The Liberty Beacon

The Liberty Beacon

What's Hot…


Turkey 2

By TLB International Contributor: Ceylan Ozbudak

An overwhelming majority of NGOs and analysts have led the diplomats of the EU and the U.S. into playing a detrimental role in the status of Ukraine. The EU was looking for a western-facing Ukraine — leaving Russia behind — and failed to take into consideration that Sevastopol in Crimea was the only door the Russian Navy has to the Black Sea and “the Bear” would fight for this with its life.

Now those who supported the internal conflicts in Ukraine are holding meeting after meeting and have come to realize they have nothing left other than threatening Russia with sanctions. Russia’s economy mainly depends on natural resources extraction, most of which is sold to the EU. Sanctions – if applied – would only further damage European economies and Russia could end up exporting its rich natural resources to the rapidly-rising East.

Ukraine is a hub for the East-West corridor and has been subjected to occupation and pillage due to Asia-Europe disputes throughout its history.

The EU certainly did not pull Ukraine so forcefully to its side thinking the Ukrainians would excel in democracy, art and science and therefore contribute to a great extent to the culture of the European Union. They did so because the thirsty EU economies needed at least a part of this vital country to have control over the Russian energy corridor to Europe.

The EU also knew that a shattered Ukraine, stripped from its geopolitical importance, would not mean much to either Ukrainians or Europeans.

This should lead us to think of, and take precautions for, a potential axial shift dispute in the Balkans, a new conflict to spread to the coasts of the Black Sea, like the one in the Persian Gulf. If the crisis gets bigger, the Black Sea will become a militarized region, the center for a Russia-West conflict, and countries in the region will begin arming themselves to the teeth: Romania, Bulgaria and Ukraine will turn into vast military encampments.

Here we have to turn to the country which has the longest Black Sea coasts and controls the sea traffic in the Black Sea: Turkey. Turkey constitutes the basic axis of the South East Gas Corridor (SGC) along with Azerbaijan and Israel is getting involved in the international energy business through Turkey. Iran is also insisting on joining this energy axis.

Turkey is the only country, which can diplomatically invite all these diverse players to the same table. The diplomatic crisis between Turkey and Israel has quickly subsided and is on the road to being completely resolved. Azerbaijan already calls Turkey a brother nation.

Turkey has been strikingly successful in bringing Iran to the diplomatic table concerning serious international matters such as the Syria crisis, the Iranian-Western nuclear deal and relationships in the Gulf region. Turkey is the only country where both Iranian and Israeli citizens can travel without a visa and enjoy their stay without being concerned about security risks.

Montreux Convention

Is Turkey holding the cards to solving simply a potential energy crisis? Not at all, it is far more than that. Turkey controls the only passageway to the Black Sea and the Turkish Straits are the only waterways connecting the Black Sea to the Aegean and Mediterranean Seas and to the oceans through the Suez Canal and the Straits of Gibraltar.

Since 1936, passage through the Turkish Straits has been governed by the Montreux Convention. Freedom of transit and navigation in the Straits is regulated in the Convention based on discrimination regarding merchant vessels, vessels of war, and aircraft.

The delicate balances in the Black Sea right now heavily depend on Turkey being the calm, sane and wise rational actor in the escalating tensions. One needs to feel the moral dynamics, understand economic forces, recognize back-door diplomatic corridors and study the history of a region perfectly and be ready to accept the true driving force behind a community, no matter how controversial it may be to their personal beliefs.

Ceylan Ozbudak

Other distinctions are dependent on circumstances: times of peace, when Turkey is not a belligerent during a time of war, when Turkey is a belligerent in a time of war, and situations when Turkey considers itself threatened with the imminent danger of war.

In addition to this, in times of peace, the total number and the maximum aggregate tonnage of all foreign naval forces that may pass through the Turkish Straits are limited to 9 and 15,000 tons respectively. This means aircraft carriers cannot under any circumstance pass through the Turkish Straits.

The maximum aggregate tonnage that non-Black Sea countries may have in this body of water is 45,000 tons. The maximum aggregate tonnage of the vessels of war that one non-Black Sea country may have in the sea is 30,000 tons and vessels of war belonging to non-Black Sea states cannot stay more than 21 days in the Black Sea.  Advance notification must be given to Turkey of all passages through the Turkish Straits. The notification time is eight days for vessels of war belonging to Black Sea states and 15 days for those of other countries.

According to the aforementioned clauses in the Montreux Treaty, even small American or European war ships cannot linger in the Black Sea more than 21 days and they cannot just show up at the door without prior permit. Even though the U.S. asked Turkey to violate the treaty to pressure Russia regarding Ukraine, Turkey turned down this offer.

The reason why we are seeing an American warship in the Black Sea right now is because the ship was declared to need repairs after its 21 day permit had expired. Turkey sought to keep the Black Sea demilitarized since 1936.

Following the South Ossetia War in August 2008, the Turkish Straits again became an issue of concern for the US when Turkey denied passage to US warships seeing to transit the Straits, which prevented the tensions from escalating even further between the US and Russia.

Istanbul Canal is the key to Black Sea power struggle

There is one other factor in the near future which will make Turkey the number one player in the Black Sea power struggle: the Istanbul Canal project. Through this new canal, Turkey will be able to pass aircraft carrier groups to the Black Sea without any international supervision even in times of peace. Military power is surely very important but the Istanbul Canal puts more power into the hands of Turkey through the energy axis and raises its position as an energy hub.

Turkey has two relatively small domestic crude oil pipelines, Ceyhan-Kırıkkale and Batman-Dörtyol, which pump 135,000 bb/d and 86,400 bb/d respectively. Turkey’s two major international pipelines, Kirkuk-Ceyhan and Baku-Tblisi-Ceyhan pale in comparison to the 2004-2008 average of 2.6-2.8 million barrels of oil transported through the crowded Bosphorus each and every day.

The Istanbul Canal could alleviate the pressure and reduce shipping delays, sometimes by up to three weeks. Even if the capacity of the Samsun-Ceyhan line were increased to 1.5 million barrels per day, there would still be over one million barrels of oil going through the Bosphorus, so clearly pipelines are not the answer.

Of course, the canal would affect the energy policies of other actors in the region. Having an alternative, nationally controlled sea route would increase Turkey’s regional leverage, both politically and economically. The canal would also potentially have an undermining effect on the current pipeline projects of Russia, which would enable the West to have a genuine “sanctions card” to play against Russia.

Turkey’s pluralist foreign policy

These developments show the importance of Turkey’s pluralist foreign policy and rejection of taking sides in East-West disputes. Despite significant pressure from the outside, Turkey has always kept calm in times of crisis and did not turn its back on either Russia or the European Union.

If Turkey chose sides like many states expect it would, and turned its face to either East or West, this would become a catalyst in creating a new Cold War. I can name many respected analysts criticizing Turkey for having good relationships with Russia, Iran, Israel or America despite the ongoing tensions.

However, the delicate balances in the Black Sea right now heavily depend on Turkey being the calm, sane and wise rational actor in the escalating tensions. One needs to feel the moral dynamics, understand economic forces, recognize back-door diplomatic corridors and study the history of a region perfectly and be ready to accept the true driving force behind a community, no matter how controversial it may be to their personal beliefs.

A lack of deep understanding of the aforementioned details has led the majority of political pundits to make miscalculations not only with their poll predictions or the outcome of the protests in Turkey, but also with their foreign policy assessments. With its historical presence, special bonds and future projects, it is Turkey that will be holding the key to peace in the Black Sea in the near future.


Ceylan 2013





Ceylan Ozbudak is a Turkish political analyst, television presenter, The Liberty Beacon International Contributor and Executive Director of Building Bridges, an Istanbul-based NGO. As a representative of Harun Yahya organization, she frequently cites quotations from the author in her writings. She can be followed on Twitter via @ceylanozbudak


Peter Koenig
Global Research
Tue, 08 Apr 2014 16:13 CDT

Russia has just dropped another bombshell, announcing not only the de-coupling of its trade from the dollar, but also that its hydrocarbon trade will in the future be carried out in rubles and local currencies of its trading partners – no longer in dollars – see Voice of Russia
Russia’s trade in hydrocarbons amounts to about a trillion dollars per year. Other countries, especially the BRICS and BRCIS-associates (BRICSA) may soon follow suit and join forces with Russia, abandoning the ‘petro-dollar’ as trading unit for oil and gas. This could amount to tens of trillions in loss for demand of petro-dollars per year (US GDP about 17 trillion dollars – December 2013) – leaving an important dent in the US economy would be an understatement.

Added to this is the declaration today by Russia’s Press TV – China will re-open the old Silk Road as a new trading route linking Germany, Russia and China, allowing to connect and develop new markets along the road, especially in Central Asia, where this new project will bring economic and political stability, and in Western China provinces,where “New Areas” of development will be created. The first one will be the Lanzhou New Area in China’s Northwestern Gansu Province, one of China’s poorest regions.

“During his visit to Duisburg, Chinese President Xi Jinping made a master stroke of economic diplomacy that runs directly counter to the Washington neo-conservative faction’s effort to bring a new confrontation between NATO and Russia.” (press TV, April 6, 2014)
“Using the role of Duisburg as the world’s largest inland harbor, an historic transportation hub of Europe and of Germany’s Ruhr steel industry center, he proposed that Germany and China cooperate on building a new “economic Silk Road” linking China and Europe. The implications for economic growth across Eurasia are staggering.”

Curiously, western media have so far been oblivious to both events. It seems like a desire to extending the falsehood of our western illusion and arrogance – as long as the silence will bear.

Germany, the economic driver of Europe – the world’s fourth largest economy (US$ 3.6 trillion GDP) – on the western end of the new trading axis, will be like a giant magnet, attracting other European trading partners of Germany’s to the New Silk Road. What looks like a future gain for Russia and China, also bringing about security and stability, would be a lethal loss for Washington.

In addition, the BRICS are preparing to launch a new currency – composed by a basket of their local currencies – to be used for international trading, as well as for a new reserve currency, replacing the rather worthless debt ridden dollar – a welcome feat for the world.

Along with the new BRICS(A) currency will come a new international payment settlement system, replacing the SWIFT and IBAN exchanges, thereby breaking the hegemony of the infamous privately owned currency and gold manipulator, the Bank for International Settlement (BIS) in Basle, Switzerland – also called the central bank of all central banks.
To be sure – the BIS is a privately owned for profit institution, was created in the early 1930′s, in the midst of the big economic melt-down of the 20th Century. The BIS was formed precisely for that purpose – to control the world’s monetary system, along with the also privately owned FED and the Wall Street Banksters – the epitome of private unregulated ownership.

The BIS is known to hold at least half a dozen secret meetings per year, attended by the world’s elite, deciding the fate of countries and entire populations. Their demise would be another welcome new development.

As the new trading road and monetary system will take hold, other countries and nations, so far in the claws of US dependence, will flock to the ‘new system’, gradually isolating Washington’s military industrial economy (sic) and its NATO killing machine.

This Economic Sea Change may bring the empire to its knees, without spilling a drop of blood. An area of new hope for justice and more equality, a rebirth of sovereign states, may dawn and turn the spiral of darkness into a spiral of light.
Peter Koenig is an economist and former World Bank staff. He worked extensively around the world in the fields of environment and water resources. He writes regularly for Global Research, ICH, the Voice of Russia and other internet sites. He is the author of Implosion – fiction based on facts and on 30 years of experience around the globe. .


Read article here:

TLB highly recommends you read more great/pertinent articles here:

Global Research, April 15, 2014


Steve McQueen, director of this year’s Oscar winner for best film “12 Years A Slave,” mentioned in his acceptance speech last month that 21 million people are living in slavery today. That quoted figure comes from the 2012 report issued by the United Nation’s International Labor Organization (ILO) that has been attempting to gather international data for over a decade now. In the Asia-Pacific region where most of the world’s forced laborers come from at 56%, an estimated 11.7 million people, followed by Africa at 18% or 3.7 million people live in bondage. Considering that at the peak of America’s slavery prior to the Civil War that ultimately declared it illegal, the total was four million people, fathoming that over five times that number are currently suffering in slavery here in the twenty-first century, casts some serious doubts on whether us humans are evolving as a species at all.

The following statistics come from the 2012 ILF report. The global economic meltdown in recent years has only given rise to conditions ripe for escalation of modern slavery. A total of 18.7 million people or 90% become forced laborers in the private sector of individual homes or private enterprise as opposed to the 10% or 2.2 million people that suffer state-imposed forms of forced labor. Of those 18.7 million forced to work in private settings, 4.5 million (or 22%) are forced into sexual exploitation while 14.2 million (or 68%) are victims of forced labor such as in agriculture, domestic work, construction or manufacturing.

The most concentrated area of forced labor victimization is in central and southeastern Europe at 4.2 humans out of 1000 followed by 4 out of 1000 in Africa. Slavery is lowest in developed nations and the European Union at 1.5 per 1000 people. The world average is 3 people in every 1000 are forced into labor.

An appalling 26% of all modern slaves or 5.5 million are children under 18, the majority underage girls forced into child prostitution and pornography. Other children are forced into working in sweat shops while young boys 12 and older are frequently recruited and forced to become child soldiers. The majority at 56% (11.8 million) of the world‘s forced laborers remain in their home country. As an example India has been identified as a nation where many of its own poor citizens are forced into slave labor. However, of the 44% (9.1 million) that are forced into labor across borders, the vast majority being women and children are sold into the highly profitable sex trafficking trade often operated by organized crime rings.

