If truth were a tangible place, like a town or city, it would be a very dangerous place to live! Despite appearing like a utopian destination and for all the benefits and worth of getting there, there would be times when it would erupt into a bloody showdown like an old western frontier town. Other times you might feel like you were living in one of those Soviet based, mock American towns of the 50s or The Village – the one immortalised by the excellent 60s show: The Prisoner. Problems are always made by people though. The place is enormously incidental.
Truth is almost always a contrivance, utilised by some as a means to manipulate and understood subjectively by others. We can partly blame the way our conscious/subconscious mind interprets information and our ‘trust’ in the source of it, some we can blame on our predispositions and bias, the rest of the blame lies firmly at the feet of those who understand perfectly how to manipulate these psychological processes in others.
The architects of the hidden state of global affairs are singularly powered by the vast majority of humanity’s ignorance (of a situation), mass apathy or willingness to just let them get on with it. There are those that are a little more informed or proactive though. Knowledge really is power, but how can you be sure that you really do ‘know’? And if you ever do ‘know’, how do you decide to act on it?
reactions and thus, a movement is always born. History is replete with examples. From the Suffragettes and the New Age movement to Anti-War and 9/11, mass social stirrings become driven by the promise of justice, enlightenment or change. The driving forces of these movements are decent, honest and well-intentioned people who want to make the world a better place. Without them there could be no movement. But is it naïve to think that these movements have been created solely from a collective sense of conscience? That everybody shaping, developing and driving them are equally as honourable as those with the best of intentions?
Sadly, history also shows us that certain individuals and groups have played a hand in the nature of these movements. It shows us that while some movements have been co-opted and usurped at some stage, others have been created or instigated by agents of the global agenda players (for one reason or another) and given what we know about these agenda players, we can only assume that their intentions were not to benefit the social majority.
In the 1960s, those opposed to the war in Vietnam were gaining momentum in bringing the injustice and hypocrisies of the conflict to the world’s attention. It became the mandate of western intelligence and military organisations to do everything they could to infiltrate and discredit those who had the ability to sway public opinion, and distract the rest. The exposure of the MKULTRA project era alone, shows how intelligence agency sourced LSD was introduced far and wide into society with the intention (amongst others) of disassociating many from their political activism.
As for those with a visible anti-war profile (writers, artists and musicians), a leaked memorandum dated April 26th 1976 shows how several government branches were tasked with painting these individuals as “scurrilous and depraved”, highlight their “living conditions and habits” and attempt to discolour their character with sexual indiscretions, drug charges, planting narcotics, sending in women to break up marriages, misinformation (to confuse and disrupt) and alerting the media to their activities. They even obtained handwriting specimens to fake documents, enflamed existing personal conflicts and animosities, and provoked rival groups in the hope of inciting hostilities and murders. (see: “The Covert War Against Rock” – Alex Constantine)
The Cointelpro days of the 60s and 70s are extensively documented, with everything from The Black Panthers to the Yippies being infiltrated by various agency. Officially, this infiltration was justified in order to protect the larger public from “disruptive subversion”. In reality, much of their activities involved agitating members of these various groups, often pitting them against each other through various forms of subterfuge (such as blackmail.)
movement was equally exposed to subversion via agencies such as the FBI, CIA and NSA. During the early 70s, institutions such as Esalen made it possible for a huge increase in the number of agents to infiltrate the “human potential” movement.
These are just a few examples of the global players utilising their apparatus to redirect the power of the masses.
In recent times, we have learned (all too painfully) how governments have advanced agendas by getting everybody on board with a certain belief system. 9/11 was the conduit through which the mantra of “threats” from new “global enemies” could dogmatise the masses into accepting not only wars of aggression, occupation of foreign countries and policies of “regime change”, but also sweeping changes that curtailed individual rights and freedoms.
The West (particularly NATO countries) has also taken huge liberties with the desire for freedom that has grown out of the post-9/11 world. There have been claims that many of the uprisings of 2011 were infiltrated by "agent provocateurs”. According to former CIA counterterrorist analyst Michael Scheuer, the US intelligence agency gave training and logistical support to the anti-Gaddafi “resistance” and that “Obama secretly authorised this covert operation.”
