Chestnut Tree Cafe 





"Political or military commentators, like astrologers, can survive almost any mistake, because their more devoted followers do not look to them for an appraisal of the facts but for the stimulation of nationalistic loyalties." 
 
                                                                 George Orwell - from  Notes on Nationalism







2010


The System is Working -

As expected, it didn't take long for the Obama administration to begin looking like its predecessor.  From obstructing war crime investigations and refusing to release prisoner abuse photos to refusing to repeal the enhanced, kingly powers of President, ushered in during the Bush/Cheney era, and beating the the war drums.  It all sounds too familiar.

No need to be surprised by what's been happening.  Concerned, yes, but not surprised.  Government abuse makes perfect sense if we look at how our system was set up.  The system is not failing, it's succeeding.  This is what is was designed to do.  The genius of the United States government, from its very founding, was never its vision of equity and promotion of popular governance. The US Constitution was founded by monied interests and fashioned to protect those interests.

And strong opposition to popular government - by the overclass - has a strong historical precedent. 

The connections between the Trilateral Commission and the Obama administration are so numerous it would be futile to attempt to list them all.

The ruling oligarchs have promulgated the idea of democracy and self-rule for the purposes of creating a milieu conducive to self-censorship, improved morale and productivity.  They similarly promulgated the embarrassingly ridiculous idea of "chosen people" and "manifest destiny."  


The Corporate/Bureaucratic Elite are GlobalistsHistorically, different parts of the world cycle through periods of prosperity followed by periods of difficulty, at different times.  They will say that the push for global governance is precisely what is needed to bring the entire world into a common rhythm and to ameliorate uncertainty of these inconvenient cycles.  We should no sooner accept this than the ridiculous notion that World War 1 would be "the war to end all wars", or that after World War 1, the purpose of the League of Nations was formed to prevent war from breaking out again.  Shouldn't we be skeptical when elite, round table consortiums profess to be aiming to prevent war, or, as David Rockefeller's Trilateral Commission was supposed to, bring "peace and prosperity"?  Uncertainty is going nowhere.  War is going nowhere.  They are both here to stay.  The question is, will we also have the ultimate power consolidation - that of global governance - to accompany and exacerbate them?

The Two Party System Even adding one more party (one that actually wins elections on a regular basis like dems and pubs do...) would confound things monumentally, making it statistically impossible to reign in public opinion.  This is precisely why the media emphasizes (gives credence to) only two parties.  With this mechanism in place, any initiative or legislation can garner significant public support simply by associating it - through the media - as righty or lefty initiative.  In other words, having prominent lefties or righties endorse it publicly.  A third (fourth, fifth ... ?? ) party would cut way into the efficacy of this mechanism for obvious reasons.  The elite easily install their puppet in every election and subsequently whip up the requisite public support - through the media - for the initiatives they desire, which are drawn up long before the election.  It is utterly impossible for a true grass roots candidate to gain any traction in this sort of system.

As children we are programmed for our role as consumers by our tvs, which conditions us to be self-censoring.  Crowd control is much easier if you can get the crowd to censor itself, which is precisely what we have.

The subtext emanating from the mass media echoes this sentiment perfectly.  The subtext is: there's something at stake here that is more important than the truth.  We all sense that rabble rousing media righties and lefties like Glenn Beck and Bill O'Reilly and Keith Olbermann are not reporting the news in a responsible, forthcoming fashion.  Their righty and lefty hollywood editorializing is pathetic, yet we not only tolerate it, we embrace it.  The reason is that we have been trained to accept imaginary, alternate realities in lieu of the truth.  We live vicariously through Hollywood - why not get our principles in a similiar fashion, prefabricated like big macs?   Hence we direct our frustrations at each other instead of the real source.  Pseudo-principles, just like pseudo-food.  It's just so easy and convenient.