Though slaves around the world today may not be legally beaten, shackled or sold as property like African American slaves suffered for over two centuries between 1619-1865, an estimated 32 billion dollars is generated annually in an underground industry classified as a type of slavery – human trafficking. Many sources estimate profits far greater than the United Nations total of 32 billion. Only guns and drugs are more lucrative criminal enterprises.

According to the UN, transporting individuals from their homes to another location against their will into involuntary servitude or forced labor involves at least 2.5 million human trafficking victims worldwide at any given time. Seventy nine percent of victims of the human trafficking trade fall into the slavery category of sexually abused women and underage children. Female victims are both women and girls snatched up from their only familiar environment, forcibly taken across borders, and there all alone in a strange land surrounded by cruel, depraved strangers speaking in foreign tongues, they are forced into prostitution although some become domestic work as nannies, maids, cooks or factory workers. Fifteen percent of human trafficking victims are men most often forced into conditions of hard labor.

Because many nations neither have the will nor the formal mechanism in place to assess how many humans are slaves, actual numbers have been difficult to attain. Plus due to the common perception of slavery being so stigmatized with shame, along with fear of potential immigration problems or violent retribution from slave trade perpetrators, many victims understandably resist going to authorities and reporting this largely invisible crime against humanity. Some are victims of the Stockholm syndrome where they actually identify with their enslavers.

Of course the illicit nature of both slavery as well as prostitution as part of the seedy underbelly of a brutally violent industry covertly run by organized crime, also acts as a formidable barrier resulting in severe underreporting and relatively few cases ever being brought to prosecution. All of these factors have contributed to a growing international problem that has been slow for organizations of both victim advocacy as well as national and transnational law enforcement agencies to effectively come together to tackle its immensity.

Yet since last month’s Oscar winning film delving into this enormously important subject matter, more recent developments just in this last week alone are beginning to shine a sliver of light and modest reason for optimism on this long overlooked and indelible human stain. Last Thursday the pope many believe comes closest to embodying the spirit of the most famous saint Francis of Assisi, Pope Francis himself met privately with four ex-slaves to top off a two-day global conference  bringing much needed attention to the blight of modern slavery. The pope is calling for an orchestrated partnership and two pronged approach between churches around the world offering spiritual guidance and compassion to victims and international law enforcement spearheading the coordinated investigative crackdown necessary to arrest what Francis calls this “scourge” on humanity from spreading beyond its current worldwide operation.

Police chiefs from the continents of North and South America, Africa, Asia and Europe were all in attendance, including countries where the problem of human trafficking has been most severe – Albania, Brazil, Nigeria and Thailand. It was reported that this rather weighty topic of global slavery was discussed in the pope’s meeting last month with President Obama.

This first time conference on slavery in the twenty-first century comes fresh on the heels of the pope’s apology to the world for all the damage his religion has inflicted on the thousands of innocent victims of sexual abuse perpetrated by pedophile Catholic priests and clergymen through the ages. In the US alone from 1985 to 2000 an estimated 1,400 sexual abuse lawsuits were filed against priests resulting in billions of dollars in settlements reached. Papal critics and abuse advocates view the pope’s personal apology as a genuine first big step in the right direction toward bearing some responsibility for the sins of his church. But many still await the pope’s specific concrete plan of action to substantively tackle and begin making further inroads toward resolving this endemic pandemic he inherited.

Benjamin Skinner wrote in his eye-opening landmark book A Crime So Monstrous (Free Press, 2008) that “there are more slaves today than at any point in human history” – six years ago citing 27 million people living in bondage – a full six million more than ILO’s latest 2012 count. The estimated variance of numbers is a testimonial to the enormity of difficulty compiling and accurately tracking slavery’s pervasiveness in the modern world. It seems highly unlikely that at such an early stage of still organizing a global commitment toward its eradication that slavery is actually decreasing in the ensuing years since Skinner’s book was published. If anything, the human trafficking industry has been expanding both its area and scope of operations, particularly in east Asia.

Less than a month ago at the Vatican a new initiative released by multiple faiths represented announced a Memorandum of Agreement and Joint Statement establishing the Global Freedom Network designed to abolish modern slavery and human trafficking by 2020. Its statement on slavery:

“The physical, economic and sexual exploitation of men, women and children condemns 30  million  people to dehumanization and degradation. Every day we let this tragic situation continue is a grievous assault on our common humanity and a shameful affront to the consciences of all peoples.”

In efforts to educate and inform the public about modern slavery and human trafficking, a series of ongoing articles have been covered by such newspapers as the Observer and Guardian, both announced as UK winners of the Anti-Slavery Day Media Awards last week. The Guardian launched a series called “modern day slavery in focus” that depicts the atrocious conditions of Nepalese workers in the Middle Eastern nation Qatar in preparation for the 2022 World Cup.

Similar to the Sochi Olympics, a common pattern has emerged with construction of massive stadium complexes for major international sporting events that under pressured deadlines pre-set the stage for inhumane work conditions with high potential for human trafficking of forced slave laborers. The Guardian tells the tragic story of a sixteen year old boy from Nepal attempting to escape poverty back home arriving in Qatar to work in a cramped forced labor camp exploited by a trafficking broker that produced a forged passport claiming the boy was 20. Instead of receiving the promised pay wage, the 16-year old was forced to sign his life away in indentured servitude but within two months was dead. Nepal’s foreign employment board estimates that 726 Nepalese migrant workers died overseas in 2012, marking an 11% increase from the previous year. More foreign workers abroad especially from Asia are being misled and lured into this world of exploitation, corruption and deception that increasingly results in slavery and death.

In a related matter, the UK Parliament is in the throes of drafting Europe’s first modern anti-slavery bill calling for lifetime sentences for convicted human traffickers. Debate centers around simplifying the law to increase the rate of conviction. Last week Oscar winning director Steve McQueen weighed in his criticism calling for the bill to be rewritten so as to not turn victims of slavery themselves into criminals. A revised reworking is underway.

Even a publicity stunt was just announced of an April 15th Guinness record breaking event of a whirlwind 7-city tour across Europe in just 24 hours emphasizing awareness of human trafficking to raise money for the leading US anti-trafficking policy organization ECPAT-USA. This week also marks the third annual human trafficking awareness week at Chico State University in California. Last weekend a bi-national conference with delegates from El Paso, Texas and across the border city Juarez held a joint conference on modern slavery and human trafficking to reduce its occurrence between Mexico and the US.

It appears that lawmakers and church faiths alike from the local to international level in conjunction with local, national and Interpol policing agencies are mobilizing task forces like never before to generate momentum in addressing the plight of modern slavery. A number of advocacy organizations in recent years have been fighting to make this destructive and sinister human rights violation among the worst kind a global priority and it appears their efforts are finally now just beginning to pay off. But real progress towards eradicating slavery requires a lot more than just an ephemeral, “flavor-of-the-week” cause and mindset.

These recent small steps only highlight humanity’s seminal starting point in the modern era to collectively exercise the political will to prioritize, fund and coordinate a concerted effective global effort and campaign over the long haul to ultimately end slavery on this planet once and for all.

Joachim Hagopian is a West Point graduate and former Army officer. His written manuscript based on his military experience examines leadership and national security issues and can be consulted at After the military, Joachim earned a masters degree in psychology and became a licensed therapist working in the mental health field for more than a quarter century.


Read article here:

TLB recommends you read more great/pertinent articles here:

London  2_logo[1]

By: John Christian

We are at present working discreetly, but with all our might, to wrest this mysterious force called sovereignty out of the clutches of the local national states of the world. And all the time we are denying with our lips what we are doing with our hands.”- Arnold Toynbee, Fabian Society – City Of London

Consider this paper a fair warning to all. Having been exposed to the inner workings of world politics and power struggles for many years, the author wishes to convey to the people of the world that these individuals, although caught up in sickening, delusion of ego, and dreams of world domination, are very serious in their intent, and equally as bent toward the attainment of their goals. [This] is their plan, which they are moving forward with as you read this . . . It is left up to WE, The People to be even more intent on putting them away – for good.” – John Christian, Author


The modern system of local and regional government can be directly traced back to Babylon, when in King Nebuchadnezzar’s time (605-562 B.C.), the city was divided up into ten distinct regions or districts ruled by princes, under whom were mayoral governors, captains, judges, treasurers, councilors and sheriffs.

In modern times the system of local government that we have throughout the world is derived exclusively from the City of London Corporation. The City of London Corporation is a Masonic, private, independent, sovereign state occupying approximately one square mile within the heart of the greater London area inside the old Roman walls of London. It either directly or indirectly, controls all mayors, councils, regional councils, multi-national and trans-national banks, corporations, judicial systems (through Old Bailey, Temple Bar and the Royal Courts of Justice in London), the IMF, World Bank, Vatican Bank (through N. M. Rothschild & Sons London Italian subsidiary Torlonia), European Central Bank, United States Federal Reserve (which is privately owned and secretly controlled by eight British-controlled shareholding banks), the Bank for International Settlements in Switzerland (which is also British-controlled and oversees all of the Reserve Banks around the world including our own) and last but not least, the communist European Union and communist United Nations Organization.

The Court of leadership consists of the Lord Mayor, 25 Aldermen and 130 Common Councilmen. All of the giant, largely Jewish international banks and corporations in the City of London that control the world are members of one or another of the Twelve Great Livery Companies domiciled in Guildhall (or the Hall of the City of London Corporation).

As the result of a ‘gentleman’s agreement’ between the sovereign and the City – which merchants and bankers made many hundreds of years ago, the Lord Mayor is officially head of the Corporation and is allowed to operate independently of the sovereign.

However, the wealth of the world held in the Corporation ultimately is the Sovereign’s, because, should the gentleman’s agreement break down, the sovereign has the power to “rescind” the Corporation’s independence.

The Queen sometimes refers to the Corporation as “The Firm.”

The supreme ruler of the City is the Lord Mayor who is elected once a year and lives in the Mansion House. The City has a resident population of about 5,000 that rises to about two million during the week when people surge in and out each day to work. The financial center of the world, it is often termed the ‘wealthiest square mile on earth.’ The full title of the Square Mile’s governing body is the ‘Mayor, Aldermen and Commons of the City of London in Common Council Assembled.’

While ostensibly, the power of the monarchy appears to be diminishing as the Queen voluntarily gives her Commonwealth countries their ‘independence’. They become republics chartered to the United Nations. As she actively works toward abolishing the sovereignty of Britain, the UK is broken up and divided into regions of the European Union. Her ‘City of London’ Corporation, her multi-national banks and her multi-national corporations are quietly taking over the world.

In ancient times the City marshals and sheriffs were employed to ensure that all the “council” rates and taxes were paid to the City on behalf of the king. After the conquest of William the Conqueror in 1066, who first brought the Jewish bankers to London from France, the Jews developed written credit agreements for the king, (in French called “mort-gages” mort ‘death’gage ‘bond’) and it was the marshal’s and sheriff’s jobs to ensure that all the interest payments of these “death bonds” were paid to the Jews on behalf of the king.

During the reign of Richard I (the Lionheart) after the serious downturn in the economy as the result of the cost and tax impositions of the Crusades, many farmers, business people and peasants had defaulted on their “mort-gages” throughout England. (read “Blondel’s Song” by David Boyle to understand how 25% of the wealth of England was required in standard Silver Ingots to free Richard the Lionheart from not Saladdin but the ‘Holy’ Roman Emperor!”)

As the result, the JEWS promptly commenced seizing the commoner’s property for not paying the interest, rates and taxes to the City and King. Subsequently, a rapid increase in hate against the “King’s Jews” was initiated. This led to the massacre of Jews at York in 1190. New York in America was later named by British Jewish immigrant bankers in memory of the event.

For 100 years the commoner’s hate against the “King’s Jews” fermented until 1290, when, under pressure from the people, Edward III finally suspended the Mayoralty and reluctantly banished all Jews from his kingdom. 16,000 Jews left England and didn’t begin to return until around the reign of Elizabeth I. (1558-1603)

This era is when the enormous power of the City really began to accelerate with the opening of the world’s first stock exchange in London and has continued unabated to the present day. While there have been rare occasions when the Lord Mayor and Commalty of the City, as a result of their colossal wealth and power have been able to subtly out-maneuver the monarch, as to their cost, Richard II, Charles I and James II were to learn to their fate. Generally speaking this has been the exception rather than the rule.

Ultimately, whoever successfully rules must have the “will” of the people. Historically, in the City many although certainly not all monarchs, have ruled with the “will” of their subjects. But rarely, if ever, have the bankers, rich barons or knights been respected in this position. More often than not they’ve been consistently hated. Even when monarchs have done a poor job, provided they have still had the “will” of the people, the ‘wealthy bankers’ position has been extremely “perilous” to say the least.

After forty years of misrule by Henry III, the Lord Mayor, Thomas Fitzthomas (1261- 1264) and the Aldermen defied the king. On this particular occasion the Lord Mayor ended up being thrown into the Tower where he died. Henry III vetoed nine Mayors in his long reign, and jailed another who died in prison.