Of course, this is nothing new. You need only research Operation Gladio to understand the extent to which these operations have been carried out in the past. Gladio was a “far-right secret army, operated by the CIA and MI6 through NATO, which killed hundreds of innocent Europeans and attempted to blame the deaths on Baader Meinhof, Red Brigades and other left wing groups. Known as 'stay-behinds' these armies were given access to military equipment which was supposed to be used for sabotage after a Soviet invasion. Instead it was used in massacres across mainland Europe as part of a CIA Strategy of Tension. Gladio killing sprees in Belgium and Italy were carried out for the purpose of frightening the national political classes into adopting U.S. policies.” (see: BBC Documentary, “Timewatch: Operation Gladio”, 1992, Director Allan Frankovich) The “Timewatch” documentary (surprising for the BBC… although it was pre-9/11) shows in detail how Gladio was a quintessential example of cointelpro / agent provocateur strategy.
The aftermath of 9/11 has also had the effect of mobilising popular opinion. One of the few examples of an effective social mobilisation appeared in the fallout from the invasion of Iraq and the WMD farce. Millions of people took to streets of numerous cities to protest against an illegal war. The sheer outrage against government policies and particular individuals, such as Bush and Blair, reminded the powers that be of the potential threat from genuine people power... something which scared them witless.
The 21st century is a curious time for truth. More people are now waking up to the reality of a hidden history / global truth and the alternative community has become a force to be reckoned with. For possibly the first time, a battleground of sorts has appeared with various psychological weaponry, infiltration and armaments being deployed on all sides. As much as we might want to think in terms of black and white, good and evil, goodies and baddies, there have never really been any clearly defined boundaries in truth… especially now.
With the power of the movement now stronger than ever, there are some very controversial questions to ask. It is becoming a question of “pick your side”, rather than “what do you think?” This kind of boxed mentality makes ‘Truth’ a very dangerous place indeed… recognising and questioning it, even more so. Never the less, these questions are a responsibility of truth. Why does enlightenment need to have a representative middleman? They say that the truth speaks for itself, so why all of a sudden does it need to be led by the hand?
movements is like opening Pandora’s Box. Every question asked by a researcher about facets of 9/11 Truth or The Occupy Movement often invites attack or counter questions of personal intentions. Yet these are important questions to ask. Andrew Johnson’s book “9/11 – Finding the Truth” raises some very important questions about the connections between certain prolific researchers and assorted military/industrial complex players and their associates. It also shows a clear and multi-pronged attack upon those supporting the idea of a connection between 9/11 and directed free-energy technology (specifically the work of Dr Judy Wood.)
“Nanomanagement: The Disintegration of a Non-Profit Corporation” by Michael Armenia discusses (albeit from a biased perspective) the collapse of ‘Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth’. Appendix C (page 236) includes the March 12, 2009 draft of the “Volunteer Vetting Procedures” of those wishing to be involved with the group. These extensive investigation procedures specify being careful to watch for those who could potentially be destructive for the movement. The ‘destructive’ criteria include those who have researched “no planes”, “directed energy weapons” and “Judy Wood.” Why is this so? ‘No-planers’ and ‘DEW’ researchers have something crucial to bring to any legitimate investigation of 9/11. Is this the reason why they are side-lined, attacked or discredited?
I’ve heard it said that in order to get ‘non-truthers’ to take 9/11 seriously, the research needs to stay within the realms of possible /plausible reality. Only a cursory look at the directed free-energy research (relating to 9/11) shows something perfectly possible or plausible. The ramifications of this area of study are huge, maybe that’s the point. Such knowledge would need to be discredited and kept from mass public awareness, and therefore imply the necessity for subversion in some areas of 9/11 truth.
aspects of the Occupy movement. Although it is much harder to point to specific concerns (unlike 9/11), it is hard to ignore the recent alleged connections between Occupy and say: George Soros, Adbusters, The Lucis Trust, and Ivan Marovic and Srdja Popovic . The last two chaps are intricately associated with OPTOR/CANVAS (Centre For Applied Non-violent Action And Strategies), which was founded as a “non-violent revolutionary group” by Serbians and responsible for driving the uprising that overthrew Slobodan Milosevic in the late 90s/early 2000s.