The discourse between dems and pubs has come to resemble pro wrestling, and it serves a similar purpose - filling an empty void.  We need diversion, entertainment, and distraction, and they give us that, but we also need principle.  Having been manipulated into embracing our worker/consumer roles, and are no longer able to live our true principles, so they have been replaced, as if we were hosting a virus.  We are increasingly dependent and beholden to the system.  We spend far too little time doing what we love, and far too much time doing what the overclass loves.  Our principles now come from without, instead of from within.  They are artificial, like the food we eat and like the vicarious living.  None of it real.  It's just another Hollywood production - a cheap substitute for we really need and want.  And underlying it all is a fake economy that no one understands or wishes to talk about. 


The Globalist Agenda and the End of National Sovereignty - Conservation is being framed up by the media as part of a leftist or progressive agenda.  But the fact is, the prominent people behind it are much more concerned about making money than they are about conservation or reducing their carbon footprint.  But even this, as bad as it is, isn't the main concern.  There is a much broader agenda here. The left side of the political spectrum is now being used, by the corporate, bureaucratic elite, as a platform for putting globalization into hyperdrive.  The current trend involves the consolidation of power around global authorities.  I would also suggest that this is no better - in fact it may be worse - than power consolidation in multi-national corporations.  The fact is that the two are intimately intertwined, working together towards a global paradigm shift, one that will probably hinge upon an economic "crisis", which will itself probably be induced by another crisis (energy, disease outbreak, climate change, any combination thereof).  And if history is any guide, the underlying cause of the "crisis" will be real, but it will most definately be overinflated, and promulgated by elite industrial interests which have the power to control governing bodies, whether at the national or global level.

So there a global trend which is an insidious process by design (though many of the events and sub-plots involved may be more acute ... ).  Efforts are continually made to gradually erode the sovereignty of countries to capitulate to unions.  The unions, in turn, capitulate to the central global authorities, "for the good of the whole" and in the spirit of "teamwork", of course.   But this is a power grab, pure and simple.  Whether anything but totalitarianism will come from it remains to be seen.  But I think the rampant use of deception might be instructive here.  The global warming issue will almost certainly play a pivotal role in this process going forward.  Here, too, we see rampant deception by leading figures who have obvious ties to big industry, who use a good cause towards a bad end. 

Global WarmingThe fact that the climate change issue has galvanized around the UN is not an insignificant issue, given the UN's history as a tool for big corporate interests (see Chomsky on "forced acquiescence" and "the Washington consensus").  The idea that these big corporations, which control the UN, suddenly wish to talk about the environment has zero credibility.  On the other hand, the idea that they have an ulterior motive is much more salient.  Even a quick look into the backgrounds of the movers and shakers behind this movement reveals an obvious elitist bias.  These sorts should have zero involvement, let alone leading involvement, in any legitimate effort.  Clearly, they have a lot more than just global warming on their agenda.  And profiting from trading carbon credits is not the only ulterior motive.  Nor is the manifest destiny style of green investing that Al Gore has found an interest in.  There is also a very concerted effort underway to foster globalization, which in turn entails increasing global governance, global taxation, and the consolidation of government power at the global level to the detriment of the sovereignty of nations.  Those who want this are big corporations who stand to establish still more dominance from liberalizing international trade.  And they would love nothing more than to legitimize their dominance around a global, central government authority.  So, increasingly, we will see things dealt with on a supranational level, for the "good of the whole", or course.  This will have the desired effect, namely the gradual ceding of national sovereignty and simultaneous consolidation of power around global authorities.


Investing With Al Gore  -  Where the problems arise is simultaneously being a spokesperson for one's own investments.  How nice to have Paramount Pictures, now a subsidiary media juggernaut, Viacom, distribute "An Inconvenient Truth".  No doubt that year was particularly good for Gore's very green investment firm.  And how nice that Paramount also helped fund Gore's "Alliance for Climate Protection", which further promotes his investments.  And, though there is nothing wrong in using one's celebrity to sell books, doesn't it cross a line when the content of those books dovetails so very nicely with personal investments, especially when one is a founding member of a very relevant investment firm, and a partner of a very relevant venture capitalist firm?!