On one occasion the threat to the Lord Mayor’s massive wealth and power has not come directly from the monarch, but from the people themselves. Mayor Nicholas Brembre (1383-1385) had been a king’s man during the peasant’s revolt, and was knighted by Richard II for curbing the ambitions of his uncle, John of Gaunt. But Brembre had few friends among the common people having deposed the popular Mayor Adam Stable, and when he re-imposed the hated Poll Tax which had caused the revolt, the mob turned on him. He was given a mockery of a trial and was then hanged, drawn and quartered.

Understandably, therefore, from the time of Richard II most of the “Lord Mayors” in the City of London and others in the realm became very “cautious” and “hesitant” about any proposal which could be seen as an “unreasonable demand” to levy rates or taxes for the City and king.

However, today these events have all but been forgotten. From the time of William the Conqueror in 1066 up to the time of the Reformation the City of London Corporation was Roman Catholic. (The modern global “company” and “corporate” business system that we know today grew out of the old Roman Catholic dioceses in England which were the world’s first “corporations”).

During the reigns of Henry VIII (1491-1547) and Elizabeth I (1558-1603) when the Church of England, knights and barons took over the assets of the Catholic Church in England, the City then became Protestant. Gradually however, the people of England apostatized and turned away from the Protestant King James Bible and Christianity in general, both Roman Catholic and Protestant.

In the period beginning in the late 1800′s the City and Monarchy became rabidly Socialist. The religion of Socialism is based primarily on the teachings of the pagan Greek philosopher and writer Plato, and especially his book The Republic, in which 400 years before the time of Christ he dreamed of a “World Republic” headed not by a president, but by a royal “world philosopher king” or “prince” – like himself of course. Both Karl Marx and Hitler were great students of Plato. It is only inevitable that the planned reformed United Nations and EU will one day be headed by this “Philosopher Prince”.

Socialism officially first began in 1880 in London when H. M. Hyndman founded the Rose Street Club, which was dedicated to the destruction of Christianity in England. In 1884 the group changed its name and came to be called the Social Democratic Federation. Its early members deceptively called themselves “Christian Socialists”.

Later the group’s membership included the Jew, Karl Marx’s daughter, Eleanor Marx and her husband Professor Aveling. Behind the scenes the group was largely controlled by Engels, Karl Marx’s partner. Because Hyndman would not obey the orders of Engels, Eleanor Marx and her husband split off with William Morris the poet and others and started an opposition group which they called the Socialist League.

On January 4, 1884, members and past members of the Social Democratic Federation, the Socialist League and others founded the Fabian Society. The first meeting of the Fabian Society was held at the home of Mr. E. R. Pease, a member of the London Stock Exchange. Two of the leading members were George Bernard Shaw and Sidney Webb. Other early members were Eleanor Marx, theosophist and occultist Annie Besant, and author H. G. Wells.

The name of the society was suggested by the Spiritualist, Frank Podmore, who named it after the brilliant, elderly, third century Roman general, censor and consul, Quintus Fabius (Maximus Verrucosus 303-203 BC) who was made a dictator in 221-217 BC and, with his small band of fighting guerrillas and superior cunning, successfully defended Rome by defeating Hannibal’s much bigger and mighty Carthaginian army through “gradualism” and “terrorism” during the time of the second Punic War.

Initially he kept to the hills and cunningly hampered the enemy’s progress by cutting off their food and supply lines with “delaying tactics” until Rome could assemble enough men to defend the city successfully. During the war, his slow, “gradual,” delaying tactics were greatly disapproved of by his soldiers and the civilians and earned him the name of ‘Cunctator’ the ‘Delayer.’ But later, after the triumph, his skill and wisdom was highly appreciated. He died in his 100th year in 203 BC.

The only difference between Fabian Socialism and Communism is that Communists take your house by directly sending in the “secret police” to knock your front door down. Fabian Socialists do it much more subtly and cleverly by “gradually” taking your individual rights away, by “gradually” increasing property taxes and rates, and finally, when you can’t pay them, they send in their regional “council tax inspectors” to take your house away but the end result is the same.

Former British PM Tony Blair and President George Bush Junior’s globalist “war on terror” is a classic Fabian Socialist strategy. The philosophy of the Fabian Society was written in 1887 and included the statement:

The Fabian Society acknowledges the principal tenet of Marxism the abolition of private property etc.”

(Of course this does not apply to the elect oligarchy at the top who end up owning the lot!).

Fabian Socialism is a “mixture” of Fascism, Nazism, Marxism and Communism all bundled together. However, it is much more deadly because it is much more clever and subtle. Sidney and Beatrice Webb published a book of 1143 pages in defense of Bolshevism. It was entitled Soviet Communism: A New Civilization.

In April 1952 the Webbs were exposed before a US Senate Committee on the judiciary when Soviet Colonel I. M. Bogolepov, a former Red Army officer stated that:

“…the entire text had been prepared by himself in the Soviet Foreign Office…”

Appropriately, the defiant coat of arms of the Fabian Society (commissioned by author/playwright co-founder George Bernard Shaw) today (now archived) is a “wolf in sheep’s clothing.” Until recently it also appeared on the Fabian glass window (now removed) in the Beatrice Webb House at Dorking, Surrey.

Part II


Today the Fabian Society is among other things the intellectual wing of the British Labor Party. Before the now infamous pedophile, Tony Blair became British Prime Minister in May 1997, he was Chairman of the Fabian Society. Since the 1997 British general election there have been around 200 Fabian MP’s in the House of Commons, some of whom have formed almost entire Labor Cabinets including: Gordon Brown, Robin Cook, Jack Straw, David Blunkett, Peter Hain, Patricia Hewitt, John Reid, Ruth Kelly, Alan Milburn and Clare Short.

Now headed by Gordon Brown, Fabians now dominate the entire British government. They are resident in all parties and sit on all important select committees, commissions and organizations allied to the government. A good web-site on the subject is:

The Fabian Society literally controls the European Union. German-born Gisela Stuart, the Labour MP for Birmingham Edgbaston since 1997, and member of the House of Commons Foreign Affairs Select Committee, was one of two House of Commons’ Representatives on the European Convention and a member of the Presidium of the Convention on the Future of Europe. The Presidium was the drafting body that created the draft Constitution for Europe.

In her book, ‘The Making of Europe’s Constitution’, published in December 2003 by the Fabian Society, p. 20-21, Gisela writes:

In the early months, the Presidium members would meet in a small room in the Justus Lipsius Building some fifteen minute walk from the European Parliament.”

Attendance was limited to the thirteen members, the Secretary General Sir John Kerr, his deputy and the press officer. Sir John Kerr, a former Permanent Secretary of the British Foreign Office, conducted the proceedings inside the Presidium and in the plenary sessions of the Convention with deft diplomatic skill as might be expected from someone who John Major called ‘Machiavelli’ in his autobiography.”

The best description of his talents I heard was:

“When Kerr comes up to you and asks for the time, you wonder why me and why now?”

On several occasions, we would retreat to the Val Duchess a small palace used by the Belgian foreign minister.”

It was at one of the dinners at Val Duchess that the skeleton of the draft constitution was given to members of the presidium in sealed brown envelopes the weekend before the public presentation.”

We were not allowed to take the documents away with us.”

Just precisely who drafted the skeleton, and when, is still unclear to me, but I gather much of the work was done by Valery Giscard d’Estaing and Sir John Kerr over the summer.”

There was little time for informed discussion, and even less scope for changes to be made.”

There is another important idea, a method more than a principle which becomes closely associated with Fabianism. Sydney Webb called it ‘permeation.’ Today it would be called ‘consensus.’ Webb put it this way.

“…Most reformers think that all they have to do in a political democracy is to obtain a majority. This is a profound mistake. What has to be changed is not only the vote that is cast, but also the mental climate in which Parliament and Government both live and work. That I find to be an accurate description of the approach I and my colleagues have tried to bring to the affairs of the nation in our first term of office…”

In the last century, members of the British Fabian Society dynastic banking families in the City of London financed the Communist takeover of Russia. Trotsky in his biography refers to some of the loans from these British financiers going back as far as 1907. By 1917 the major subsidies and funding for the Bolshevik Revolution were co-ordinated and arranged by Sir George Buchanan and Lord Alfred Milner.

Part III


The British plan to take over the world and bring in a “New World Order” began with the teachings of John Ruskin and Cecil Rhodes at Oxford University. Rhodes in one of his wills in 1877 left his vast fortune to Lord Nathan Rothschild as trustee to set up the Rhodes Scholarship Program at Oxford to indoctrinate promising young graduates for the purpose, and also establish a secret society for leading business and banking leaders around the world who would work for the City to bring in their Socialist world government. Rothschild appointed Lord Alfred Milner to implement the plan. At first the society was called ‘Milner’s Kindergarten’, then in 1909 it came to be called The RoundTable. It was to work closely with the London School of Economics founded in 1894 by Fabian Socialist leader Sidney Webb (Lord Passfield).

Today former Rhodes Scholars (such as Bill Clinton), Fabian Business RoundTable members, and graduates from the London School of Economics -(the primary Fabian Socialist training school in the world)- dominate the global banking, business and political systems in every country.

The British Fabian Society plan to takeover the world by the City of London financial community was first published in a book entitled: “All These Things” by a New Zealand author and journalist, A. N. Field. The book was first published in 1936 by Omni Publications in the United States (and censored in New Zealand).

The document, called “Freedom and Planning” was secretly circulated in 1932 by the inner councils of the members of the Political Economic Plan, otherwise known as “P.E.P.” in London. The then chairman of the organization was a City of London Jew, Israel Moses Sieff, who was the reputed author of the plan. The headquarters of P.E.P. were at 16 Queen Anne’s Gate, London. Mr Sieff was also chairman and financier of Marks and Spencer’s’ chain stores and vice-president of the British Zionist Society.

Centred around City of London Jewry’s international financiers in the Bank of England subsidiary, the Bankers Industrial Development Company, the essence of the document “Freedom and Planning” was (and still is) to gradually “Sovietize” the world based on their “Five Year Plan” inaugurated in Moscow in 1927-28 in the Soviet Union.

Part IV


Basically the plan involved the subtle transfer of the entire productive capacity of each country throughout the world into a series of great “State-owned” departments, which would then be “corporatized”, then “privatized” to City of London Corporation International banks and corporations, which they control.

Individual property ownership would be severely restricted, with most of the land, sea, fisheries, rivers, lakes, ports, railways, communications, media, roads, electricity, energy, food, water, waste management, housing, farms, commercial property, schools, hospitals, police, social welfare, Inland Revenue etc. transferred into statutory corporations, companies or land trusts which indirectly would be owned by City of London banks.

The “peasants” would still be allowed to own their own clothes, and small assets like furniture, cars and boats etc., but the main assets of each country would be owned by their multi – national corporations and banks.

In essence the City of London Corporation would become the “One World Earth Corporation” and would privately own the world.

Similar to the experiment carried out in the in the USSR, the whole world would eventually be transferred into a Communist “United Nations” World Soviet Socialist Republic, where each country would be “regionalized” and ruled through “Regional Councils” through a United Nations dictatorship called a “Parliamentary Assembly” which would be just another name for a Soviet style “Central Committee” and all independent, sovereign, national governments would be totally abolished.

As the result of the P.E.P. Plan originally formulated in 1932, right now every country’s “State assets” (owned in trust by the State on behalf of the people) are being frantically “privatized” by City of London-controlled banks and corporations primarily under the directions of two leading Fabian Socialist writers Sir Roger Douglas and John Redwood.

Sir Roger Douglas’s book “Unfinished Business” and John Redwood’s book “Public Enterprise in Crisis” are the primary handbooks being used by central and local government finance ministers and officers all around the world to sell off each nation’s “family silver” and State assets with the more “sensitive” public assets being transferred into Fascist-type Public-Private Partnerships (PPP’s) which are designed to make the public masses and peasantry “think” that they have some degree of control when in reality they have none as the real ownership of the assets are held by the City of London banks and corporations who fund them.

Until relatively recently, John Redwood was head of N. M. Rothschild & Sons London global Overseas Privatization Unit that is coordinating the entire global privatization process. Sir Roger has been contracted as a consultant by City of London Banks, the World Bank and others to advise on national privatization programs as well.

Fabian Society “Regionalization” of the World through UN and EU Control of Regional and City Councils. All of the countries in the world currently are being “regionalized”. Presently, for example, the whole of the United States is being “regionalized” and the EU Committee of the Regions, based in Brussels, is “regionalizing” every country in the European Union. As the result of this radical “regionalization” process, Britain has now already been effectively abolished, having been divided up into 9 separate regions of the EU, plus Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland.

This cunning process, which is being “gradually” implemented to destroy the power of the central national government in each country, is commonly referred to as “Devolution” by the Queen and Fabian Society.

Unlike the rest of the autonomous regions in the UK which, like most of the other regions in the EU that have become virtually powerless through their representation in the European Parliament which is now only a “talking shop”, the City of London Corporation as a separate region by itself within the Union – now rules the European Union. This is because all of the Commissioners are appointed (not elected) to the European Commission by City of London-controlled business leaders and bankers in their respective countries.

