enrichment of uranium in Eunice, New Mexico. The NEF is operated by Louisiana Energy Services (LES), which is in turn owned by the URENCO Group, just to make sure it looks like an American company. Notice the elaborate ownership of this facility hides who actually owns and benefits from this facility. Foreign nations directly benefit through the profits after U. S. tax payers pay two/thirds of the cost of building it.

Since the Dedication Ceremony in October 2008, the company has grown to 236 employees with an annual payroll of USD $23 million. At full capacity, NEF can provide 50% of the current enriched uranium demand for civilian nuclear power plants in the U.S. The NEF began operations in June 2010. The original proposed budget was USD $1.5 billion, but this increased to USD $3 billion for an enlarged facility capable of 5.9 million SWU at full capacity.

https://aim4truthblog.files.wordpress.com/2018/04/urenko-plant.jpg

URENCO Corruption

In the 1970s, Dr. Abdul Qadeer Khan who worked for a subcontractor of URENCO in Almelo, brought stolen drawings of the centrifuges operated by URENCO to Pakistan. In the early 1974, Dr. Khan joined the uranium enrichment program and, within a short span of time, established a highly advanced uranium enrichment facility near Islamabad.

In May 1985, the United Nations Council for Namibia decided to take legal action against URENCO for breaching UNCN Decree No. 1, which prohibited any exploitation of Namibia’s natural resources under apartheid South Africa, because URENCO had been importing uranium ore from the Rössing mine in Namibia.

According to Greenpeace, URENCO has a standing contract with Russia for the disposal of radioactive waste. In reality, these contracts do not relate to the disposal of waste, but to the sale of depleted uranium tails, which are re-enriched to natural uranium equivalent. As the enricher, Russia would be the owner of any radioactive waste that results from this process. In March 2009, there were protests about the largest-ever load of depleted uranium hexafluoride being transported from Germany to the Siberian town Seversk.

British Petroleum’s U.S. Retail

BP might as well stand for “British Pirates” if you look at the record of a company that flourishes in America, the home of the largest oil companies in the world, and pollutes and destroys environment in a country they don’t live in. BP has a poor safety record and it looks like they just don’t care about America’s ecosystem. These British Pirates, along with Shell, have fleeced America in every way concerning oil, from drilling to gas stations. From New York to San Francisco, British Petroleum has a network of retail stations that provide Americans with fuels, lubricants and other products essential to modern transportation. The company’s nationwide retail presence includes over 7,100 BP and ARCO branded gas stations, along with close to 1,000 convenience stores.

In 2016, BP delivered 7.3 billion gallons of BP-branded fuel to its U.S. customers. BP’s upstream operating segment includes production from Prudhoe Bay area in Alaska and four production platforms in deep-water Gulf of Mexico, where BP is the leading leaseholder. In 2016, BP produced 676,000 barrels of oil per day, making the company one of America’s largest oil and natural gas producers.

How is it possible in America that U. S. governmental agencies allow the British invasion of our land, waters, and streets. There is no reason that U. S. oil rights should go to a foreign country for their profit. American oil should be processed and sold by American companies not added to the portfolio of the Queen of England.

BP Crimes

BP PLC is the company responsible for the 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil spill. BP paid a record $20.8 billion to the US government to cover damages caused by the disaster. It is considered the largest settlement with a single entity in American history. Apart from this settlement, BP has spent a reported $28 billion on cleanup and compensation for their criminal negligence.

The Deepwater Horizon disaster is considered by many to be the worst oil spill in US history. The spill occurred when an offshore oil rig exploded in the Gulf of Mexico, dumping 4.9 million barrels of oil into the surrounding waters. The explosion killed 11 people and devastated marine wildlife in the area.

BP was found to be in gross negligence for not testing the only safety measure they had available for deep-water drilling accidents. BP continued to lie about their unpreparedness and criminal cover-up. The massive oil slick still exists and has yet to be properly managed or cleaned up. America will never fully recover from this disaster. BP (British Pirates) carelessness for gross profits cost America more than money can recover.

Shell Oil Company

Shell Oil Company is the United States-based wholly owned subsidiary of Royal Dutch Shell, a multinational oil company of Anglo-Dutch origins, which is amongst the largest oil companies in the world. Shell Oil is wholly owned by British interests. Approximately 22,000 Shell employees are based in the U.S. The U.S. headquarters are in Houston, Texas. Shell Oil Company, including its consolidated companies and its share in equity companies, is one of America’s largest oil and natural gas producers, natural gas marketers, gasoline marketers and petrochemical manufacturers.

Shell is the market leader through approximately 25,000 Shell-branded gas stations in the U.S. which also serve as Shell’s most visible public presence. At its gas stations Shell provides diesel fuel, gasoline and LPG. Shell Oil Company was a 50/50 partner with the Saudi Arabian government-owned oil company Saudi Aramco in Motiva Enterprises, a refining and marketing joint venture which owns and operates three oil refineries on the Gulf Coast of the United States.

Shell products include oils, fuels, and car services as well as exploration, production, and refining of petroleum products. The Shell Oil Refinery in Martinez, California, the first Shell refinery in the United States, supplies Shell and Texaco stations in the West and Midwest.

After Texaco merged with Chevron in 2001, Shell purchased Texaco’s shares in the joint ventures. In 2002, Shell began converting these Texaco stations to the Shell brand, a process that was to be completed by June 2004 and was called “the largest retail re-branding initiative in American business history.”

Shell’s Crimes

Shell Puget Sound Refinery, Anacortes, Washington, was fined $291,000 from 2006 to 2010 for violations of the Clean Air Act making it the second most-fined violator in the Pacific Northwest. As of 2011, it was listed as “high priority violator” since 2008.

In 2008, a lawsuit was filed against Shell Oil Company for Clean Air Act violation. Shell Deer Park facility, 20 miles east of Houston, was the nation’s eighth-largest oil refinery and one of the world’s largest petrochemical producers. The facility was also the second largest source of air pollution in Harris County, which ranked among the lowest in the nation in several measures of air quality.

Between 1978 and 1995, Shell Oil produced polybutylene pipes, which corrode when exposed to chlorine. A class action lawsuit was filed in 1995 against Shell Oil when the polybutylene pipes caused flooding in many households in the U.S. and Canada. The settlement required Shell Oil to pay for the re-installation of piping for millions of houses for claims filed through May 2009.

British American Tobacco

British American Tobacco plc (BAT) is a British multinational tobacco company headquartered in London. It is the largest publicly traded tobacco company in the world. BAT has a primary listing on the London Stock Exchange. BAT has a market-leading position in over 50 countries and operations in around 180 countries. Its four largest-selling brands are its native brand Dunhill and US brands Lucky Strike, Kent and Pall Mall, others the company markets include Benson & Hedges and Rothmans.

The company was formed in 1902, when the United Kingdom’s Imperial Tobacco Company and the United States’ American Tobacco Company agreed to form a joint venture, the British-American Tobacco Company Ltd. In 1911, the American Tobacco Company sold its share of the company. Imperial Tobacco gradually reduced its shareholding, but it was not until 1980 that it divested its remaining interests in the company.