Generation Investment Management also owns a 10% stake in the Chicago Climate Exchange, which owns half of European Climate Exchange, creating yet another conflict of interest for Gore, since he benefits directly from the trading of carbon credits. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generation_Investment_Management).  By the way, Kleiner Perkins Caulfield & Byers don't exclusively invest in green technology.  Their "Pandemic Biodefense Fund" should do fairly well if all the hype over swine flu vaccination continues.  (http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE53N6YO20090424)   So too should an old friend, Donald Rumsfeld, since he also has very large stakes in Tamiflu (http://motherjones.com/mojo/2009/04/swine-flu-bringing-home-bacon).  


Shock and Awe with National Geographic  -  In the past we have looked at cronies like Al Gore and Maurice Strong who are cashing in on "crisis".  But National Geographic?  Who would have thought?  As it happens, this all makes perfect sense, really, when you consider who has partnered up with National Geographic (and many years ago, I might add) - it's an old friend from team Bushcraft, Ruppert Murdoch.  http://www.huffingtonpost.com/georgianne-nienaber/fox-owned-inational-geogr_b_112699.html  ...  http://www.allbusiness.com/media-telecommunications/telecommunications/6645689-1.html.   Yes, it would seem that Ruppert is now concerned with conservation.  Amazing that this round of shock and awe is so mysteriously different from, in fact diametrically opposed to, the previous, Fox News style one.  Hmmm ...  





2009

Good Legislation - 2009  - As long as the FED maintains the level of power that they currently enjoy, we will remain light years from anything remotely resembling popular government.  The US dollar is unique in that it is the world reserve currency.  This unique distinction allows the FED to print their way out of anything, such as our massive trade imbalance.  Problem is, this gets tacked onto our national debt.  The Treasury must issue bonds to get those dollars, dollars which we and our children now owe to the Fed.  And how much did it cost the FED to print the dollars?  Pennies on the dollar.  And they make interest to boot.  We import vast quantities of goods and services without paying for them.  Unique?  Certainly.  Sustainable?  Temporarily.

Bailout Funds for Small Business?Bailout $ for small business?  Yes of course.  We all know where this is going.  Just how much money are we talking about here?  If recent precedent is any indication, not very much.

President Barack Obama Unveils a New War Plan
 

Even Prominent Left Intellectuals Are Not Buying into Obama
- including Noam Chomsky, Howard Zinn, and Naomi Klein.


Margaret Hamburg as FDA Administrator - Another classic new appointment in Margaret Hamburg as FDA Administrator.  (terror obsessed, and well-connected to the secret meeting gang ...)


Obama Small Business Tax Cuts Missing In Action - The capital gains tax cuts Obama promised for small business now seem to be missing in action, both from the house and senate versions of the stimulus package.  Surprising?  Hardly.  This classic bait and switch is standard procedure on both sides of the political spectrum.  But more importantly, this is consistent with a recurring theme, a theme which maintains that it's not so important what happens to all the little people - it's the big fellas that count.  In it's purest form, it goes something like this;
"What's good for big business is good for everyone else." 
I recall hearing my 8 year old tell my 6 year old something like that once, where she was "big business" and the 6 year old was "everyone else".  I'm sure there's some truth to it - I'm just not too sure how well it reconciles with values like democracy and freedom.  If history is any guide, then we can expect today's "stimulus packages" to reconcile poorly with these kinds of values, and reconcile much better with concepts like oligarchy and plutocracy.  And once again, what better bit of history to look at than the New Deal, since there have been frequent, optimistic allusions to it lately.


New Deal Allusions (Illusions?)  - The problem is, threatening economic realities cloud people's judgement.  Under these circumstances, people don't care very much where the money comes from, as long as it comes.  This is what made The New Deal one of the most popular government programs in our history.  Likewise it is very much the impetus for the excitement revolving around President Obama, along with a very unpopular war effort which has contributed to the current economic carnage.  So now the government is expected to ride in and save the day.  The bottom line is that Obama's popularity will be used to pass what would normally be very unpopular bailout legislation.  Even the massive increase in our national debt won't deter this.  Nor did it deter the New Deal.
 