Right now throughout the UK all city councils and regional councils are dramatically increasing their rate demand on their constituent’s properties, while at the same time they are quickly expanding their debt levels for unaffordable capital works programs via loans from City of London banks which policies are deliberately intended to prepare for the councils’ “privatization” whilst transferring the local government in each country to “regional councils” which ultimately will become or be controlled by “Regional Parliamentary Assemblies,” identical to the old structure in the former Soviet Union which first regionalized then abolished the national governments before they set up their republican socialist police state.

Part V


Meanwhile, the Obama administration in the US is mirroring the ‘privatization’ (theft) method in North America.

[March 5, 2010 - Obama Land Grab: "Congressman Rob Bishop (R-UT) was leaked a "secret memo" outlining a plan for the Interior Department to place 14 new land tracts on a list of federally controlled "national monuments." The memo outlines 14 areas spread across 9 western states (see memo below for full list of states), amounting to over 10-million acres of resource rich lands that Obama could, according to the Antiquities Act of 1906, take unilaterally."]

Purposely running up massive amounts of unmanageable debt, and, at the same time, increasing the tax burden on individuals and organizations. When debt and tax obligations cannot be met, ownership of the enterprise or individual domicile is reverted back to banking interests – which was the intent from the onset.

In 1992 at the “communist” United Nations Conference on the Environment and Development (UNCED) in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, co-chaired by former Soviet Union President Mikhail Gorbachev and N. M. 

Rothschild-London agent Canadian billionaire Maurice Strong, the UN unveiled a radical environmental philosophical agenda which “inverted” the traditional values reflected in the Bible, Magna Carta and US Constitution (which put man under God at the head of his creation and dominion i.e. a man’s rights were to have superiority over those of animals, fish, plants, trees and forests etc.)

At the Earth Summit in Rio, an old pagan concept was introduced which “inverted” all of our existing, constitutional, democratic, personal and property rights and values espoused by Christianity and transferred them to the environment and the religion of mother-earth Gaia worship. In this religion, a tree becomes more valuable than a human being. A rare bird more valuable than a hospital.

This United Nations program of action unveiled in Rio was called Agenda 21. It is 300 pages long and is very complex. Primarily it is designed to be implemented with other radical UN documents such as the Global Biodiversity Assessment (1100 pages), promoted by the UN Conference on Human Settlements, Habitat II.

The first Habitat conference was held in 1974 and specifically identified private property ownership as a threat to the peace and equality of the environment. It proposed to revolutionize the development of the land and cities of each country under strict “Soviet-style” environmental guidelines, called “Sustainable Development.”

The UN’s communist secret agenda through “environmentalism” and “sustainable development” is very cunning and has deceived a lot of well-meaning people. Most people genuinely want to protect the environment and ensure that the earth’s resources are “sustainable” for future generations there is no doubt. But the communist goal of “sustainable development” and “environmentalism” has absolutely nothing to do with protecting the environment or sustainability it is all about abolition of property rights, and ultimately, collectivization of housing and farms under corporate State control.

Under this system, farmers and property owner’s rights would be effectively extinguished and overridden by strict Environmental and Sustainable Development resource consents and laws. They would be told where they could farm, what “sustainable” land they could “develop,” (sustainable development) what trees they could plant or cut down, what fertilizer if any they could apply, and they would need “consents” and licenses for everything under the sun.

City dwellers would be in the same dire predicament, and have their homes confiscated, or they’d be severely fined, if they cut down a heritage tree, washed their car, boat or dishes using detergent, or used the privatized corporation’s water when they shouldn’t, especially if they were nabbed under their friendly “Neighbourhood Watch Scheme,” which scheme, incidentally, was first implemented in the Soviet Union.

Communist Marxist Socialism is very subtle

The penalty for cutting a tree down without the appropriate government consent would become worse than murder. Not only would you have to license your dog, to own a dog you would have to be licensed too. Farmers would need to be licensed to operate their collectivized farms, spray weeds, care for cattle and drive their tractors under new Soviet-styled “health and safety” laws.

All tradesmen and professional workers would have to be accredited and licensed, as would all Christian pastors and churches, and any other persons or institutions that could be likely to criticize their Soviet bosses. All potential young parents would need to have a license to have children, and if there was any family genetic weakness of some sort in their state-controlled doctor’s medical records, no license would be given. In the end you would need a license or permit to take your boat on a lake, take your kid fishing off a wharf, or travel between towns or cities. In other words, full-blown Marxism.

The United Nations policy of “Sustainable Development” introduced in 1992 at the UNCED at Rio de Janeiro, and implemented through Habitat II and the UN World Commission on Environment and Development is taken directly from the USSR Constitution, chapter 2, article 18, which reads:

In the interests of the present and future generations, the necessary steps are taken in the USSR to protect and make scientific, rational use of the land and its mineral and water resources, and the plant and animal kingdoms to preserve the purity of air and water, ensure reproduction of natural wealth, and improve the human environment.”

Not only was N. M. Rothschild agent, Maurice Strong, Secretary-General of the UN 1992 Rio Earth Summit, he personally worked with UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan to appoint three of his own Earth Charter Commissioners to the 12-man advisory panel of the Johannesburg Summit.

Part VI


and their electronic global currency, the ‘Earth Dollar’

In September 1987, the 4th World Wilderness Congress was held in Denver, Colorado, USA, which established the World Conservation Bank. The congress was setup by none other than London’s (late) Baron Edmond de Rothschild, chairman of Banque Privée Edmond de Rothschild, Geneva, Switzerland, and one of the trustees of the International Wilderness Foundation that sponsored the conference.

Approximately 1500 of the world’s most powerful bankers and leaders attended the congress, which was chaired by Rothschild agent and Canadian multi billionaire, Maurice Strong. At the congress, Edmond de Rothschild designated eminent financier I. Michael Sweatman to be the first president of the World Conservation Bank. Sweatman wrote the forward of the banks charter.

Leading insiders of the biggest banks and UN agencies in the world were present, including Maurice Strong “Mr Sustainable,” David Rockefeller head of the ChaseManhattan Bank “Mr Development” and Mr David Ruckleshaus head of the UN Environmental Protection Agency “Mr Environment” of course!

The World Conservation Bank is destined to become the final World Bank and the “de-coupling mechanism” for City of London parent banks to take over the assets of every country of the world.

The essence of their secret plan is this:

After an orchestrated period of global financial chaos triggered by a major war in the Middle East or man-made state of emergency or natural disaster, in which most of the world’s banks will be deliberately collapsed in the process, (wiping everybody’s savings out in the crash), key City of London banking parent creditors, are going to take over all the “mort-gages” (death-bonds) and assets of the world, and transfer them to the World Conservation Bank.

The plan is very esoteric and cunning, and very difficult for most to understand. Already most government treasury departments are preparing for such an event. As part of the preparation for this momentous event, all of the world’s individual currencies are to be merged into two or three major currency groups, two of which are the euro and US dollar. Finally, these currencies are to be replaced with the World Conservation Bank’s new electronic global currency, the “Earth Dollar.” This new currency is deceptively to be issued against the collateral of 34 percent of the Earth’s surface that is presently being transferred into huge UN Heritage Parks and Conservation areas in every country across the globe, under the crafty deception “Sustainable Development.” In short, the biggest banking conspiracy and deception ever to face mankind!

George W. Hunt, (95 Camino Basque, Boulder, Colorado 80302, U.S.A.), a US businessman, attended the congress and produced a video about it exposing their wicked and incredibly deceptive plans. On his video he plays excerpts of key speeches recorded at the congress. One such speech was made by David Lang, a leading US financier and close personal friend and business partner of Maurice Strong, who said:

When the auditor finally gets his hands into the balance sheet, I suggest therefore that this be sold not through a democratic process. That would take too long and devour far too much of the funds to educate the cannon fodder unfortunately which populates the earth. We have to take an almost elitist program that we can see beyond our swollen bellies and look to the future in time frames and in results which are not easily understood or which can be, with intellectual honesty, be reduced down to some sort of simplistic definition.”

CANNON-FODDER!” this is what these leading, arrogant, banking conspirators of the UN “Sustainable Development,” “SmartGrowth,” and World Conservation policies think of the world general population. THESE are the wicked men that all the millions and millions of naive local/central government politicians and business leaders throughout the world are now following.

The main business facilitators and organizations of the UN Sustainable Development policies in the Asia-Pacific Region are the Pacific Rim Institute of Sustainable Management, the NZ Business Council for Sustainable Development and the Melbourne-based Sustainable Investment Research Group (SIRIS). Equity in this group, SIRIS, coincidentally, is held by IOOF Funds Management and broking house JBWere that provide research for N.M. Rothschild & Sons’ Ethical Share Trust based in London.

Part VII


The 1995 session the United Nations General Assembly passed a number of rules. Rule 61, 62 and 63 gave local government, civil organizations and private citizens the right to participate directly in the development and implementation of these documents. Directed by the IMF, World Bank, UN, and Prince of Wales International Business Leaders Forum, the philosophy of “sustainable development” basically says that there are too many people on planet earth and there are not enough resources to go around. What we need to do is urgently reduce the population, preserve, conserve, and “ration” the remaining resources and that the United Nations is the only body that can do it.

The World Bank already has a huge statistical database on countries and individuals what they produce and what resources they consume, water, energy, food, raw materials, heat, waste, health, social services etc. If the net figure is a plus, they are considered to be good productive world citizens. If it is a negative, they are in line for liquidation.

These are all basically the same old Socialist/Communist ideas as the “Marxist/Leninist” philosophy and “planned economy” that permeated the old Soviet Union. In 1992 at Rio, another key “Soviet-styled” strategy proposed by the Agenda 21 Programme of Action from the United Nations Conference on the Environment and Development (UNCED) was “SmartGrowth.” This agenda can be found in a UN companion book called “Global Biodiversity Assessment” published by Cambridge University Press. It proposes to model all the cities of the world on the Israel Moses Seif P.E.P plan, and the “planned” economic system of development used by Lenin and Stalin under the old Communist.

The UN “SmartGrowth” legislation in the United States was first passed in the State of Maryland in March 1997. Since then, it has been gradually introduced by city and district councils all around the world. Of course, rarely if ever will you hear of the policy coming from a foul brood of UN international bankers. 

While virtually all of the general public are oblivious of this fact, usually individual councils will be happy to credit themselves as authors of the plans. Just as there is a “close relationship” between the remuneration rises of leading local body politicians with the overall level of council rate-rise demand, so there is a “close relationship” between the level of council rate-rise impositions and the financial status of people living in each council ward or constituency.

The Fabian bankers already “own” the properties held by ratepayers with a “mort-gage” on them. This includes all private homes, farms, businesses and commercial property, local and central government debt. All young people with student loans and welfare beneficiary groups also come under this category. By and large – central bankers believe this group is not a worry as they are already under their strict control and firmly in their grip through welfare dependency or mort-gage “death-bond” fealty.

[Obstacles aka targets - successful retirees]

But the one group that Fabian Socialists hate the most are the “freehold” property-owners. Hence, this group, more often than not, is the “middle class” that is predominantly comprised of middle-aged citizens and more particularly pensioners who are generally the most asset-rich. As a result of this phenomenon, all global residential property taxation and ratepayer tax policies are now being subtly targeted against these particular groups to confiscate all their properties. Essentially the Fabian City of London banks envisage this to be achieved through a variety of measures.

Consider this paper a fair warning to all. Having been exposed to the inner workings of world politics and power struggles for many years, the author wishes to convey to the people of the world that these individuals, although caught up in sickening, delusion of ego, and dreams of world domination, are very serious in their intent, and equally as bent toward the attainment of their goals.

The above described is their plan, which they are moving forward with as you read this line.

It is left up to WE, The People to be even more intent on putting them away – for good.

These individuals and organizations must be tripped up with every step, cut off at every turn, exposed with every opportunity, and thwarted in every action taken: the Bank Of International Settlements (BIS), International Monetary Fund (IMF), Club Of Rome, The Committee Of 300, the Central ‘Intelligence’ Agency (CIA), the Council On Foreign Relations, The Tri-Lateral Commission, The Bilderberg Groups, the ‘Federal’ Reserve System, the Internal Revenue Service(s), Goldman Sachs, Israel and the Israeli lobby, the Vatican, the City of London, Brussels, the United Nations, the Israeli Mossad, and the primary chosen mouthpiece of the beast, the Associated Press (AP).”


NOTE: This editor took the liberty of partitioning this paper for ease of referencing. Permissions granted by John Christian: This ‘paper’ is written in the public interest, and may be freely reprinted or republished, in full or in part, for profit or not, by whomsoever wished to use it. Copyright John Christian April 2006.”

TLB Recommends you visit Just Chillin for more great/pertinent articles and information.

See featured article here:



By TLB contributor: Bruce Robinson

Greetings America: We are Legion. We do not Forgive. We do not Forget. We are Anonymous.

Really. That sounds more like a catchphrase from the IRS than from a group of self- proclaimed “Hactivists.” Just imagine for a moment what that mantra might sound like coming from a governmental agency. The CIA perhaps. Maybe some agency, the CIA perhaps, when it has its opportunity, it will mean it. The CIA perhaps.

That scares the pants off me – just as much as in knowing there is a pack of faceless, nameless, irresponsible hacks parading around on the Internet. Well, Facebook and You Tube anyway. They defy the very rule of law which we depend on for justice…in their search for justice. Nope, doesn’t add up to me either. Never did.