In July 2004 the U.S. business of British American Tobacco (Brown & Williamson) was combined with that of R. J. Reynolds Tobacco Company (R. J. Reynolds), under the R. J. Reynolds name. R. J. Reynolds and Brown & Williamson were the second and third-ranking U.S. tobacco companies prior to the combination. When they combined, R. J. Reynolds became a subsidiary of Reynolds American, with BAT holding a 42% share.

In 2017, BAT bought the remaining 57.8 percent of U.S. cigarette maker Reynolds American in a $49.4 billion takeover that would create the world’s biggest listed tobacco company with brands including Newport, Lucky Strike and Pall Mall.

Over six million people worldwide die to tobacco death each year. The British don’t seem to mind that this industry kills more people per year than all the wars combined. There have been no class action suit against BAT in the UK.

ICAP – the World’s Largest Interdealer Broker

ICAP was the world’s largest interdealer broker for over-the-counter (OTC) trading. In 2016, ICAP sold its global broker business to the British brokerage firm Tullett Prebon, which retained the “ICAP” brand, and ICAP rebranded the remaining, non-brokerage part of the business as NEX Group.

ICAP had daily transaction volume of more than $2.3 trillion at 50 locations in 32 countries, and offered both voice-driven and electronic brokerage systems plus post-trade services. It provided wholesale brokerage on a range of interest rates, credit derivatives, commodities, foreign exchange, emerging markets, equities and equity derivatives. More than 40 percent of its trading occurred on its two electronic trading platforms, BrokerTec and EBS, which merged to become EBS BrokerTec.

ICAP offers a range of OTC (over-the-counter) financial products and services in energy, foreign exchange, interest rates, credit and equity markets and indices. For each of these asset classes, ICAP’s electronic capability gives customers the choice to enter prices and execute trades electronically, directly via one of ICAP’s electronic trading systems, or to engage with brokers to identify and help negotiate trades. According to its 2013 Annual Report. Its electronic broking volume for 2013 reached $728.3 billion.

ICAP Becomes TP ICAP

TP ICAP plc is a global firm of professional intermediaries that operates in the world’s financial, energy and commodities markets. It is listed on the London Stock Exchange and is a constituent of the FTSE 250 Index. In November 2015, the company agreed to terms with ICAP (now known as NEX Group) to acquire their global hybrid voice broking and information business. Using the name of the acquired business the company changed its name from Tullett Prebon plc to TP ICAP plc on 30 December 2016.

ICAP Crimes

On September 25, 2013, ICAP was fined a total of $87 million, including a $65 million settlement with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) and a $22 million settlement with Britain’s Financial Conduct Authority as part of an investigation into the manipulation of the LIBOR benchmark interest rate. The ICAP fine was in addition to settlements paid by British lenders Barclays and the Royal Bank of Scotland, as well as UBS, of Switzerland, of a combined $2.5 billion related to the LIBOR scandal. ICAP was the first interdealer broker fined for rigging the Libor.

In June 2014 ICAP received an antitrust complaint from the EU’s antitrust arm alleging it facilitated a cartel to manipulate yen Libor. The complaint alleged that “ICAP acted as a facilitator to breaches of EU competition law by certain banks in relation to yen Libor for isolated periods between 2007 and 2010.”

The UK and Silicon Valley

The UK is the leading European destination for Silicon Valley investors, with British tech companies raising more venture capital from Bay area VCs than any other European country. According to the investment data released by London & Partners, over the last five years UK tech companies have received more venture capital investment from West Coast investors than France, Germany and Ireland combined.

Silicon Valley investors continue to pump large sums of money into UK tech companies despite Brexit, with 2017 already seeing a record $1.13 billion raised since the beginning of the year. The findings have been released to mark the start of Silicon Valley Comes to the UK, a week-long series of events bringing together leading figures from the Bay area and UK tech scenes.

Further analysis of the investment data reveals that London tech companies received the majority of venture capital investment from the Bay area, accounting for over 90% ($1.04bn) of the total amount raised by UK tech companies this year. Over the last five years, London tech firms have also raised considerably more capital ($2.5bn) than their European counterparts.

London’s thriving VC market has been boosted by the number of unicorn companies based in the capital, with separate research from investment firm GP Bullhound revealing that London is home to more unicorns than any other European city. Fresh analysis of its 2017 Titans of Tech report found that London accounts for almost one third of all unicorns in Europe. With 17 out of the 53 unicorns founded in London.

Rio Tinto and Resource Fleecing

Rio Tinto Energy America (RTEA) was a wholly owned American subsidiary of the England and Australia-based mining giant, the Rio Tinto Group, headquartered in Gillette, Wyoming, United States. The company, previously known as Kennecott Energy after another of Rio Tinto’s American subsidiaries, was formed in 1993 when Rio Tinto purchased NERCO and placed that company’s Spring Creek coal mine and Antelope coal mine under the RTEA umbrella. Subsequent acquisitions included the Cordero Mining Company, the Colowyo Coal Company, and the Jacobs Ranch coal mine. RTEA operated four mines  in Wyoming and Montana, supplying fuel for the generation of approximately 6% of the United States’ electricity consumption. The RTEA mines were spun off to Cloud Peak Energy in 2010.

Boron

The heart of Rio Tinto Borates’ business is the open-pit mine in Boron, California, one of two world-class borate deposits on the planet. Company founders began mining borates in 1872. What began as an underground mine was transformed into an open pit mine in 1957.

Resolution

The Resolution Copper project is a proposed copper mine that can supply the world with the copper it needs to support ongoing technological and environmental innovation. The project will generate sustainable benefits for Arizona, creating several thousand direct and indirect jobs and is expected to have an economic value of several billion dollars over the estimated life of the mine.

Rio Tinto Kennecott

Rio Tinto Kennecott is a fully integrated mining operation located just outside Salt Lake City, Utah, US. Kennecott is a wholly owned subsidiary of Rio Tinto. For more than 110 years, Kennecott has been mining and processing minerals from the rich orebody of the Bingham Canyon Mine. In 1989, Rio Tinto acquired the Bingham Canyon Mine and other facilities in the Salt Lake Valley.

Rio Tinto Crimes

The top U.S. securities regulator rejected arguments by Rio Tinto Plc and two former top executives that its civil lawsuit claiming they concealed the plunging value of coal assets owned by the big Anglo-Australian mining company should be dismissed. In letters filed with the U.S. District Court in Manhattan, the Securities and Exchange Commission said its complaint adequately alleged that fraud occurred, and that Rio Tinto, former Chief Executive Thomas Albanese and former Chief Financial Officer Guy Elliott intended to deceive investors.

The SEC accused Rio Tinto of ignoring the need to write down most of the value of Mozambique coal assets it had bought for $3.7 billion in April 2011, while it was raising roughly $5.5 billion from U.S. investors. Rio Tinto wrote off most of the value in January 2013, and sold the assets in late 2014 for just $50 million. It said that had Rio Tinto properly written down the assets, its net earnings for the first half of 2012 would have been reduced by more than 50 percent.

Canadian CGI Group Inc.

The total price tag for ObamaCare’s main enrollment portal cost American’s more than $2 billion, according to an analysis by Bloomberg Government. The new total includes efforts to construct and then fix HealthCare.gov after serious technical problems threatened to shutter the site last fall.