Of course the New Deal was effective.  How could the New Deal not be effective?  Throw money at something and it usually helps.  The Works Progress Administration, for example, and the millions of jobs it created for citizens, including students and artists, surely helped us through a tough period.   But if the government were to have mailed everyone hundred thousand dollar stimulus checks, that would have helped too.  But neither of these represents a healthy, sustainable way to stimulate the economy.  There are better means to the same end that don't have the long term consequences.  Anytime we have this kind government expansion, we really have to look at more than ostensible goals.  We should be asking ourselves if there might be any other interests involved which are not being talked about, because anytime we hear that there is new legislation meant to help the “forgotten man at the bottom of the economic pyramid," we can be fairly certain that there are much, much larger interests operating in the background.

Philanthropy:  Sugar and Spice and Everything Nice -
Speaking of foundations, the senate has just confirmed Timothy Geithner as Treasury Secretary.  Geithner and Obama first met several decades ago in Indonesia, where Geithner's father oversaw Ford Foundation "microfinance programs" which were being developed by none other than Ann Dunham-Soetoro -  Barack Obama's mother.  Wow.  Such a small world.


The Devil's in the Details -
Last week the Group of 30 released the special report: "A Framework for Financial Stability". Those involved in this effort included: Jacob Frenkel (AIG Vice Chairman), Andrew Crockett (Vice President of JP Morgan Chase International), William Rhodes (Senior Vice Chairman of Citigroup), Richard Debs (former President of Morgan Stanley International), and last but certainly not least - Paul Volcker, whose history of work surrounding the corporate elite requires a separate page.


" Nobody wanted to be told there was no Santa Claus " - 
By now, we've all heard about Peter Schiff and his bold (and incredibly accurate) economic predictions during former President Bush's last term.

Now that we have a new president (and a whole new party at that) you might think Schiff might have a different set of predictions.  But he doesn't, because both presidents advocate debt financing, an "easy money" system where we print money that we don't have and run up the national debt:


Paul Volcker:  Another Corporate Elite Icon chosen by Obama
- And Volcker's association's with the corporate elite go way beyond his work with The Group of Thirty, the onslaught of derivatives, and even his tenure as FED Chairman.  He has had a long association with the Rockefeller family, not only with his positions at Chase Bank and the Trilateral Commission, but also through membership of the Trust Committee of Rockefeller Group, Inc. (RGI), which he joined in 1987.  That entity managed, at one time, the Rockefeller Center on behalf of the numerous members of the Rockefeller clan.  He currently serves as Chairman of the Board of Trustees of the International House in Manhattan, NY.  He was a founding member of the Trilateral Commission."




           2008


Modern Day Scramble For Loot

"Fed Refuses to Disclose Recipients of $2 Trillion"  - http://bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=apx7XNLnZZlc&refer=home

This story came out on the Bloomberg site last month, regarding a federal lawsuit Bloomberg filed against our beloved "FED" in November.  The suit seeks no damages, just the recipients of more than $2 trillion of emergency loans from U.S. taxpayers and the assets the central bank is accepting as collateral. 

"Where'd the bailout money go? Shhhh, it's a secret" - http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/politics/2008547803_apmeltdownsecrets.html?syndication=rss

"But after receiving billions in aid from U.S. taxpayers, the nation's largest banks say they can't track exactly how they're spending the money or they simply refuse to discuss it."



Don't Worry, It's Just Globalization  -  Globalization does not have to entail the loss of national sovereignty.  The two are not mutually exclusive, though the global elite would have us think they are. 

This kind of “globalization” smacks of power consolidation and of multinationals that are bigger than countries and that destroy local commerce everywhere they go and control governments.  But worse, they are governments!  It has become relatively easy for most of us today to name the corporate associations of many of our most important leaders. 