They pretend to be some type of cyber-day Robin Hood for the protection of the Internet. Who are they kidding? They run around like headless Superheroes with super-hacking ability as their powers. That is the stuff comic books are made of.

Anonymous is a false flag operation created by the CIA and the government to enforce censorship. Shut down the Internet and give cause for legislation and new laws that go against human rights for people all around the world.

The people you believe to be “Anonymous” are actually government and federal personnel using an alter-ego of themselves to make people think that anonymity is good so people will follow in their footsteps. The government links the term “anonymous” to the group they want to eliminate. They want the ability to appear as anonymous while on the Internet, shut down and make it illegal to post without using your real name and making your IP address visible to everyone.

If you are going to exercise your unalienable possession of freedom of speech which belongs to you and speak out against the government that wants you to believe freedom of speech is a privileged granted to you, by them, then they want to know who you are. Immediately. For some unnecessary reason.

You might have wondered: is the group called Anonymous for us or hiding behind masks because they are against us? Trust your instincts and your intuition. Supporting their masquerade will ultimately end up with them making some kind of stand on some kind of false principal. They will wave their false flag and cause serious (pretend) damage and then your ability to surf the Internet as you do now will be gone faster than Guy Fawkes was hanged, drawn, and quartered  – for  trying to pull a fast one over on a group of unsuspecting people. Sound familiar?

The proclaimed objective of the so-called group “Anonymous” is to cause chaos against the same targets who would benefit from such legislation and censorship. Actually they pretend to cause chaos; no harm is ever done but we are not supposed to know that. It would ruin the whole scam. That would be like cutting the plastic nose of your Guy Fawkes face despite your mask.

Consider the role of Anonymous in the Occupy movement and their insistence that everyone participate. For that purpose they were the government’s planning arm. That is just what they wanted. Nothing really came of it except hordes of new legislation and regulations. Thanks Anonymous. You are not the only ones that do not forget or forgive.

“We are Legion.” What the hell kind of terminology is that? Merriam Webster defines the word “legion” as:

1. the principal unit of the Roman army comprising 3000 to 6000 foot soldiers with cavalry.

2. a large military force; especially: ARMY

3. a very large number: MULTITUDE

4. a national association of ex-servicemen. Associated words are: array, battalion, host, army, militia, national guard, standing army, infantry, ranks, regulators, soldiers, troopers, troops, military, bivouac, logistics, petard, salient, sally, supernumerary, tactical

“Legion” can be found elsewhere. Particularly where and when it is capitalized to signify some type of distinction from “legion” as defined above.

The New Testament refers to “Legion” as demons. The Gospel of Mark reports: There was a man possessed by an evil spirit. Night and day among the tombs and in the hills he would cry out and cut himself with stones. When he saw Jesus from a distance, he ran and fell on his knees in front of him. He shouted at the top of his voice, “What do you want with me, Jesus? In God’s name don’t torture me!” For Jesus had said to him, “Come out of this man, you evil spirit!” A large herd of pigs was feeding on the nearby hillside. The demons within the man begged Jesus, “Send us among the pigs; allow us to go into them.” He gave them permission, and the evil spirits came out and went into the pigs. The herd, about two thousand in number, rushed down the steep bank into the lake and were drowned.

Before Jesus had exorcised the demons, He asked of the man, “What is your name?”

“My name is Legion,” he replied, “for we are many.”

Guess that answers that.



By: Prof Michel Chossudovsky

Author’s note

The world  is currently commemorating the 20th anniversary of the Rwandan genocide. The official story is that the genocide directed against the Tutsi population was triggered by the Interhamwe militia of the Habyarimana government in the wake of the plane crash which led to the death of president Habyarimana. The evidence suggests that the United States played a covert role in shooting down the plane.

The geopolitics underlying the Rwandan genocide should be understood.

Whereas France was accused of supporting the Habyarimana government. the United States played an undercover role in triggering the genocide.

The ultimate objective was to displace France from Central Africa. It is worth noting that that a similar situation is unfolding in the Central African republic which historically has been an area of French influence. Ethnic divisions between Christians and Muslims are being fomented the ultimate objective is to establish a US proxy states in the Central African republic.

The 1994 Rwandan “genocide” served strictly strategic and geopolitical objectives. The ethnic massacres were a stumbling blow to France’s credibility which enabled the US to establish a neocolonial foothold in Central Africa. From a distinctly Franco-Belgian colonial setting, the Rwandan capital Kigali has become –under the expatriate Tutsi led RPF government– distinctly Anglo-American. English has become the dominant language in government and the private sector. Many private businesses owned by Hutus were taken over in 1994 by returning Tutsi expatriates. The latter had been exiled in Anglophone Africa, the US and Britain.

The Rwandan Patriotic Army (RPA) functions in English and Kinyarwanda, the University previously linked to France and Belgium functions in English. While English had become an official language alongside French and Kinyarwanda, French political and cultural influence will eventually be erased. Washington has become the new colonial master of a francophone country.

In the words of former Cooperation Minister Bernard Debré in the government of France’s Prime Minister Henri Balladur:

“What one forgets to say is that, if France was on one side, the Americans were on the other, arming the Ugandans, who armed the Tutsis. I don’t want to portray a showdown between the French and the Anglo-Saxons, but the truth must be told.” 43

Originally written in May 2000, published on Global research in May 2003, the following text is Part II of Chapter 7 entitled “Economic Genocide in Rwanda”, Second Edition of The Globalization of Poverty and the New World Order , Global Research, 2003. 

Michel Chossudovsky, April 6, 2014

*      *     *

Rwanda, Installing a US Protectorate in Central Africa. The US was Behind the Rwanda Genocide

by Michel Chossudovsky

First  published in May 2000, posted by Global Research May 2003

The civil war in Rwanda and the ethnic massacres were an integral part of US foreign policy, carefully staged in accordance with precise strategic and economic objectives.

From the outset of the Rwandan civil war in 1990, Washington’s hidden agenda consisted in establishing an American sphere of influence in a region historically dominated by France and Belgium. America’s design was to displace France by supporting the Rwandan Patriotic Front and by arming and equipping its military arm, the Rwandan Patriotic Army (RPA)

From the mid-1980s, the Kampala government under President Yoweri Musaveni had become Washington’s African showpiece of “democracy”. Uganda had also become a launchpad for US sponsored guerilla movements into the Sudan, Rwanda and the Congo. Major General Paul Kagame had been head of military intelligence in the Ugandan Armed Forces; he had been trained at the U.S. Army Command and Staff College (CGSC) in Leavenworth, Kansas which focuses on warfighting and military strategy. Kagame returned from Leavenworth to lead the RPA, shortly after the 1990 invasion.

Prior to the outbreak of the Rwandan civil war, the RPA was part of the Ugandan Armed Forces. Shortly prior to the October 1990 invasion of Rwanda, military labels were switched. From one day to the next, large numbers of Ugandan soldiers joined the ranks of the Rwandan Patriotic Army (RPA). Throughout the civil war, the RPA was supplied from United People’s Defense Forces (UPDF) military bases inside Uganda. The Tutsi commissioned officers in the Ugandan army took over positions in the RPA. The October 1990 invasion by Ugandan forces was presented to public opinion as a war of liberation by a Tutsi led guerilla army.

Militarization of Uganda

The militarization of Uganda was an integral part of US foreign policy. The build-up of the Ugandan UPDF Forces and of the Rwandan Patriotic Army (RPA) had been supported by the US and Britain. The British had provided military training at the Jinja military base:

“From 1989 onwards, America supported joint RPF [Rwandan Patriotic Front]-Ugandan attacks upon Rwanda… There were at least 56 ‘situation reports’ in [US] State Department files in 1991… As American and British relations with Uganda and the RPF strengthened, so hostilities between Uganda and Rwanda escalated… By August 1990 the RPF had begun preparing an invasion with the full knowledge and approval of British intelligence. 20

Troops from Rwanda’s RPA and Uganda’s UPDF had also supported John Garang’s People’s Liberation Army in its secessionist war in southern Sudan. Washington was firmly behind these initiatives with covert support provided by the CIA. 21

Moreover, under the Africa Crisis Reaction Initiative (ACRI),Ugandan officers were also being trained by US Special Forces in collaboration with a mercenary outfit, Military Professional Resources Inc (MPRI) which was on contract with the US Department of State. MPRI had provided similar training to the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA) and the Croatian Armed Forces during the Yugoslav civil war and more recently to the Colombian Military in the context of Plan Colombia.

Militarization and the Ugandan External Debt

The buildup of the Ugandan external debt under President Musaveni coincided chronologically with the Rwandan and Congolese civil wars. With the accession of Musaveni to the presidency in 1986, the Ugandan external debt stood at 1.3 billion dollars. With the gush of fresh money, the external debt spiraled overnight, increasing almost threefold to 3.7 billion by 1997. In fact, Uganda had no outstanding debt to the World Bank at the outset of its “economic recovery program”. By 1997, it owed almost 2 billion dollars solely to the World Bank. 22

Where did the money go? The foreign loans to the Musaveni government had been tagged to support the country’s economic and social reconstruction. In the wake of a protracted civil war, the IMF sponsored “economic stabilization program” required massive budget cuts of all civilian programs.

The World Bank was responsible for monitoring the Ugandan budget on behalf of the creditors. Under the “public expenditure review” (PER), the government was obliged to fully reveal the precise allocation of its budget. In other words, every single category of expenditure –including the budget of the Ministry of Defense– was open to scrutiny by the World Bank. Despite the austerity measures (imposed solely on “civilian” expenditures), the donors had allowed defense spending to increase without impediment.

Part of the money tagged for civilian programs had been diverted into funding the United People’s Defense Force (UPDF) which in turn was involved in military operations in Rwanda and the Congo. The Ugandan external debt was being used to finance these military operations on behalf of Washington with the country and its people ultimately footing the bill. In fact by curbing social expenditures, the austerity measures had facilitated the reallocation of State of revenue in favor of the Ugandan military.

Financing both Sides in the Civil War

A similar process of financing military expenditure from the external debt had occurred in Rwanda under the Habyarimana government. In a cruel irony, both sides in the civil war were financed by the same donors institutions with the World Bank acting as a Watchdog.

The Habyarimana regime had at its disposal an arsenal of military equipment, including 83mm missile launchers, French made Blindicide, Belgian and German made light weaponry, and automatic weapons such as kalachnikovs made in Egypt, China and South Africa [as well as ... armored AML-60 and M3 armored vehicles.23 While part of these purchases had been financed by direct military aid from France, the influx of development loans from the World Bank's soft lending affiliate the International Development Association (IDA), the African Development Fund (AFD), the European Development Fund (EDF) as well as from Germany, the United States, Belgium and Canada had been diverted into funding the military and Interhamwe militia.

A detailed investigation of government files, accounts and correspondence conducted in Rwanda in 1996-97 by the author --together with Belgian economist Pierre Galand-- confirmed that many of the arms purchases had been negotiated outside the framework of government to government military aid agreements through various intermediaries and private arms dealers. These transactions --recorded as bona fide government expenditures-- had nonetheless been included in the State budget which was under the supervision of the World Bank. Large quantities of machetes and other items used in the 1994 ethnic massacres --routinely classified as "civilian commodities" -- had been imported through regular trading channels. 24

According to the files of the National Bank of Rwanda (NBR), some of these imports had been financed in violation of agreements signed with the donors. According to NBR records of import invoices, approximately one million machetes had been imported through various channels including Radio Mille Collines, an organization linked to the Interhamwe militia and used to foment ethnic hatred. 25

The money had been earmarked by the donors to support Rwanda's economic and social development. It was clearly stipulated that funds could not be used to import: "military expenditures on arms, ammunition and other military material". 26 In fact, the loan agreement with the World Bank's IDA was even more stringent. The money could not be used to import civilian commodities such as fuel, foodstuffs, medicine, clothing and footwear "destined for military or paramilitary use". The records of the NBR nonetheless confirm that the Habyarimana government used World Bank money to finance the import of machetes which had been routinely classified as imports of "civilian commodities." 27

An army of consultants and auditors had been sent in by the World Bank to assess the Habyarimana government's "policy performance" under the loan agreement.28 The use of donor funds to import machetes and other material used in the massacres of civilians did not show up in the independent audit commissioned by the government and the World Bank. (under the IDA loan agreement. (IDA Credit Agreement. 2271-RW).29 In 1993, the World Bank decided to suspend the disbursement of the second installment of its IDA loan. There had been, according to the World Bank mission unfortunate "slip-ups" and "delays" in policy implementation. The free market reforms were no longer "on track", the conditionalities --including the privatization of state assets-- had not been met. The fact that the country was involved in a civil war was not even mentioned. How the money was spent was never an issue.30

Whereas the World Bank had frozen the second installment (tranche) of the IDA loan, the money granted in 1991 had been deposited in a Special Account at the Banque Bruxelles Lambert in Brussels. This account remained open and accessible to the former regime (in exile), two months after the April 1994 ethnic massacres.31

Postwar Cover-up

In the wake of the civil war, the World Bank sent a mission to Kigali with a view to drafting a so-called loan "Completion Report".32 This was a routine exercise, largely focussing on macro-economic rather than political issues. The report acknowledged that "the war effort prompted the [former] government to increase substantially spending, well beyond the fiscal targets agreed under the SAP.33 The misappropriation of World Bank money was not mentioned. Instead the Habyarimana government was praised for having “made genuine major efforts– especially in 1991– to reduce domestic and external financial imbalances, eliminate distortions hampering export growth and diversification and introduce market based mechanisms for resource allocation…” 34, The massacres of civilians were not mentioned; from the point of view of the donors, “nothing had happened”. In fact the World Bank completion report failed to even acknowledge the existence of a civil war prior to April 1994.