Who was the pathetic corporation that gouged Americans? A Canadian company called CGI – Consultants to Government and Industries. Don’t forget, the British Crown owns large stakes in most Canadian national businesses due to being part of the British Commonwealth. The Queen always has her first choice of stocks in any Commonwealth Country – especially Canada.

Americans were not happy with the exorbitant costs charged by CGI, nor the fact that a Canadian company ripped-off U. S. tax-payers and created an ineffective portal that a high school student could have done a better job creating. Congressman Issa had this to say about the debacle:

“Two billion dollars is an awful lot to pay for a website with lingering security issues that transfers the costs of healthcare from customers to taxpayers,” said House Oversight Committee Chairman Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) in a statement.

“If this were private enterprise, the CEO would have been fired and company shareholders would be suing,” he added. “But in this Administration, there’s no high-level accountability and the focus remains fixated on signing up as many Americans as possible regardless of the cost, the security risks, or the impact on the quality of healthcare for all Americans.”

CGI Group Inc. (Consultants to Government and Industries), more commonly known as CGI, is a Canadian global information technology consulting, systems integration, outsourcing, and solutions company headquartered in Montreal, Quebec, Canada. CGI purchased American Management Systems (AMS) for $858 million in 2004, which grew CGI’s presence in the United States.

CGI Federal’s 2010 acquisition of Stanley, Inc. for $1.07 billion almost doubled CGI’s presence in the United States, and expanded CGI into defense and intelligence contracts. In 2012, CGI acquired Logica for $2.7 billion Canadian, making CGI the fifth-largest independent business processes and IT services provider in the world, and the biggest tech firm in Canada.

In 2016 CGI ranked No. 955 on the Forbes Forbes Global 2000. At the time CGI had assets worth CAD $20.9 billion, annual sales of $10.7 billion, and a market value of $9.6 billion. As of 2017, CGI is based in forty countries with around 400 offices, and employs approximately 70,000 people. As much as 29% of CGI’s business comes from the United States.

Serco – British Control Our Sensitive Data

Queen Elizabeth II, owns and controls U. S. data management, corporate banking, resources of gas, uranium, gold, and many strategic resources and systems in the United States. This system of control is called SERCO, and it is essentially a Crown Agent.

Serco is not only an enemy of the United States, but an enemy of countries and people around the world. For example, did you know that the U. S. Patent Office is controlled by Serco? That’s right, a BRITISH based company controls the creative efforts of American entrepreneurs and creators. Serco was the company awarded the Obamacare data management system that cost America’s over $2 billion.

That’s right. SES employees in charge of selecting contracts for this lucrative data management system couldn’t find any U.S. based companies to do the work. Instead they cherry-picked their buddies at British owned and controlled Serco to deliver Obamacare management.

Here are a few highlights of what Serco does already in our government. To our friends in other parts of the world, don’t be surprised when you see similar structures in your own country run by the British Monarch through Serco:

  • Serco manages all patents for the U. S. Patent and Trademark Office. Brits have the first shot at stealing American’s intellectual property rights. This is shocking but true.
  • Serco controls the most sensitive data management systems in all branches of the military, federal government, and state and local municipalities.
  • Serco controls air traffic management, airlines security, airport management and all aspects of ticketing, visa data management, and timetable management.
  • Serco is called, “the largest company no one has ever heard of.”
  • Serco’s efficiency rating in England, Canada, and Australia is below 65% and many lawsuits have been filed against the company for egregious fraud and mismanagement.
  • Serco was paid $1.2 billion to management the data of Obamacare — British company handling American’s private medical information.

 Serco goes by many names, so always look under the hood in their corporate documents to find its trail back to Queen Lizzie. In America, it operates as Serco Inc. and claims on its website that it “is a leading provider of professional, technology, and management services for the federal government.” Headquartered in Reston, Virginia, Serco Inc. has approximately 10,000 employees, annual revenue of $2.5 billion, and is ranked in the top 35 of the largest federal prime contractors.

Piercing the corporate veil, we find that Serco Inc. is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Serco Group plc, a $7 billion international business that works with government and public services around the world.

Many researchers say that Serco runs the United Kingdom (UK), the United States, Canada, and Australia. Serco has over 60,000 people in 35 countries across the world. To our international readers, it is highly doubtful that they are not operating in your country.

Serco is a leading provider of public services of all types. Serco operates internationally across five sectors and four geographies: defense, justice, immigration, transportation, health and human services. Its services are delivered in UK, Europe, North America, Asia Pacific, and the Middle East.  

Serco delivers records management and processing support services for many U. S. government agencies. Major programs include processing and classifying of patent applications for the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office; records management and process of applications and petitions at U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services’ Service Centers; processing visa applications at the U.S. Department of State’s National Visa Center and Kentucky Consular Center; and, records management services at the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services’ National Benefits Center, among many others.

Ninety percent of Serco’s business is with the federal government with 10,000 workers across 45 states. Serco’s experience is in paper pushing, records management, processing applications, processing visas, handling patents with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. There are more than 60 million records that Serco handles for the Department of Homeland Security.

Serco Inc. is indeed part of Serco Group, an international contracting firm headquartered near London and partly owned by the UK government itself. Serco Inc. is the North America division of Serco Group, plc. In North America, Serco Inc. serves federal, state and local governments, along with the Canadian government and commercial customers, and over 14,000 in North Americas.

Digest that for a moment: U.S. federal records, personal medical records, patents, and visas are held by a company owned and directed by the British Monarch. Its “soldiers on the ground” are employees of SES. These SES employees guarantee that Serco gets the contracts and then manages and oversees their continued involvement.

Th UK is suing Serco for the alleged theft of $80 billion dollars. UK officials have been investigating Serco and found that the company is only effective 65% of the time. Serco has been found out to be corrupt from top to bottom. Many mistakes of data management have also happened in the United States that have caused terrible disasters and multiple deaths. Serco manages services for the military and government that are incredibly sensitive and should be trusted to no one else but the United States of America.

https://aim4truthblog.files.wordpress.com/2018/04/profile_sercospider1.jpg?w=600&h=314

TENTACLES OF SERCO STRANGLE AMERICA

Finally Winning the American Revolution

We are not a sovereign nation with our arrangement with the British government and UK based corporations. It seems that we are still subjects of the British Monarchy in many ways.

The American corporate mechanism for the continued enrichment of the British Crown is the same one used for the corporate sell-out of the American Republic – corporate lobbyists controlling Congress, corporate pay-to-play through the executive branch (such as Hillary’s Department of State), and the Senior Executive Service (SES) to maintain the bureaucratic status quo, selling out to global corporatism at every turn with no bid contracts and cronyism.

The Senior Executive Service and Serco are the people and organizational systems that the British Monarchy uses to control America through economic cronyism that bolsters the continued economic slavery of Americans to foreign powers.

The Senior Executive Service aligns with the imperialistic intents of Serco and the numerous other corporations that we have described in this intelligence report (BP, Shell, ICAP, British American Tobacco, Rio Tinto, etc).