Popovic claims that CANVAS is 100% privately funded with no involvement from the US government, yet it is alleged by many that OTPOR/CANVAS has become a powerful CIA front, creating the model for popular global uprisings. William Engdahl claims that OTPOR now operates as “revolutionary consultants” in over 50 countries and is geared toward finding ways to instigate “regime change”.
Numerous individuals have come out in support of Occupy and spoken at various rallies. It is worth noting that some of these folk are big in the alternative world, yet whenever they take to these platforms of expression, they fail to even mention 9/11 or any other ‘bigger picture’ issues. Interesting that…
On a more esoteric level, we have the likes of Kanye West (with his Rockefeller connections) spouting on about Occupy. The use of the human loudspeaker system (with its repetitive slogan aspect) and the bizarre uptake of the pyramid hand sign at rallies (allegedly symbolising a ‘point of procedure’ or something like that).
totally ignored the mainstream media, then totally ridiculed, then labelled as a union-sponsored, anti-free market, pro-Marxist movement. Nowadays Occupy is often compared to the Tea Party and (much as it was) labelled as a “grassroots” movement… a buzzword that we should be very suspicious of. It almost appears as though it has now become credible in the eyes of the MSN and anything MSN speaks favourably about should be eyed very warily. I am always extremely cautious when the media changes their tune about something, let alone four times! There are also several pieces of footage floating around on the internet that show staged, small scale protests for the benefit of the cameras. One such piece was broadcast on RT, omitting the cue to the cameraman at the beginning.
I suspect the origins of Occupy to be largely benign in nature, but this still doesn’t exclude the possibility of infiltration. It is well documented that the US Department of Homeland Security has already classified the Occupy movement as a “potential security risk”. Similar observations have been made by several western government agencies. They wouldn’t say such things and then let them just get on with it. It would actually be naïve to think that Occupy hasn’t already been infiltrated. The question is: to what extent?
Before I am accused of sounding totally damning, I must make it clear that I have nothing against movements. I wrote, back in October, about the pride I felt when watching Occupy take to the streets across countless cities around the world. Social uprisings can change the world in wonderful ways. However, the voice of the few that starts to represent the many is exactly the same as that which we fight to expose. These people who steer or micromanage a cause (even with the best of intentions) can so easily be misdirected, misinformed or even corrupted.
So what does this say about our little “town called truth” then?
In order to decide what to do and how to act, we must first learn. As I pointed out in the first paragraph, the problems all stem from people. Unfortunately, there is no such thing as an original thought. To learn, we must study what others have already accumulated and it is here that personal agendas (good and bad) can get in the way. We all know that there are high profile individuals (researchers & authors in the alternative community) who are slanted by an extreme left/right political perspective, xenophobic tendencies or spiritual/religious leanings. This is a shame because within their bias lies some well researched, important and factual information. If people fail to separate stance from facts, they can be so easily and blindly led… even when it seems like a just cause.
No matter how enlightened we think we may be, remember that we are only the hair of gnat’s knacker away from sheep! The facts remain that, with regard to our cognitive processes, we either want to be led or need to be from time to time and in the case of early age it is a practical necessity that literally forms those processes.
mind that you only as powerful or awake as you want to be. It takes time but it gets easier the more you do it. A little common sense (not in the traditional sense!!) can go a long way. Learn all you can lay your hands. Get in the faces of the knowledge bearers and ask questions, get them to point you to all the places that inspired / informed them and make up your own mind. If you don’t ask, you won’t get… and never be ashamed of asking. With enough wisdom, you’ll know how to act and when. You’ll know when it is the right time to say “NO!”
Until next time…
The Truth Seeker’s Guide.