In the wake of the Civil War: Reinstating the IMF’s Deadly Economic Reforms

In 1995, barely a year after the 1994 ethnic massacres. Rwanda’s external creditors entered into discussions with the Tutsi led RPF government regarding the debts of the former regime which had been used to finance the massacres. The RPF decided to fully recognize the legitimacy of the “odious debts” of the 1990-94. RPF strongman Vice-President Paul Kagame [now President] instructed the Cabinet not to pursue the matter nor to approach the World Bank. Under pressure from Washington, the RPF was not to enter into any form of negotiations, let alone an informal dialogue with the donors.

The legitimacy of the wartime debts was never questioned. Instead, the creditors had carefully set up procedures to ensure their prompt reimbursement. In 1998 at a special donors’ meeting in Stockholm, a Multilateral Trust Fund of 55.2 million dollars was set up under the banner of postwar reconstruction.35 In fact, none of this money was destined for Rwanda. It had been earmarked to service Rwanda’s “odious debts” with the World Bank (–i.e. IDA debt), the African Development Bank and the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD).

In other words, “fresh money” –which Rwanda will eventually have to reimburse– was lent to enable Rwanda to service the debts used to finance the massacres. Old loans had been swapped for new debts under the banner of post-war reconstruction.36 The “odious debts” had been whitewashed, they had disappeared from the books. The creditor’s responsibility had been erased. Moreover, the scam was also conditional upon the acceptance of a new wave of IMF-World Bank reforms.

Post War “Reconstruction and Reconciliation”

Bitter economic medicine was imposed under the banner of “reconstruction and reconciliation”. In fact the IMF post-conflict reform package was far stringent than that imposed at the outset of the civil war in 1990. While wages and employment had fallen to abysmally low levels, the IMF had demanded a freeze on civil service wages alongside a massive retrenchment of teachers and health workers. The objective was to “restore macro-economic stability”. A downsizing of the civil service was launched.37 Civil service wages were not to exceed 4.5 percent of GDP, so-called “unqualified civil servants” (mainly teachers) were to be removed from the State payroll. 38

Meanwhile, the country’s per capita income had collapsed from $360 (prior to the war) to $140 in 1995. State revenues had been tagged to service the external debt. Kigali’s Paris Club debts were rescheduled in exchange for “free market” reforms. Remaining State assets were sold off to foreign capital at bargain prices.

The Tutsi led RPF government rather than demanding the cancellation of Rwanda’s odious debts, had welcomed the Bretton Woods institutions with open arms. They needed the IMF “greenlight” to boost the development of the military.

Despite the austerity measures, defense expenditure continued to grow. The 1990-94 pattern had been reinstated. The development loans granted since 1995 were not used to finance the country’s economic and social development. Outside money had again been diverted into financing a military buildup, this time of the Rwandan Patriotic Army (RPA). And this build-up of the RPA occurred in the period immediately preceding the outbreak of civil war in former Zaire.

Civil War in the Congo

Following the installation of a US client regime in Rwanda in 1994, US trained Rwandan and Ugandan forces intervened in former Zaire –a stronghold of French and Belgian influence under President Mobutu Sese Seko. Amply documented, US special operations troops — mainly Green Berets from the 3rd Special Forces Group based at Fort Bragg, N.C.– had been actively training the RPA. This program was a continuation of the covert support and military aid provided to the RPA prior to 1994. In turn, the tragic outcome of the Rwandan civil war including the refugee crisis had set the stage for the participation of Ugandan and Rwandan RPA in the civil war in the Congo:

“Washington pumped military aid into Kagame’s army, and U.S. Army Special Forces and other military personnel trained hundreds of Rwandan troops. But Kagame and his colleagues had designs of their own. While the Green Berets trained the Rwandan Patriotic Army, that army was itself secretly training Zairian rebels.… [In] Rwanda, U.S. officials publicly portrayed their engagement with the army as almost entirely devoted to human rights training. But the Special Forces exercises also covered other areas, including combat skills… Hundreds of soldiers and officers were enrolled in U.S. training programs, both in Rwanda and in the United States… [C]onducted by U.S. Special Forces, Rwandans studied camouflage techniques, small-unit movement, troop-leading procedures, soldier-team development, [etc]… And while the training went on, U.S. officials were meeting regularly with Kagame and other senior Rwandan leaders to discuss the continuing military threat faced by the [former Rwandan] government [in exile] from inside Zaire… Clearly, the focus of Rwandan-U.S. military discussion had shifted from how to build human rights to how to combat an insurgency… With [Ugandan President] Museveni’s support, Kagame conceived a plan to back a rebel movement in eastern Zaire [headed by Laurent Desire Kabila] … The operation was launched in October 1996, just a few weeks after Kagame’s trip to Washington and the completion of the Special Forces training mission… Once the war [in the Congo] started, the United States provided “political assistance” to Rwanda,… An official of the U.S. Embassy in Kigali traveled to eastern Zaire numerous times to liaise with Kabila. Soon, the rebels had moved on. Brushing off the Zairian army with the help of the Rwandan forces, they marched through Africa’s third-largest nation in seven months, with only a few significant military engagements. Mobutu fled the capital, Kinshasa, in May 1997, and Kabila took power, changing the name of the country to Congo…U.S. officials deny that there were any U.S. military personnel with Rwandan troops in Zaire during the war, although unconfirmed reports of a U.S. advisory presence have circulated in the region since the war’s earliest days.39

American Mining Interests

At stake in these military operations in the Congo were the extensive mining resources of Eastern and Southern Zaire including strategic reserves of cobalt — of crucial importance for the US defense industry. During the civil war several months before the downfall of Mobutu, Laurent Desire Kabila based in Goma, Eastern Zaire had renegotiated the mining contracts with several US and British mining companies including American Mineral Fields (AMF), a company headquartered in President Bill Clinton’s hometown of Hope, Arkansas.40

Meanwhile back in Washington, IMF officials were busy reviewing Zaire’s macro-economic situation. No time was lost. The post-Mobutu economic agenda had already been decided upon. In a study released in April 1997 barely a month before President Mobutu Sese Seko fled the country, the IMF had recommended “halting currency issue completely and abruptly” as part of an economic recovery programme.41 And a few months later upon assuming power in Kinshasa, the new government of Laurent Kabila Desire was ordered by the IMF to freeze civil service wages with a view to “restoring macro-economic stability.” Eroded by hyperinflation, the average public sector wage had fallen to 30,000 new Zaires (NZ) a month, the equivalent of one U.S. dollar.42

The IMF’s demands were tantamount to maintaining the entire population in abysmal poverty. They precluded from the outset a meaningful post-war economic reconstruction, thereby contributing to fuelling the continuation of the Congolese civil war in which close to 2 million people have died.

Concluding Remarks

The civil war in Rwanda was a brutal struggle for political power between the Hutu-led Habyarimana government supported by France and the Tutsi Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF) backed financially and militarily by Washington. Ethnic rivalries were used deliberately in the pursuit of geopolitical objectives. Both the CIA and French intelligence were involved.

In the words of former Cooperation Minister Bernard Debré in the government of France’s Prime Minister Henri Balladur:

“What one forgets to say is that, if France was on one side, the Americans were on the other, arming the Ugandans, who armed the Tutsis. I don’t want to portray a showdown between the French and the Anglo-Saxons, but the truth must be told.” 43

In addition to military aid to the warring factions, the influx of development loans played an important role in “financing the conflict.” In other words, both the Ugandan and Rwanda external debts were diverted into supporting the military and paramilitary. Uganda’s external debt increased by more than 2 billion dollars, –i.e. at a significantly faster pace than that of Rwanda (an increase of approximately 250 million dollars from 1990 to 1994). In retrospect, the RPA — financed by US military aid and Uganda’s external debt– was much better equipped and trained than the Forces Armées du Rwanda (FAR) loyal to President Habyarimana. From the outset, the RPA had a definite military advantage over the FAR.

According to the testimony of Paul Mugabe, a former member of the RPF High Command Unit, Major General Paul Kagame had personally ordered the shooting down of President Habyarimana’s plane with a view to taking control of the country. He was fully aware that the assassination of Habyarimana would unleash “a genocide” against Tutsi civilians. RPA forces had been fully deployed in Kigali at the time the ethnic massacres took place and did not act to prevent it from happening:

The decision of Paul Kagame to shoot Pres. Habyarimana’s aircraft was the catalyst of an unprecedented drama in Rwandan history, and Major-General Paul Kagame took that decision with all awareness. Kagame’s ambition caused the extermination of all of our families: Tutsis, Hutus and Twas. We all lost. Kagame’s take-over took away the lives of a large number of Tutsis and caused the unnecessary exodus of millions of Hutus, many of whom were innocent under the hands of the genocide ringleaders. Some naive Rwandans proclaimed Kagame as their savior, but time has demonstrated that it was he who caused our suffering and misfortunes… Can Kagame explain to the Rwandan people why he sent Claude Dusaidi and Charles Muligande to New York and Washington to stop the UN military intervention which was supposed to be sent and protect the Rwandan people from the genocide? The reason behind avoiding that military intervention was to allow the RPF leadership the takeover of the Kigali Government and to show the world that they – the RPF – were the ones who stopped the genocide. We will all remember that the genocide occurred during three months, even though Kagame has said that he was capable of stopping it the first week after the aircraft crash. Can Major-General Paul Kagame explain why he asked to MINUAR to leave Rwandan soil within hours while the UN was examining the possibility of increasing its troops in Rwanda in order to stop the genocide?44

Paul Mugabe’s testimony regarding the shooting down of Habyarimana’s plane ordered by Kagame is corroborated by intelligence documents and information presented to the French parliamentary inquiry. Major General Paul Kagame was an instrument of Washington. The loss of African lives did not matter. The civil war in Rwanda and the ethnic massacres were an integral part of US foreign policy, carefully staged in accordance with precise strategic and economic objectives.

Despite the good diplomatic relations between Paris and Washington and the apparent unity of the Western military alliance, it was an undeclared war between France and America. By supporting the build up of Ugandan and Rwandan forces and by directly intervening in the Congolese civil war, Washington also bears a direct responsibility for the ethnic massacres committed in the Eastern Congo including several hundred thousand people who died in refugee camps.

US policy-makers were fully aware that a catastrophe was imminent. In fact four months before the genocide, the CIA had warned the US State Department in a confidential brief that the Arusha Accords would fail and “that if hostilities resumed, then upward of half a million people would die”. 45 This information was withheld from the United Nations: “it was not until the genocide was over that information was passed to Maj.-Gen. Dallaire [who was in charge of UN forces in Rwanda].” 46

Washington’s objective was to displace France, discredit the French government (which had supported the Habyarimana regime) and install an Anglo-American protectorate in Rwanda under Major General Paul Kagame. Washington deliberately did nothing to prevent the ethnic massacres.

When a UN force was put forth, Major General Paul Kagame sought to delay its implementation stating that he would only accept a peacekeeping force once the RPA was in control of Kigali. Kagame “feared [that] the proposed United Nations force of more than 5,000 troops… [might] intervene to deprive them [the RPA] of victory”.47 Meanwhile the Security Council after deliberation and a report from Secretary General Boutros Boutros Ghali decided to postpone its intervention.

The 1994 Rwandan “genocide” served strictly strategic and geopolitical objectives. The ethnic massacres were a stumbling blow to France’s credibility which enabled the US to establish a neocolonial foothold in Central Africa. From a distinctly Franco-Belgian colonial setting, the Rwandan capital Kigali has become –under the expatriate Tutsi led RPF government– distinctly Anglo-American. English has become the dominant language in government and the private sector. Many private businesses owned by Hutus were taken over in 1994 by returning Tutsi expatriates. The latter had been exiled in Anglophone Africa, the US and Britain.

The Rwandan Patriotic Army (RPA) functions in English and Kinyarwanda, the University previously linked to France and Belgium functions in English. While English had become an official language alongside French and Kinyarwanda, French political and cultural influence will eventually be erased. Washington has become the new colonial master of a francophone country.

Several other francophone countries in Sub-Saharan Africa have entered into military cooperation agreements with the US. These countries are slated by Washington to follow suit on the pattern set in Rwanda. Meanwhile in francophone West Africa, the US dollar is rapidly displacing the CFA Franc — which is linked in a currency board arrangement to the French Treasury.