It is time to send the Red Coats running home to Queen Lizzie and finally end the American Revolution against British tyranny. It is time to notice that the UK is not our friend and we should not be sharing intelligence in the Five Eyes Community (UK, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, USA).

We need to bring our wealth back home to America and stop using tax payer dollars to fund Crown Agents in whatever form they take. American freedom and independence does not need the dead weight of archaic monarchies that believe they should always get their “golden share” before the commoners get their crumbs.

We must throw off the shackles that have tied the British Crown to American economic affairs. We do not need to pay taxes to the Crown any longer. We simply must choose American companies to do American work and stop the Senior Executive Service from giving higher priority to Crown Agents and British corporate interests.

[1] Crown Agents USA Inc. Washington DC. (Accessed Apr. 17, 2018). Federal Vendor Contracting Profile via GovTribe. USAID.

[2] Crown Agents USA Inc. Wasington DC. (Sep. 30, 2012). Contract No. AIDOAAI1200038, $23.7m, thru Sep. 29, 2020 (7 years), PUBLIC FINANCIAL MANAGMENT: PUBLIC FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT (PFM) INDEFINITE DELIVERY INDEFINITE QUANTITY (IDIQ) CONTRACT – TO CROWN AGENTS via GovTribe. USAID.

[3] Crown Agents USA Inc. Washington DC. (Dec. 24, 2014). Contract No. AIDOAAI1200038-AID391TO1500001, $6m, thru Feb. 22, 2018 (3 years), SUPPORT FOR PRIVATIZATION ACTIVITY: IN SEPTEMBER 2013, THE GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN (GOP) AND THE INTERNATIONAL MONETARY FUND (IMF) REACHED AGREEMENT ON A THREE-YEAR, $ 6.68 BILLION EXTENDED FUND FACILITY (EFF). Vendor Contacts: Anne C. Sattgast, Joe G Lentini. Via GovTribe. USAID.

[4] Crown Agents USA Inc. Washington DC. (May 19, 2014). Contract No. AIDOAAI1200038-AIDOAATO1400007, $19m, thru Sep. 29, 2018 (4 years), PUBLIC FINANCIAL MANAGMENT: THIS ACTION PROVIDES GCC OFFICE FUNDING FOR A NEW EP-MANAGED TASK ORDER NAMED CEADIR – CLIMATE ECONOMIC ANALYSIS FOR DEVELOPMENT, INVESTMENT AND RESILIENCE UNDER THE PUBLIC FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT (PFM) IDIQ. Vendor Contacts: Anne C. Sattgast, Joe G Lentini. Via GovTribe. USAID.

Source: Aim4Truth.org

Situational Assessment 2017: Trump Edition

In 2015, I took a swing at assessing the shape and state of our global challenges. Looking back, that essay is still well worth a read, but it is high time for an update.

While many things have changed in the world in the past two years, 2016 saw what looks like a phase transition in the political domain. While the overall phenomenon is global in scale and includes Brexit and other movements throughout Europe, I want to focus specifically on the victory of the “Trump Insurgency” and drill down into detail on how this state change will play out.

I use John Robb’s term “Trump Insurgency” here to highlight the fact that the election of 2016 was not an example of “ordinary politics”. Anyone who fails to understand this is going to be making significant errors. For example, the 2016 election is not comparable to the 2000 election (e.g., merely a “close” election) nor to the 1980 election (e.g., an “ideological transition” election). While it is tempting to compare it to 1860, I’m not sure that is a good match either.

In fact, as I go back and try to do pattern matching, the only real pattern I can find is the 1776 “election” (AKA the American Revolution). In other words, while 2016 still formally looked like politics, what is really going on here is a revolutionary war. For now this is war using memes rather than bullets, but war is much more than a metaphor.

This war is about much more than ideology, money or power. Even the participants likely do not fully understand the stakes. At a deep level, we are right in the middle of an existential conflict between two entirely different and incompatible ways of forming “collective intelligence”. This is a deep point and will likely be confusing. So I’m going to take it slow and below will walk through a series of “fronts” of the war that I see playing out over the next several years. This is a pretty tactical assessment and should make sense and be useful to anyone. I’ll get to the deep point last — and will be going way out there in an effort to grasp “what is really going on”. I’ll definitely miss wildly, but with any luck, the total journey will be worth the time.

https://cdn-images-1.medium.com/max/1000/1*3tgRmWs8Kgm9ZFAnvqGBhA.jpeg

Front One: Communications Infrastructure.

All modern war fighters know that the first step of any conflict is to disrupt the enemy’s communications and control infrastructure.

Our legacy sense making system was largely composed of and dominated by a small set of communications channels. These included the largest newspapers (e.g., NYT and Washington Post) and television networks (e.g., CNN, CBS, Fox, etc.). Until very recently, effectively all sense making was mediated by these channels and, as a consequence, these channels delivered a highly effective mechanism for coordinated messaging and control. A sizable fraction of the power, influence and effectiveness of the last-stage power elites (e.g., the neocon alliances in both the Democratic and Republican parties) was due to their mastery at utilizing these legacy channels.

It is important for anyone planning in the contemporary environment to recognize that the activities of the Trump Insurgency are entirely different to all previous actors. Rather than endeavoring to establish control over the legacy infrastructure, the Trump Insurgency is in the process of destroying it entirely and replacing it with a very different architecture. One that is intrinsically compatible with its own form of collective intelligence.

It is clear to me that the Insurgency is engaged in “total war”. They are simultaneously attacking the legacy power structures on multiple fronts (access, business viability and, in particular, legitimacy) while innovating entirely novel approaches to the problem of large scale communications and control (e.g., direct tweets from POTUS). Their intent is not to play with or even dominate the legacy media — but to eliminate them from the field entirely and to replace them with something else altogether.

This approach is strategically optimal. The Trump Insurgency represents a novel model of collective intelligence in general. It is the first truly viable approach that is connected directly with the emergent decentralized attractor that has been driving technical/economic disruption for the last several decades. This form of governance is structurally incompatible with the legacy media architecture. It is intrinsically dissonant with the kind of top-down, slow, controlled, synchronized approach of the old media. It therefore both must dismantle this architecture and replace it with one that is in synch with its mode of operation and, thereby, benefits massively by hamstringing any collective intelligence that works in the old top-down fashion (i.e., all existing forces currently at play).

To use a concept from Gilles Deleuze, the Trump Insurgency is a nomadic war machine and it is in the process of smoothing the space of communication. To use a simpler metaphor, if you imagine the Trump Insurgency as highly effective desert guerrillas, they are currently in the process of turning everything into a desert. The Establishment, optimized for “jungle conflict”, is going to have a hard time.

From where I sit, it seems evident that the Insurgency’s ability to read-plan-react (their “OODA loop”) is simply of a higher order than the legacy power structures. For at least the past 18 months, the Insurgency has been running circles around the the Establishment and the old media. Accordingly, I fully expect the Insurgency to win this fight. Specifically, for all functional purposes, I expect the memetic efficacy of the New York Times, CNN, the Washington Post, MSNBC and related channels to be near zero within the next two to four years. I would not be surprised to see several of these entities actually out of business.