The net result?   The global elite are getting richer.   No surprises there.   What should we expect when we ”liberalize” the globe in the name of the free market global economy, giving giant transnationals unfettered access to the markets of their choice, regardless of how that might affect the local economy there?  (What would we expect if we took things like weight classes and age limits away from the Olympic games?  Wouldn’t we expect to ruin the competition?)

Giant transnationals move on to greener pastures, greener pastures that are rolling out the red carpets as their sovereign wealth funds swell and buy up our US debt and US preferred corporate stock.

But don’t worry, it’s just globalization.     

     
Obama names Clinton for Global Job   - This comes as somewhat of a surprise given some of Obama's comments about Hillary during the campaign!  Wow!  What an about face!  As we all know, one of Obama's most biting criticisms of Hillary during the debates was his pointing out her tenure at Walmart (where she was not just on the corporate payroll but also on the board of directors) . . .


Mormons Tipped Scale in Ban on Gay Marriage - The key to freedom, for those who really care about it, is to allow all to pursue that which they believe, not that which someone else believes.  If Mormons were being forced to have gay marriages, that would be different.  Then I would - gladly - take up arms with them.  But they are not being forced to do any such thing.  Gays only seek to change their own marriages, not those of Mormons or anyone else.


Tech Puts JFK Conspiracy Theories To Rest  -   Nov. 13, 2008 - A team of "experts" assembled by the Discovery Channel has finally figured it out . . .


Globalization, Multinational Corporations and Trade Liberalization  We don't like the idea of changing the status quo.  Thus the media talking heads had an easy time convincing us that the presidential candidate in 2008 who wanted to abolish the FED was not "electable".  We like to talk about change.  It makes a nice story line.  But when it comes to actually doing it, real change is frightening.  So instead of real change - big change - the herd fell for the smooth talking whippersnapper, who promises to spy on Americans and continue chasing after terrorists, and who supports the central bank and the bailout legislation.  These things have been working - so we assume they are sustainable. So as for the guy who really wants change and who has integrity?  We send him packin' . . .

      
Change
President elect Obama promises to spy on Americans and continue chasing after terrorists.  He also supports the central bank and the bailout legislation.  And Joe Biden  has guaranteed us a "generated crisis" inside six months of Obama's presidency which will test Obama's "mettle".   So where's the change?


US Troops now within US Borders  -  "Helping ‘people at home’ may become a permanent part of the active Army."


FISALast month, on July 10th, President Bush signed the FISA Ammendments Act into law, providing lawsuit protection for telecommunications companies and supporting eavesdropping on Americans in "emergencies" without court approval.  No surprises there.  But our beloved, so-called "progressive" presidential front runner also supported this legislation, insisting that "In a dangerous world, government must have the authority to collect the intelligence we need to protect the American people."   . . .

Increasing Unilateral Powers of the Executive Branch - We have witnessed an explosion of presidential "signing statements" during the last four presidencies.  And the theory of the unitary executive, first proposed under President Reagan, has been expanded since then by every president, Democrat and Republican alike . . .





Not So New . . .


Martial Law No doubt that our government has set the stage for martial law.  Just have a look at recent legislation.  But why?


A North American Union   -   The integration of the United States, Mexico and Canada under a single supranational authority without being addressed by Congress or the Supreme Court ?   . . .


 Project For A New American Century ( PNAC )  -  After the 2000 election of George W. Bush, many of  PNAC's members were appointed to key positions within the new President's administration, including Cheney, Rumsfeld, and Wolfowitz  . . .    

The Patriot Act  - 
There are alot of complex things going on in the world economically and geopolitically.  But in the big picture, some things aren't so complex.  Case in point.  This kind of legislation, and similiar legislation that permits spying on citizens and monitoring their bank accounts, is pretty simple.  It is a matter of attempting to control a world that is on the brink of some massive power shifts in favor of countries like the BRICs.  The United States has the most to lose here.  And to add insult to injury, the US also has the baby boomer demographic, which is not only part of the reason the US has lost its status as a leader in production, but also part of the reason countries like the BRICs will eventually eclipse it going forward.  And many of these retired boomers, along with many innovative entrepreneurs who have not yet retired, would love to take their fortunes overseas where they can stretch them alot further.  This creates problems for the US, the dollar, and hence the entire global economy, since the dollar is the world reserve currency.