Notes (Endnote numbering as in the original chapter)

  1. Africa Direct, Submission to the UN Tribunal on Rwanda, direct/tribunal.html Ibid.
  2. Africa’s New Look, Jane’s Foreign Report, August 14, 1997.
  3. Jim Mugunga, Uganda foreign debt hits Shs 4 trillion, The Monitor, Kampala, 19 February 1997.
  4. Michel Chossudovsky and Pierre Galand, L’usage de la dette exterieure du Rwanda, la responsabilité des créanciers, mission report, United Nations Development Program and Government of Rwanda, Ottawa and Brussels, 1997.
  5. Ibid
  6. Ibid
  7. ibid, the imports recorded were of the order of kg. 500.000 of machetes or approximately one million machetes.
  8. Ibid
  9. Ibid. See also schedule 1.2 of the Development Credit Agreement with IDA, Washington, 27 June 1991, CREDIT IDA 2271 RW.
  10. Chossudovsky and Galand, op cit
  11. Ibid.
  12. Ibid.
  13. World Bank completion report, quoted in Chossudovsky and Galand, op cit.
  14. Ibid
  15. Ibid
  16. See World Bank, Rwanda at
  17. Ibid, italics added
  18. A ceiling on the number of public employees had been set at 38,000 for 1998 down from 40,600 in 1997. See Letter of Intent of the Government of Rwanda including cover letter addressed to IMF Managing Director Michel Camdessus, IMF, Washington, , 1998.
  19. Ibid.
  20. Lynne Duke Africans Use US Military Training in Unexpected Ways, Washington Post. July 14, 1998; p.A01.
  21. Musengwa Kayaya, U.S. Company To Invest in Zaire, Pan African News, 9 May 1997.
  22. International Monetary Fund, Zaire Hyperinflation 1990-1996, Washington, April 1997.
  23. Alain Shungu Ngongo, Zaire-Economy: How to Survive On a Dollar a Month, International Press Service, 6 June 1996.
  24. Quoted in Therese LeClerc. “Who is responsible for the genocide in Rwanda?”, World Socialist website at , 29 April 1998.
  25. Paul Mugabe, The Shooting Down Of The Aircraft Carrying Rwandan President Habyarimama , testimony to the International Strategic Studies Association (ISSA), Alexandria, Virginia, 24 April 2000.
  26. Linda Melvern, Betrayal of the Century, Ottawa Citizen, Ottawa, 8 April 2000.
  27. Ibid
  28. Scott Peterson, Peacekeepers will not halt carnage, say Rwanda, rebels, Daily Telegraph, London, May 12, 1994.

About the author: Michel Chossudovsky is an award-winning author, Professor of Economics (emeritus) at the University of Ottawa, Founder and Director of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG), Montreal and Editor of the website. He is the author of The Globalization of Poverty and The New World Order (2003) and America’s “War on Terrorism”(2005). His most recent book is entitled Towards a World War III Scenario: The Dangers of Nuclear War (2011). He is also a contributor to the Encyclopedia Britannica. His writings have been published in more than twenty languages. He can be reached at

TLB Highly recommends you visit Global Research for more great/pertinent articles and information.

Read more here:


Why haven’t education reform efforts amounted to much? Because they start with the wrong problem, says John Abbott, director of the 21st Century Learning Initiative.

Because disaffection with the education system reflects a much deeper societal malaise, it’s imperative that we first figure out what kind of world we really want: a world populated by responsible adults who thrive on interdependence and community, or a world of “customers” who feel dependent on products, services, and authority figures, and don’t take full responsibility for their actions? The answer, he says, will point to the changes needed in all three pillars of education — schools, families, and communities.

This is one of Abbott’s primary takeaways from a career spanning more than two decades of teaching in England, followed by three decades at the helm of an international nonprofit (begun in the U.S. but now headquartered in England), whose mission is to promote fresh thinking based on the existing body of research about how children learn. Its findings have been synthesized into policy briefings, reports, and a book, “Overschooled but Undereducated: How the crisis in education is jeopardizing our adolescents.” It has also just published a distillation of its work, called “Battling for the Soul of Education.”

As Abbott sees it, the need for reflection has never been greater. Spurred by technological advances, “civilization is on the cusp of a metamorphosis,” he says, that will lead either to societal collapse and chaos, or to a resurgence of liberty, community, and ethics. Either way, schools are stuck in the past: The emphasis has been on feeding children static information and rewarding them for doing only what they’re told, instead of helping them develop the transferable, higher-order skills they need to become life-long learners and thrive in an uncertain future. This approach — a product of the Industrial Age, which relied on compliant factory workers and mass consumption — promotes weakness rather than strength. It has become even more regimented (and thus more disempowering) in recent years due to a lack of trust. Adults who feel hard-pressed to predict or control their own destinies, and who feel confused about the “big issues of life,” Abbott notes, are less willing to give children the time and space they need to shape their own futures.

Unfortunately, he adds, this approach to education goes against the grain of how young people learn. Research has confirmed what most parents of young children can already see for themselves — that children are born to learn, rather than to be taught, as Abbott puts it. Driven by an inborn desire to make sense of the world and find purpose in life, they naturally observe, deconstruct, piece together and create their own knowledge. They learn best when this intrinsic motivation is harnessed in what he calls “highly challenging but low-threat environments.”

Re-Imagining Society First, Education Second

The bottom line, Abbott notes, is that the current system excels at preparing children to be dependent “customers,” so if we hope to instead create a world of responsible, community-minded adults, we need to overhaul the educational paradigm. That means replacing the metaphor — the concept of the world and its inhabitants as machine-like entities — that has shaped the education system, as well as many other aspects of our culture. Because humans are not machines, a reliance on this metaphor has created a large disconnect between people’s actual lives and their inherited expectations and predispositions, which lies at the root of many inter-related modern challenges, says Abbott.


His recommendation: Start by re-examining our collective values and envision a society where individuals once again matter. Clues to a more suitable paradigm can be found in the metaphors that characterize the dynamic, networked Information Age. These share some key characteristics with the pre-industrial past, when people learned in the community, from a variety of adults with whom they built relationships. Learning continued over the course of a lifetime filled with meaningful work (in contrast to today’s high unemployment rates and low workplace engagement levels), and success was judged by whether a person carried out his or her fair share of responsibilities within the community.

All of these elements have a direct bearing on education. “Such a vision is as essential to motivate whole generations of young people to delight in the development of their intellectual powers, as it is to create an adult society that is able — and willing — to devote quite enormous amounts of its energy to the slow, fascinating, if sometimes frustrating but totally essential, task of inducting all its young people into adulthood,” Abbott has written on the Initiative’s web site.

“Children learn most from what they see going on around them,” he explains. “We become who we are based on things around us that we admire or not. Children don’t just turn their brains on when they go to school.”

Therefore a young child is dealt “a shattering blow to its sense of order and purpose when a parent it loves and admires is made redundant …. Too much of that, and the web of life is shattered, and life becomes a crap game where the lasting lesson is take all you can, and put nothing back.”

Creating “Collaborative Learning Communities”

“It is essential to view learning as a total community responsibility,” he says, and to expect no short cuts. Children need to be integrated, fully contributing members of the broader community, so they can feel useful and valued. (It is not just the children who need this, he adds; healthy communities also need children.)

On a practical level, the most powerful lever for change, Abbott says, is people coming together to “rethink the role of community in the learning process,” agreeing how to divide up responsibilities among professional teachers and other community members, and then launching small pilot projects that are true to their new vision. These efforts will build on each other, he says, and large-scale change will follow.


He cautions against simply copying a specific model that worked elsewhere — each community must figure out what’s best, given its unique circumstances. But he is convinced of one thing: The formal school system needs to be “turned upside down and inside out.” It should be based on the biological system of weaning — i.e., gradually reducing children’s dependence on teachers. Teacher-student ratios should be high in the early years, then decrease dramatically in adolescence, when “the whole community has to become a place of learning,” with mentorships, apprenticeships and other hands-on learning experiences complementing highly self-directed classroom learning.

Teachers as Guides

In general, schools should move away from “an overemphasis on teaching,” Abbott says, and instead view teachers as imaginative, knowledgeable guides. “Any kid can read a textbook — they don’t need a teacher standing over them telling them to do so,” he points out. “They need teachers to inspire them to think about things in a much bigger way than they’ve done before.”


He cites an example from his time as a substitute teacher, when he found himself assigned to teach history to a class of 15-year-olds one afternoon. Casting about for inspiration, he expressed an interest in a student’s book about prisoners of war. When the boy asked him why wars get started, Abbott used the question as a launching pad for a discussion on the topic. He urged the students to consider not only what they’d been taught in school, but also what they’d gleaned from relatives. “It went so well,” he recalls, “that no one heard the bell ring.”

Twenty years later, while waiting for a train during the time of the Falklands War, he was approached by a porter who said he recognized him as the teacher of that class. It had opened his eyes, the man added, to how wars can serve politicians’ careers, and he had referenced it in a discussion with friends the previous evening. “At the end of my history lesson, something had stuck,” Abbott notes, “so that 20 years later, he remembered how between us we had constructed an explanation for the Second World War.”

Simply following a lesson plan wouldn’t have had the same result. “I don’t think teachers should be over prepared for any particular lesson,” he says, “because if they are, they lack flexibility to adapt to where the children are in their understanding.”

Lastly, in this vision of the world, our expectations of children would also be recalibrated. Rather than being considered the age at which people start to become independent learners, 18 (and even younger in some cases) should be viewed as the age when young people “demonstrate that they have already perfected that art, and know how to exercise this responsibly,” says Abbott.


TLB highly recommends you read more great/pertinent articles here:

Read article here:



Explore: ,




Former Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) director and now Google Executive, Regina E. Duncan, has unveiled a super small, ingestible microchip  that we can all be expected to swallow by 2017. “A means of authentication,” she  calls it, also called an electronic tattoo, which takes NSA spying to whole new  levels. She talks of the ‘mechanical mismatch problem between machines and  humans,’ and specifically targets 10 – 20 year olds in her rant about the  wonderful qualities of this new technology that can stretch in the human body  and still be functional.

Hailed as a ‘critical shift for research and medicine, ’ these biochips would  not only allow full access to insurance companies and government agencies to our  pharmaceutical med-taking compliancy (or lack thereof), but also a host of other  aspects of our lives which are truly none of their business, and certainly an  extension of the removal of our freedoms and rights.

The New York Times writes:

“These biochips look like the integrated circuits in a personal computer,  but instead of containing tiny semiconductors, they are loaded with bits of  actual DNA that make up genes or fragments of genes. Inserted in a PC-sized  analytical instrument, the chips allow scientists to perform thousands of  biochemical experiments at a fraction of the cost and time required for  traditional tests.”

With bio-tech’s track record of hybridizing genes in our food and  trees as GMO, why should we give them full access to our entire genetic makeup?  With a satellite or the click of a button, these tiny micro-chips could also be  set to begin our own demise, or even control our minds.

And the fact that microchipping has even been mentioned or considered in health  care bills is insane:

“This new Health Care (Obamacare) law requires an RFID chip implanted in  all of us. This chip will not only contain your personal information with  tracking capability but it will also be linked to your bank account. And get  this, Page 1004 of the new law (dictating the timing of this chip),  reads, and I quote: ‘Not later than 36 months after the date of the  enactment”. It is now the law of the land that by March 23rd 2013 we  will all be required to have an RFID chip underneath our skin and this chip will  be link to our bank accounts as well as have our personal records and tracking  capability built into it…’”

This is not a new idea – Dr. Jose M.R. Delgado, Director of Neuropsychiatry Yale  University Medical School Congressional Record, No. 26, Vol.  118 February 24, 1974 discusses it extensively in a paper in which he  states, “Man does not have the right to develop his own mind. This kind of  liberal orientation has great appeal. We must electrically control the brain.  Some day armies and generals will be controlled by electric stimulation of the  brain.”

Is this the kind of mind that is creating bio-tech warfare in the form of  GMOs, chemtrails, and vaccines? Don’t sign me up for  micro-chipping or high-tech tattoos. I trust the medical establishment and  biotech about as far as I can throw a rotten, cancer-causing GMO apple.

TLB Highly recommends you visit Natural Society for more great/pertinent articles and information.

Read more: Follow us: @naturalsociety on Twitter | NaturalSociety on Facebook


The face of treason…


In my previous article – Benghazi  and the Global Elite’s Goals for America and the World – I discussed what I  believe to be the actual events connected with Benghazi and why it occurred in  the first place. I also pointed out that a group of extremely powerful and  wealthy people – the Global Elite – have had their hooks in the United States  since the early 1900s. They have also endeavored to control many countries and  have done so by creating an indebtedness by that country to the rich bank(sters). This has been a regular routine since Nathan  Rothchild first stated that the person who controls the flow of money controls  the laws of a given country (my paraphrase).

I believe that we have had such individuals in and outside of America who  have endeavored to do just that. The main family in America associated with this  is none other than the Rockefellers. I noted last time that Rockefeller, along  with his counterparts, Carnegie and JP Morgan, concocted a plan prior to the  1896 presidential elections to literally buy a president, and this they  accomplished by spreading a great deal of money around.

David Rockefeller is, today, the oldest living patriarch in the Rockefeller  line. He calls the shots in many ways and has done more to uproot the  foundational rule of law in America than anyone else. Working closely with the  United Nations, he has created numerous agencies that exist for no other purpose  than to continue his clandestine activities that undermine America’s  Constitution. Aside from serving on the Advisory  Board of the Bilderbergers, he has either created or is heavily involved in  the following groups:

  • Trilateral Commission
  • Council on Foreign Relations (CFR)
  • Americas Society
  • Council of the Americas

David Rockefeller’s Global Elite have done and continues to do everything  possible to overthrow society. Through the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, he has  given huge sums of money to organizations like Planned Parenthood. Incidentally, Margaret Sanger was also backed by previous Rockefellers because  of her interest in eugenics, from which arose what eventually became Planned  Parenthood. This organization – originally called the American Birth Control  League – was designed to eliminate those individuals who were deemed less than  ideal, which normally included minorities.