Note, the relative position of “new media” such as Twitter, Facebook and YouTube is harder to predict. I suspect that most of the important conflict of this front will take place here. Right now, all of new media is controlled by forces broadly opposed to the Insurgency. Yet the Insurgency must establish dominance on this territory. They can accomplish this either by capturing these existing platforms (aka “bend the knee” capitulation) or by moving the center of power to new platforms that are aligned with the Insurgency (e.g., gab.ai replacing Twitter). If you think that this latter is highly unlikely, I strongly urge you to reexamine your models and assumptions.

My sense is that the decisive decision in this conflict is whether the “new media” remain coupled to the legacy power structures (and their OODA loops) or decouple and enter into a direct conflict for “decentralized supremacy” (see my last point below). If they choose the former, they will lose. If they choose the latter, the outcome is hard to predict.

https://cdn-images-1.medium.com/max/1000/1*PkljSuYBIOpX4GqBrvNftw.png

Front Two: The Deep State

In ordinary politics, an elected candidate is expected to integrate with and make relatively small fine-tuning changes to the existing state apparatus and the mass of career bureaucrats that make up most of the actual machinery of government (AKA the “deep state”). Thus, while the Obama Administration might differ quite significantly from the Bush Administration in political theory and intent, the actual impact of theses differences on the real trajectory of the “ship of state” is relatively small.

My assessment is that the Trump Insurgency has identified the Deep State itself as its central antagonist and is engaged in a direct existential conflict with it.

Normally this would be an easy win for the Deep State. However, I expect this front to be the most challenging, uncertain and dangerous of the war. The Deep State is massive, has access to vast resources and capabilities and has been in the business of controlling power for decades. But two things are moving in the Insurgency’s favor.

First, the Deep State appears to be fragmented. For example, the “Russian Hacking” scenario of the past two months looks surprisingly uncoordinated and incompetent. I don’t know exactly what is going on here, but it is clearly not the product of a unified and smoothly operating Deep State.

Second, it seems highly likely that the Deep State is prepared to fight “the last war” while the Insurgency is bringing an entirely different kind of fight. The Deep State developed in and for the 20th Century. You might say that they are experts at fighting Trench Warfare. But this is the 21st Century and the Insurgency has innovated Blitzkrieg.

Let’s take a look at the “fake news” meme for example. This has all the earmarks of a Deep State initiative. Carefully planned, highly coordinated, coming from all authoritative directions, strategically targeted. My read is that this was a Deep State response to the Communications Infrastructure fight. But it looks like this initiative has not only failed, but that the Insurgency has been able to leverage its decisive OODA loop advantages to turn the entire thing around and make “fake news” its own tool. How? By moving rapidly, unconventionally, in a very decentralized fashion and with complete commitment to victory.

If my read is correct, the balance of the struggle between the Deep State and the Insurgency will be determined by how quickly the Deep State can dispense with old and dysfunctional doctrine and innovate novel approaches that are adequate to the war. In other words, is this the Western Front (France falling in six weeks) or the Eastern Front (the USSR bleeding and giving ground until it could innovate a new war machine that could out compete the Wehrmacht).

If my read of the situation is correct (which, of course, it very well may not be), then the Deep State would be ill advised indeed to undertake any major efforts in the next 12–24 months. For example, an “impeach Trump” initiative, would almost certainly be an enormous strategic disaster. In spite of the apparent strength of the Deep State, the Insurgency’s superior OODA loop would likely result in an Insurgency victory in this fight — and victory here would greatly strengthen the Insurgency’s position. (Can you say “Emperor Trump?)

From the opposite direction, the Insurgency would be well advised to Blitzkrieg. Right now it has the advantage of an approach and a model that its opponent doesn’t understand and can’t react to effectively. But the Deep State is deep. Given time it could learn how to win this fight. If the Insurgency wants to win, it needs to radically reduce the Deep State’s strategic agency quickly. This means moving fast and moving decisively.

I cannot overstate how deeply dangerous this fight is. Classically, when a long-standing hegemony (cf “Pax Americana) is weakened and distracted by intra-elite conflict, rivals like Russia and China will see an opportunity to move from a hegemonic to a multi-polar world and can be tempted into adventurism. In these conditions, even the slightest mistake can push the system into nearly catastrophic conflict.

https://cdn-images-1.medium.com/max/800/1*CrO5NGy8YLsV5ew0rO9w0w.jpeg

Front Three: Globalism

Anti-globalist rhetoric was one of the most enduring and central features of the Trump campaign. Indeed, if Trump clearly stood for anything, resisting the “false song of globalism” was it. And all evidence in the post-election environment is that the Trump Insurgency will indeed be actively anti-globalist.

What is flat out astounding is the relative ease with which Trump has been able to cut through globalist Gordian Knots. For half a decade, the Trans-Pacific Partnership was an unstoppable juggernaut. Until, that is, Trump decided to end it. Perhaps this is evidence of a “below the surface” weakness that made TPP a paper tiger. Perhaps it is evidence of the relative balance of power between nationalist and globalist institutions. At least when the nationalist institution is the United States. (Compare the Greeks vis a vis the EU). Perhaps it is evidence of a larger scale anti-globalist conflict that has been raging for nearly a decade and has been surfacing all over the place (Brexit, Trump, Le Pen, etc.).

In any event, it is a significant victory and I am certain that it will embolden the Insurgency. At this point, I expect the Insurgency to cut deep into globalist power institutions (the World Bank, the UN, various treaty organizations) and, more importantly, globalist-allied national institutions like the Federal Reserve. The Globalists have an odd connection to power. Generally, they must move through influence and threat to elites, with a non-trivial amount of mass level propaganda to smooth the way. The Insurgency is broadly immune to globalist propaganda, the Insurgency elites seem unlikely to play ball with globalist elites or to back down under threat. At this point, I see only two real moves available to the globalists. 1) economic destabilization hoping to turn “the people” against the Insurgency; 2) some kind of some kind of social/military destabilization.

But I don’t give the globalists much of a chance. Of all of the major world powers, only the EU is currently dominated by globalists, and with the victory of Brexit and the surge of nationalism in France, the Netherlands, etc., even the Eurocrats are on the run.

By moving quickly and decisively against the Deep State allies of globalism at home and erecting nationalist resilience to global institutional influence (e.g, high tariffs and protectionist monetary policy), combined with shaping a narrative that points all bad economic news directly at globalists, the Insurgency might well be able to cut most globalist power off at the knees.

Notably, even large multi-national corporations — until recently appearing to be pulling the strings of political policy — seem to be rapidly capitulating to the Insurgency. The two major globalist forces that have not yet been publicly tested are the energy companies and the banks. What will happen here remains to be seen. A cynic might suggest that the Insurgency itself is only superficially populist and in fact really simply represents the interests of Energy and Banks against other elites. That cynic might be right, we shall see.

The net-net result of this front will be a significant weakening of the post-War global institutional order and a rebalancing of power along not yet fully understood nationalist alignments. It is not clear what effect this change will have. For example, one might expect “global scale” issues like climate disruption or terrorism to lose focus and efficacy — but that isn’t clear. It is certainly plausible that nation-to-nation alliances can make significant forward progress in even these areas of interest. Particularly if you assume that globalist agendas were extracting value from global scale crises rather than resolving them.