911  -  We have been conditioned to scoff at conspiracies.  Gee, I wonder why?  And just like when JFK was assassinated, we have a five star "commission" whose job is to put together an official story so that everyone can lay it to rest and get on with their lives.  And just like the Warren Commission, everyone senses that the 911 Commission's story is fishy, but it doesn't matter because there is something at stake here which is even more important than the truth.

Anyone who labors under the delusion that a bunch of morons with box cutters pulled this one off without "upper management" help is in denial.  There's no definitive evidence?  I guess then that OJ Simpson was innocent of the murders of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman back in 1995.  I beg to differ. 


  
     
911 Mastermind  -  So this is the evil supergenius, huh?


Carlyle Group  -   Isn't it nice to know we have an investment group, specializing in aerospace and defense, whose investment choices "dovetail" so nicely with US military strategy ?   . . .


 
WMD  -   WMD are alluded to as justification for invasion.  But then why did we do nothing about Saddam through some of his worst atrocities?   Why did we stand by and watch as he gassed his own countrymen?   Many of the biological and chemical weapons he used originated in the United States .




Old Hat


The Council on Foreign Relations - Why does the CFR matter?  Because they're a private enterprise.  And yet their influence upon the public sphere is immense, and without due accountability and transparency.  The conflict of interest here could hardly be more obvious.   Yet many - like our new President elect - brush this aside as harmless or insignificant . . .  



The Global Elite, Industrialists, and Philanthropy  - Would it really suprise anyone to learn that the real motive behind these so-called “philanthropists” is not philanthropy?  That their stranglehold on the education system in the US got so bad that Congress had to investigate it in 1954?  Thousands of scientists and scholars from the most prestigious schools in the world have received fellowships and scholarships from “charitable” foundations like Rockefeller, Carnegie and Ford for advanced study, and now sing their praises and teach their brand of business, in an ongoing process of social engineering to mold the thinking of the masses into something more in keeping with the demands of the industrial age and the corporate elite. 


Divide and Conquer  - Throughout time,  the overclass has achieved crowd control by division of one sort or another.   They are accutely aware of our natural tendencies as a societal whole and seek to exploit them.  They have mastered the fine art of tearing people apart and creating obstacles to the organizing and unification of the people.  They fear popular government.  They believe in Plato’s “noble lie“, and advocate Machiavellian deception.  Their foreign policy is no different, except for scale.


 

Founding Fathers, Colonial Script, the Federal Reserve and the National Debt  John Maynard Keynes said it well; “There is no subtler, no surer means of overturning the existing basis of society than to debauch the currency. The process engages all the hidden forces of economic law on the side of destruction, and does it in a manner which not one man in a million can diagnose.” 
                    
 

And Now For The Weather  -   Can we control the weather?   Does it really come as a surprise ?    . . .




Videos  . . .





                             

Arms sales, anyone?



Arms Sales in Gulf Will Counter Terrorism, Rice Says     

US 'plans huge Saudi arms deal' 

 
  Bush: U.S. to Sell F-16s to Pakistan         
U.S. Arming Sunnis in Iraq to Battle Old Qaeda Allies      
<>                                                                 
 
2.3 Trillion Missing from Pentagon  -  ??????????    Is that really "trillion" - with a "T" ?   Oopsie daisy...


Transcript:  The Arming Of Iraq - Correspondent Hodding Carter investigated the complicity of the U.S. and European governments, as well as Western corporations, in creating the Iraqi military machine  -  

In this report, which originally aired Sept. 11, 1990, FRONTLINE examined how Saddam Hussein built Iraq's massive arsenal of tanks, planes, missiles, and chemical weapons during the 1980s. Correspondent Hodding Carter investigated the complicity of the U.S. and European governments, as well as Western corporations, in creating the Iraqi military machine the world was then trying to stop.


OK, go back to sleep now -