I also discussed Dr. Dennis Cuddy in  my last article, and introduced comments by him. He notes that David  Rockefeller, at least in some ways, has been fairly transparent about his  motives for doing the things he does that end up chipping away at the  sovereignty of America (and other countries). Most may be familiar with his  quote from his own book titled, “Memoirs,” published in 2002. There, he admits that he is  part of a secret cabal.

“Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best  interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as  ‘internationalists’ and of conspiring with others around the world to build a  more integrated global political and economic structure—one world, if you  will. If that’s the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of  it.”

Of course, there are those who argue that Rockefeller did not mean what it  appears he did mean, and they go to lengths to dispel the truth of his words.  Cuddy does the same thing, but ultimately shows that what Rockefeller said is  actually what he meant. Cuddy points out that people like Ari Goldberg disagree  with the commonly accepted meaning of David Rockefeller’s own words.

The best way to answer that question is to explore DR’s  worldview. DR is part of the modern version of what Philip Freneau in AMERICAN MUSEUM (July 1792) referred to as the ‘hereditary elite.’ Not  too long ago, DR told Congressman William Dannemeyer that ‘some men are  born to rule, but most men are born to be ruled.’

David Rockefeller is a globalist, a world citizen who, with other  elitists, believe they have a responsibility to manage (rule) the  world.

“This is not just my impression, because in 1959 the Rockefeller Brothers  Fund Special Studies Project issued a report titled, ‘The Mid-Century Challenge to U.S. Foreign Policy,’ in which  one reads: ‘We cannot escape, and indeed should welcome, the task which  history has imposed on us. This is the task of helping to shape a new world  order in all its dimensions—spiritual, economic, political,  social‘.”

I have emphasized several sections as you can see because it is really  important to read and absorb what is being stated there. According to Cuddy, and  numerous others, one of the main goals of the Global Elite is to “an end run  around national sovereignty, eroding it piece by piece, will accomplish much  more than the old-fashioned frontal assault.”

Ultimately, I believe (along with Cuddy and others) that the Global Elite has  been working toward a one-world system of government for a few hundred years.  The goals are simply passed along from one generation of elite to the next (as  in the case of the Rockefellers, for example). The reason the elite wants a  one-world system is solely due to the fact that they want  to run it and control all aspects of life and living.

The General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) is one of those things that  helped this along in recent years. The original version of GATT  was formulated and put in place in 1947 and is still operational.

“The General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) was a multilateral  agreement regulating international trade. According to its preamble, its purpose  was the ‘substantial reduction of tariffs and other trade barriers and the  elimination of preferences, on a reciprocal and mutually advantageous  basis.’

“It was negotiated during the United Nations Conference on Trade and  Employment and was the outcome of the failure of negotiating governments to  create the International Trade Organization (ITO). GATT was signed in 1947 and  lasted until 1994, when it was replaced by the World Trade Organization in  1995.”

Essentially, if the world becomes one, so to speak, with a government that  controls the entire world and the elite controls that government, then  obviously, this benefits them and those directly connected to them. The rest -  call them worker bees if you will – are on the bottom of the pyramid, left to  take whatever handouts are provided by the Global Elite.

The biggest plus for the Global Elite is the reduction in tariffs via trade.  If the world becomes officially one, with only one system that controls the  corporate structure and one government that essentially serves only the elite,  that is as close to a man-made heaven as the elite will ever get.

To them, money is the thing, not just for the sake of having it and being  rich, but for what can be accomplished with it. Money empowers those who can use  it for their own ends. Too many are controlled by it though. The Global Elite  use their money – and lots of it – to fund one liberal left-wing enterprise  after another. They know they have to “invest” their capital in as many projects  as possible in order to overcome the existing system that governs many nations.  This is especially so when it comes to the United States because of the  Constitution and the fact that America is a Constitutional Republic.

Ultimately, the Global Elite wants a pyramid for global society and what they  are creating is a one-world company. They are at the top enjoying unrestricted  capitalism. There will be no more pesky borders, no tariffs, no other taxation  directed toward their capitalist efforts. The rest of the population that is not  directly needed by the elite (scientists, medical researchers, etc.) will be  relegated to the bottom portion of the pyramid in which socialism reigns.

In the next (and final) section of this series, we will talk about specific  ways in which the Global Elite have worked hard to remake society since  President Obama became “king” of America. It all begins with keeping society in  a state of flux with one “crisis” after another.

Don’t forget to Like Freedom Outpost on Facebook, Google  Plus, Tea Party  Community & Twitter.

You can also get Freedom Outpost delivered to your Amazon Kindle device here.

TLB Highly recommends you visit Freedom Outpost for more great/pertinent articles and information.

Read more at


April 1, 2014 · by · in Alternative News, Kevin Annett, Paedophiles, Royalty,

Kevin Annett, the Field Secretary of the ITCCS


Kevin Annett, the Field Secretary of the International Tribunal into the Crimes of Church and State has declared that Common Law police officers will attempt to make a citizen’s arrest against Elizabeth Windsor when she visits Rome on April 3rd 2014.

Echoing the earth shattering indictments of 2013 which brought about the resignation of Pope Benedict, an international Common Law court in Brussels is starting proceedings against:

  • The Present Pope Francis, Jorge Bergoglio
  • The Head of the Jesuits, known as the Black Pope, Adolfo Pachón
  • The Arch-Bishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby

For crimes against Humanity, or rather “This case is about Global Child trafficking basically,” as Kevin Annett explained.


Evidence against Pope Francis centres around eye witness accounts of him organizing child trafficking for the Argentine Junta during the Dirty War of 1975-1978, where he has been directly implicated in the grabbing of the children of political prisoners.

Queen story-blk pope

Evidence against the Black Pope, Adolfo Pachon, is more Symbolic than anything else. As Kevin Annett explains, “Like at the Nuremberg Trials, you couldn’t put up everyone involved in the crimes on trial, but you can use a symbolic figure.”

Looking at the long history of the Jesuits, the evidence is damning.

The Jesuits were the group who established the model for the template for all the Indian boarding schools. Under their direction and influence, institutions are deliberately encouraged to alienate one generation from the other, in order to destroy their cultures.

justin welby

Evidence against Justin Welby, the Archbishop of Canterbury, centres around the implementation of the Hollywood Agreement. The former Pope Benedict and Queen Elizabeth Windsor actually agreed in September 2010, to apply the criminal policy known as ‘Criminal Solicit Annus’ to the Anglican Churches as well as the Church of England.


Essentially, the Hollywood Agreement makes it an obligation of clergymen to protect child rapists, by not telling the police and in effect silencing the victims of child-abuse at the hands of priests.

As Kevin Annett explains, “Not only did Justin Welby enact this policy of protecting child rapists and facilitating child trafficking through the Church of England, but in January 2012 he issued, right after becoming Arch-Bishop of Canterbury, a memo to Fred Hiltz, primate of the Anglican Church in Canada, that all evidence must be repressed and any evidence linking members of the Royal family to the deaths of children was to be destroyed.”

A direct directive from the Arch-Bishop of Canterbury to cover-up, the fact that only a month after commencing excavations at the Church of England Indian boarding school in Brantford Ontario, bone samples of small children were unearthed. (Confirmed by Dr Donald Ortner of the Smithsonian Institute in Washington, D.C.)

The bigger picture reveals a industrial sized system of genocide and child trafficking.


Elizabeth Windsor has already been found guilty of crimes against humanity, including child-trafficking which helped bring Pope Benedict down.

The International Tribunal into Crimes of Church and State, passed a verdict of ‘Guilty,’ on February 25th 2013, against:

  • Queen Elizabeth Windsor
  • Pope Benedict
  • and others, for Crimes against Humanity.

There is a standing arrest warrant against Elizabeth Windsor.

“In fact when she arrives in Rome on April 3rd to meet Pope Francis, there will be an attempt to perform a citizen’s arrest of her at that time,” warns Kevin Annett.

While there are three main defendants, there will be others, accessories and other agents who will be named in the course of the trial that opened on March 31st.


  • Gay
  • 61 years old
  • One of the UK’s Top Judges
  • Sits on the High Court
  • Advisor to Queen Elizabeth on Constitutional Matters
  • A notorious protector of Child Rapists
  • Founding member of the PIE (Paedophile Information Exchange)


Read more about Adrian Fulford.

Read more about the Paedophile connections with the Queen.

Read more about even the Queen’s butler being a paedophile.

A Scotland Yard police inspector is quoted as saying that child raping is on, “an industrial level.”

Its because of the influence of Fulford and others that injustice is allowed to go on.

Paedophilia is what holds the ruling classes together.

“The people who are doing this are the ones who have to worry, not us because we have the numbers, we have the truth and the Law on our side.


“The movement is growing,” boasts Kevin Annett, “We have groups in Birmingham and Manchester that are actively organizing Common Law Courts, issuing arrest warrants against known child raping priests, organizing Church occupations and naming people responsible of the crimes. There is an amazing groundswell happening.”

Things change from the bottom up.


There has been a public summons issued against these three primary defendants.

  • Pope Francis
  • Head of the Jesuits
  • Arch-Bishop of Canterbury

Public summons was posted on March 31st and gives them 10 days to respond.

“Having publically served them, they have until March 14th to respond. If they don’t respond to the summons or show up on March 31st for examination where each side can look at the evidence that the other has, normal pre-trial procedure, if they don’t respond in anyway, the court will issue on their behalf a plea of ‘nolo contendere,’ which means ‘not contested.’

As with the Queen, by not contesting the charges publically, they are not defending their own good name. They are not disputing the charges and can weight heavily against them in the final verdict.


Started on 31st March 2014, and in the months to follow, evidence will be shown to the court.

  • For example, the man living in exile in Spain who says he was sitting in on a meeting where Pope Francis was agreeing to traffic the children of political prisoners.

There are more people coming forward to give their statements.

  • We have the videotape testimony of the eye witness to Queen Elizabeth Windsor and her consort, Prince Philip, abducting 10 indigenous children from a residential school in Canada, who have never been seen again.

william comb


William’s testimony is safely kept in the ITCCS archives.

“For six months before he died, he had been appearing on my show on Vancouver Radio talking about what he had seen and he was to come to England, initially in May 2011, but in February before he was ordered by Vancouver native health, a government run operations, ordered to go for tests down at Saint Paul’s Catholic Hospital in the West end of Vancouver.

He was healthy and had stopped drinking. He was feeling a lot better in himself because of his involvement with our work. He went to Saint Paul’s hospital, his partner May went with him. She said that injected him with something and he was in a coma within six hours. They transferred him to Vancouver General Hospital and then they arbitrarily put him of life support the next day, less than 48 hours. They didn’t consult the family, gave no diagnosis, just pulled the plug on him.

Read more about William Comb.

“I believe it was deliberate. They killed him for sure,” said Kevin Annett.

This murder of a key witness to Elizabeth Windsor and her consort, Prince Philip abducting ten young children who were never seen again.

The Queen is Guilty



“She is seeing Pope Francis on April 3rd probably to work out the terms of the absorption of the Church of England back into the Church of Rome. Even if she hadn’t been convicted already, that’s an indictable offence right there because she’s violating her Coronation Oath and should be deposed before she abdicates on that ground alone.

In the Coronation ceremony of 2 June 1953 the Archbishop said.

“Will you to the utmost of your power maintain the Laws of God and the true profession of the Gospel? Will you to the utmost of your power maintain in the United Kingdom the Protestant Reformed Religion established by law? Will you maintain and preserve inviolably the settlement of the Church of England, and the doctrine, worship, discipline, and government thereof, as by law established in England? And will you preserve unto the Bishops and Clergy of England, and to the Churches there committed to their charge, all such rights and privileges, as by law do or shall appertain to them or any of them?”

To which the Queen replied.

“All this I promise to do.”

“Child rape in the Catholic Church isn’t about random priest hurting kids, its an organised system of child trafficking. Its involved at the level of Catholic orphanages which provide a certain quota. Adoption agencies will go to the Catholic Church and give them a number of kids they need. The Catholic Church then targets vulnerable women, brainwash them to give up their children. There are even signs outside Saint Paul’s Hospital in Vancouver that say, “GIVE US YOUR CHILD,” so they can traffic them to the black market.”


If there was a legitimate legal system at work in this country, these bodies would be prosecuted. That’s why we have to take the action when our courts are not.”

The People in the System, know the System isn’t operating.

“A big mental shift realising that we don’t have to have allegiance anymore to these institutions with so much blood on their hands.”

“In fact its up to us to reclaim our traditions, reclaims the Law, reclaim our religions.”


“Its starts from within, with a commitment not to be part of this murderous global system anymore.”

“This is part of a much bigger thing. I would dare to say its a whole spiritual Renaissance we are going through at the moment.”

“A great opportunity to People to become aware.”


As Matt Taylor warns the Queen of England, “Surrender yourself now to the Big Brother House and confess your sins to the nation.”

Two main websites for more information in this breaking news are:

Read article here:

TLB recommends you read more great/pertinent articles here:

  • Your support in the Liberty Beacon will be appreciated