Moreover, there is no reason to believe that a multi-polar nationalism will be less stable over the long term than a hegemony. History has certainly cut both ways. Perhaps what is most clear is this: the period of transition as globalist forces struggle to maintain power while nationalist forces are not yet in any form of stable equilibrium with each-other is a moment (possibly lasting years) of extreme danger.

https://cdn-images-1.medium.com/max/800/1*xGeGmkWfx7JBE7sOeyq2YQ.jpeg

Front Four: The New Culture War

Last week, Reddit user notjafo expressed something important. It is worth reading his entire post, but the gist is this: the left won the culture war of the 1960’s — 1990’s. And the Trump Insurgency does not represent “the next move” of the old right in that old war. It represents the first move of an emergent new culture. One that is directly at war with the “Blue Church” on the ground of culture itself.

“The Blue Church is panicking because they’ve just witnessed the birth of a new Red Religion. Not the tired old Christian cliches they defeated back in the ’60s, but a new faith based on cultural identity and outright rejection of the Blue Faith.” — /u/notjfao

While I can nit pick at some of his analysis, broadly speaking I agree. As of 2016, the shoe is on the other foot — the counter culture has become the mainstream and the Insurgents are the new counter culture.

Similar to the other battles, this Culture War front is characterized by a distinction between a more powerful and established Blue team organized around and fighting “the last war” and a Red team still in flux but beginning to figure out how to fight from the future. And, as per the other fronts, until the Blue team figures this out, it will continue to lose ground without understanding why.

In this case, however, the superior OODA loop of the Insurgency is only part of the strategic shift. Of far more importance is the fact that the Insurgency evolved within a culture broadly dominated by the values and techniques of the Blue Church and therefore, by simple natural selection, is now almost entirely immune to the total set of “Blue critique”.

In other words, if we map the arc of the culture war from the 1950’s through to the 1990’s we will see the slow emergence of a set of strategies, techniques and alliances on the part of the emerging Blue Church that became increasingly perfected and effective over time. For example, the critical power of the epithets “racist” or “sexist” which had little or no traction in the 1930’s and 1940’s had, by the 1990’s become decisive.

Yet, even as the Blue Church was achieving dominance, the roots of the Insurgency were being laid. And, like bacteria becoming increasingly immune to an antibiotic after constant exposure, those aspects of the emergent “Red Religion” that were able to survive at all began to coalesce and expand. What has now erupted into the zeitgeist is something new and almost completely immune to the rhetorical and political techniques of the Blue Church. To call an adherent of the Red Religion “racist” is unlikely to elicit much more than a “kek” and a derisive dismissal. The old weapons have no more sting.

Moreover, the Red Religion does not intend to engage the Blue Church in any way other than “outright rejection.” It considers the Church and its adherents to be acting in bad faith by default and the doctrines of the Church to be little more than a form of mental illness. Accordingly, the Red Religion has no intention of dialogue, conversation or even sharing power with the Church.

The Blue Church should expect to meet the Red Religion in war. And in this conflict the Red Religion has the advantage.

In the nature of every movement that has endured the crucible of selection, the Red Religion is much more coherent and focused than the dominant Church which is criss-crossed with internal conflict and in-fighting. The Red Religion was born into and optimized for new media (e.g, optimized for memes rather than films) and as the balance of power shifts from 20th Century media to 21st Century media, this inures to the advantage of the Reds. Going deeper, even as the Red Religion has developed an immunity to most of the primary techniques of the Blue Church, it has simultaneously developed its own memetic/values structure connected with deep human values that stem from ancient “tribal selection” and are highly attractive to the portions of the human family (men and women) who are focused on protecting and defending their tribe (hence the Red Religions’ intrinsic focus on Nationalism).

In other words, over the short to mid term, most of the humans who are best prepared to wage war — who are most attuned to and psychologically ready for war — will be attracted to the Red Religion. They will be focused, almost entirely immune to the entire portfolio of Blue weapons and they will be armed with and optimized for 21st Century techniques of waging culture war.

As a consequence, the result of this conflict will almost certainly be fatal for the Blue Church. We are already witnessing it, in the form of both an increasingly desperate “doubling down” on obviously impotent attacks and a creeping demoralization within the fabric of the Church. I expect to see this accelerate and as the Insurgency wins on other fronts, the set of alliances that hold the Church together will begin to unravel and the Church will collapse.

The sooner that happens, the better it will be for everyone.


Right now, the Church is killing us. While it is holding many important, necessary values, it is also holding a ton of stuff that is deeply dysfunctional. But by monopolizing the instruments of culture and power, it inhibits us like a well meaning but overbearing parent from being able to form the new innovations in culture, practice and value that are necessary to our age. The collapse of the Blue Church is going to lead to a level of “cultural flux” that will make the 1960’s look like the Eisenhower administration. As the Church falls away, the “children of Blue” will explode out in a Cambrian explosion and reach out to engage in all out culture war with the still nascent Red Religion.

This Culture War will be unlike anything we have ever seen. It will take place everywhere all at once, constrained less by geography than by technical platform and by the complex relationship between innovation and power on an exponential technology curve. It will be a struggle over not just the content, but the very sense and nature of identity, meaning and purpose. It will mutate so quickly and will evolve so rapidly that all of our legacy techniques (both psychological and institutional) for making sense of and responding to the world will melt into so much tapioca. This will be terrifying. It is also the source of our best hope.

https://cdn-images-1.medium.com/max/800/1*dD4X3U9Adr9UsQCPdIxlYA.jpeg

The War for Collective Intelligence

If you’ve made it this far (or chose to skip directly here), take a breath and settle in. This is the interesting part. For that precious few who prioritize understanding over brevity, what follows will make much more sense if you have read my Foundational Assumptions, The Coming Great Transition, Introducing Generation Omega and The Future of Organization.

For those who want the tldr, it is this: we live in a non-linear world, stop thinking linearly.

Once you have accepted this as the task, you will eventually come to an important conclusion: you can’t. By yourself, you can’t think non-linearly. This isn’t your fault. Individual human beings can’t think non-linearly. Only “collective intelligences,” those agents of “inter-subjective consciousness” can. To put it more simply, we implement and do things as individuals. We innovate as tribes. And the world we live in today — the world of the 21st Century — is a world of continuous innovation.

In this environment, for the first time ever in history, the ability to innovate is decisively superior to the ability to deploy power. Prior to today, the rule of “the battle goes to whoever gets there the first with the most” was a decent rule of thumb. Of course, this has never been strictly the case. Most of the great stories of history are built around moments of innovation where the smarter but less powerful group was able to outwit and undermine their opponent with superior technique, technology and strategy. Over time the balance has slowly but consistently moved in the direction of innovation. Ask Turing and Oppenheimer about the accelerating pace of innovation as it relates to war.

The conflict of the 21st Century is about forming a Collective Intelligence that can outwit and out innovate all of its competitors. The central challenge is to innovate a way of collaborating and cohering individuals that maximally deploys their individual perspectives, capabilities, understandings and insights with each-other. Right now, the Insurgency has the edge. It has discovered some key ways to tap into the power of decentralized collective intelligence and this is its principal advantage. While it is definitely not a mature version of a decentralized collective intelligence, it is substantially more so than any collective intelligence with which it is competing and unless and until a more effective decentralized collective intelligence enters the field, this advantage is enough.

Like all wars, the shape of this particular conflict will be highly dependent on path, timing and surprise. Right now, for example, the relative difference in power between the Establishment and the Insurgency is large, and while it continues to lose it’s impact, power still matters. At the same time, while the Insurgency has a meaningful advantage in “collective intelligence” this advantage is not overwhelming. Thus the details of the situation that I describe above.

So, for example, if the Deep State uses its power advantage as a way to stall until until it can innovate a collective intelligence advantage, it has a decent chance. (Of course, becoming a decentralized collective intelligence is going to be really hard for the actual individuals who make up the Deep State to understand and accept.)

But watch out as the conflict evolves. As the Insurgency cuts down and unplugs legacy power structures (e.g, the media, the intelligence agencies) and replaces them with more fluid and innovative approaches (e.g., gab.ai and Palantir) the balance will begin to tip quickly. If the Establishment cannot stave off the Insurgency in the next 4–5 years, that phase of the war will be over.

Then the real question. Does the Insurgency and the Red Religion represent a stable attractor in the 21st Century. Can it form a collective intelligence that is able to select-against and out-compete all comers. If so, what does this look like? My sense is that this is ultimately a highly unstable state. While tribalism (nationalism) can be very potent in the short term, it is ultimately a deeply unstable ship to navigate the oceans of the future.

Or is there a different timeline where one of the “children of Blue” discovers an approach that is more intelligent still — one that is more fit to ride the wave of exponential technology and global scale crisis? One that is more fully in line with the true nature of inter-subjective consciousness? One that can scale without losing its coherence? One that is adequate to the whole set of existential challenges of the 21st Century?

Such an eventuality is certainly possible — although the most robust collective intelligence is likely to be more purple than red or blue. How likely? Well, right now I think we have a decent chance but really do believe that the die will be cast in the next 3–5 years.

For those who want to take action, I have three recommendations:

  1. The Blue Church, the Deep State, the Old Media and all the other aspects of the Establishment are holding you back. Free your mind. This is going to be much harder than it sounds. For most people, if you are under 40, your entire development has taken place within the context of the Blue Church. Many of your deepest assumptions and unconscious values are going to have to be examined with brutal honesty and courage.
  2. All Collective Intelligence is gated by Sense making. Right now, our collective sense making systems are in complete disarray. We don’t know who or what to trust. We barely even know how. Find ways to improve your individual sense maker and collaborate on collective sense making systems. This should get easier as the old media and the Blue Church collapse.
  3. Both #1 and #2 require other people. And, since all of our old ways of collaborating with other people are either suspect or obsolete, you are going to have to learn how to build real faithful relationships the old fashioned way. Get much better at making friends. I don’t mean casual acquaintances. And I definitely don’t mean social network contacts. I mean the kinds of people who are ready willing and able to actually care for you — even at risk to themselves. Not because of shared ideology or even shared mission, but because of the deep stuff of human commitment.

Good luck.

By Jordan Greenhall | Deep Code Medium

Understanding The Fear Of Self-Defense And Revolution

By Brandon Smith

Our era is a strange one when considering how social attitudes have developed in such a contrary fashion to the rest of history. I think that our forefathers would look upon our current culture with bewilderment when confronted with the fact that our generation has all but abandoned the option of physical rebellion as a tool for social change. Even among the most enslaved of nations and peoples, the idea of revolution has been held in regard as an entirely moral and principled affair involving every individual, no matter their age or economic station. Today, however, that which we call “revolution” has been delegated mostly to college-age intellectuals and has been so watered down and whitewashed with politically correct restrictions that the concept is hardly recognizable.

I believe the civil rights movements in America and in India in the 20th century have in many ways warped the public view of how opposition to totalitarianism is actually accomplished. I find it interesting that movements led by Gandhi and Martin Luther King Jr. enjoy so much adoration in mainstream media and in public schooling, while the American Revolution is often either misrepresented or not discussed at all. Gandhi’s movement was, in concrete terms, a failure until Indians had actually began organizing to physically fight the British, causing the Crown to attempt to defuse the movement by suddenly offering up a reformation of Indian governance (one that would continue to benefit them). When one examines the facts surrounding Cointelpro operations by the FBI and CIA during the civil rights movement in America, one realizes that half the efforts and actions were legitimate and the other half entirely manipulated.

Over the course of half a century, the philosophy of “anti-violence” has come to include a distinct distaste for self-defense. Self-defense is now consistently equated to “violence” (and is, thus, immoral), regardless of environmental circumstances.

Even in the liberty movement, there are people who disregard physical defense as either barbaric or “futile” and have adopted rather less-effective pacifist ideologies of more socialist activism. The problem with certain factions of libertarianism is that they tend to live within their own heads, reveling in a world of Ayn Randian and Rothbardian political and social theory, while abandoning the other side of concrete resistance. Some in the survival community call these people “egghead libertarians,” and I think the label fits.

They rejoice only in the intellectual; thus, they tend to see themselves only as “intellectual warriors.” For them, the war against tyranny by extension must be fought on an intellectual battlefield. Otherwise, as individuals, they have little to offer the resistance. They believe that if they merely present a better and more logical philosophy, they will win over the masses to their side or even change the souls of the rather soulless psychopaths creating tyranny in the first place. Like magic, they will have won the fight without ever truly fighting. It sounds like a strategy right out of the “Art Of War,” but really it is an intricate excuse designed to avoid risk.

They have almost no experience with and, therefore, no respect for the concept of self-defense and revolution. And they have no capacity to fathom what such an endeavor would entail. This unknown scenario inspires fear in them — a fear of struggle, a fear of failure and a fear of death.

While taking action from a position of love for one’s fellow man is indeed noble, it is sometimes not enough in the face of pure evil — the kind of evil inherent in the ranks of elitism and the globalist ideology. It is important to keep at least one foot on the ground when building a movement of dissent and realize that while maintaining the moral high ground is paramount, there are limitations to what peaceful resistance can accomplish, depending on the opponent. If you are not prepared to use both peaceful means and physical defense if necessary, your movement will ultimately fail against an enemy without conscience.

Never before in history have humans been so dismissive of the self-defense concept when it comes to government, and I attribute this to clever conditioning and to an ingrained and powerful fear. Here are some of the most commonly heard arguments against physical revolution and why they are either ill-conceived or outright disingenuous.

Revolution Is Morally Wrong?

I find the attitude of moral superiority of the nonviolence crowd rather disconcerting at times and, in many ways, dishonest. It is very common to run into nonviolence proponents who are not satisfied with their own personal choice of pacifism alone. In many cases, they will attack or undermine other parts of the movement preparing for self-defense on the basis that even mere preparation is somehow akin to physical aggression. These people are never satisfied until everyone in the movement meets their “high standards” of activist purity.

In the end, I think their position is less about a regard for peace than it is about a regard for their own egos. People in general tend to support the formation of taboos (as opposed to honest principles) in order to gain what they see as the moral upper hand over others. They invent a condition of arbitrary piety around themselves in an act of self-elevation that does not constitute true morality.

Anyone who makes self-defense a taboo is not only living in a fantasy land outside the inherent structures of natural law, he is also likely doing so because he enjoys the sense of social superiority such a position affords. In this way many of the more irrational nonviolence activists are, in fact, no better that the raving acolytes of the cult of political correctness.

Physical self-defense against tyranny is not only necessary, but entirely honorable. When the violence of an individual is thwarted by defense, when a potential thief robs the wrong house, when a rape is prevented by an armed and prepared woman or when a potential murderer is shot dead by a citizen who refused to be a victim, our society cheers. But when someone suggests that the same measures be taken against a violent and corrupt government, people suddenly claim moral hazard.

There is no difference between the act of defending oneself against a common criminal and defending oneself against a criminal government. I would venture to say that self-defense is a moral imperative more vital to the survival of peace and freedom than any other.

Revolution Is Futile And The Enemy Is Too Strong?

When anti-defense initiates cannot effectively argue against the moral principles of physical revolution, they invariably change tactics, asserting instead that revolution is a useless endeavor that will end only in tragedy for the participants. I see this argument as a product of brainless nihilism rather than rationalism, and such a defeatist mindset invariably stems from cowardice rather than logic.

Nihilism is a powerful psychological force that destroys all hope and all positive pursuits. It is essentially the act of denying success before an endeavor is ever undertaken. Nihilists ensure their own failure because for them every scenario is a no-win scenario.

To them, I might seem like a blind optimist, while they see themselves as realists. In truth, pro-self-defense advocates are far more realistic. There is certainly a fundamental difference in the manner in which we look at the world. When I and those “optimists” like me see a problem, we look for a solution regardless of the scale of the threat; and if we cannot immediately find an obvious solution right away, we keep working until we do. There is no such thing as a no-win scenario for us. There is always a way to overcome an obstacle.

I would also point out the reality that, at bottom, it does not matter what the odds are in a revolution for freedom. When all is said and done, you will probably be confronted with two choices in the face of tyranny: fight and possibly die; or surrender, become a slave and probably still die. Those who argue against self-defense are in most cases trying to avoid the inevitability of this choice by creating non-options and non-solutions out of thin air. This is the opposite of realism.

Physical revolution requires a methodology of adaptivity and courage. Fear has no place in the mind of a freedom fighter, and nihilism is just as foreign to him. The goal of liberty will be accomplished. Totalitarians will be defeated. The size of the movement is not a factor. We expect that we will be in the minority. There is no other outcome but victory because we will allow no other outcome. Period. If we are proven wrong, then we are proven wrong; but it will not be due to a lack of trying.

In our age, arguments of the technological superiority of the enemy are often brandished as clear evidence of the uselessness of physical resistance. I think one could also make the argument that technological superiority in media manipulation and other fields could make nonviolent resistance useless as well. I’m not really sure why nihilists cling to the notion that technology matters at all, except that it perhaps offers an easy and lazy avenue of debate. The enemy has predator drones; therefore, revolution is futile.

In conjunction with Oath Keepers, I will soon be producing a video that will show the liberty movement how to build their own working thermal-evasion suits. Perhaps this will quell the incessant proclamations that drones and tanks and Apache helicopters mean anything at all in the face of asymmetric warfare. If the enemy can’t see you, they can’t kill you; and for every high-tech enemy, there is a low tech solution. Of course, I doubt this will mean anything to the nihilists, who don’t have the will to fight for anything except their belief that fighting back is useless.

Revolutions Are Always Co-Opted?

I have heard it argued by multiple sources within the liberty movement over the years that revolution is a poor option in defeating tyranny because of the cyclical nature of political and social change. They claim that all we have to do is look back at history to see that even when a revolution is successful in removing oligarchy, the resulting republic is invariably co-opted years or decades down the road. I agree, to a point.

The problem is not that the concept of revolution is ineffective. What these skeptics of physical rebellion tend to overlook or deliberately ignore is that no revolution in the history of man has ever gone far enough. Each revolution has targeted the corrupt government of their day, but no revolution has ever actually removed the elitist cabal behind those regimes — the same cabal of elites that has bankrolled nearly every tyranny over the past several centuries.

This is due in part to the fact that knowledge of who these elites are was not widespread. Today, for the first time ever, mankind has full access to information on who the globalists are and what they want. In fact, the elites barely hide who they are or what their intentions are anymore. One can simply look up the roster of organization like Bilderberg, Tavistock, the Trilateral Commission, the Council on Foreign Relations, the International Monetary Fund, the Bank for International Settlements, etc. At least in the liberty movement, we know who the real enemy is.

Co-option is always a threat if you do not know who the enemy is. A revolution against the Obama administration alone, for example, would be useless because President Obama is nothing but a puppet, a mascot playing a role. Removing middlemen is a half-measure, and anyone who tries to lead you into revolution on the premise that Obama alone is the source of your troubles is probably an elitist leading you toward disaster. If you are not removing the root of the threat, then the threat will persist.

Co-option also occurs when people become obsessed with the idea of popular top-down leadership rather than bottom-up decentralized resistance. If you are out there looking for the next George Washington on a white horse to save you from tyranny, then you will eventually get him; but he may not be at all what he seems. Beware of generals and top brass suddenly in support of revolution. Beware of any notion of military coup. Beware of any revolution that uses political party divisions as a motivator. Beware of any government with a central bank that wishes to bankroll your revolution. Stay decentralized and refuse any push for top-down leadership. This is the only way to avoid co-option.

Revolution Solves Nothing Because Mankind Is ‘Predisposed’ To Tyranny?

The great lie being injected into the movement over the past few years is that removal of the elites will solve nothing because the “real problem” is the corrupt nature of humanity in general and that if we remove one set of elites, they will simply be replaced with another set, as if society is fatally predisposed to develop an elitist class. This is the most vapid form of defeatist garbage ever regurgitated by nihilists.

First, we have no idea whatsoever what life would be like without the globalist network because we have never lived in a society in which they have been removed, even for a single generation. I think early America after the revolution is the only example I can find of a society free from most elitist controls, and the prosperity that developed in that environment leads me to believe that removal of the entire elitist framework would result in undeniable positive changes for the world. Why else would the globalists spend the past two centuries attempting to dismantle the Constitution and the Bill of Rights?

Second, if mankind is so “predisposed” to become naturally subservient to an elitist class, why do the elites feel so compelled to manipulate the masses with complex forms of propaganda and fear tactics? Why go through all the trouble of engineering economic disparity and war? What is the point if we are all dumb animals just waiting to be ruled? The argument is nonsense. The elites spend billions of dollars, if not trillions of dollars, in capital and go to such extremes because oligarchy is not a natural state of man. It is so unnatural that the elites are forced to expend constant energy trying to keep us from progressing away from the slave dynamic.

I believe a revolution is indeed necessary, a final revolution to remove the influence of the globalist cult once and for all — not only their puppet governments, puppet political parties and puppet despots, but the globalists themselves. Will bad men still exist in this world? Of course they will. But the kind of advanced and well-organized internationlist machine that thrives today will no longer exist. To save a patient poisoned to the extreme, the patient must be purged until his body can recover on its own. The elites are a poison that must be physically removed from the human system.