Active Measures: Part II, "Destabilization"

This is second part of a planned three-part series that will focus on analyzing the origins, perpetrators, and fulfillment of Soviet-style subversive “active measures” in the United States and elsewhere in the West. Because of the amount of information that there is to talk about, owing to the enormity of data that is revealed through thorough research of this subject, this multi-volume approach has been taken. This second article will be analyzing the strategy of “destabilization”.

         

BACK in the 1980s, George E. Griffin held an interview with KGB defector Yuri Bezmenov. This interview exposed the strategies the Soviet Union was using in order to infiltrate and subvert other nations, most likely the United States. Bezmenov sounded confident that these strategies were indeed being used (being ex-KGB he absolutely knew if they were or weren’t) and that they were succeeding. The first strategy, which we explored in the first article, was demoralization. Today, we will be taking a look at “destabilization”.

So, what is destabilization? Well, according to Bezmenov, “It only takes two to five years to destabilize a nation. This time what matters is essentials: economy, foreign relations, [and] defense systems.” What we can infer from Bezmenov’s words is that destabilization takes a morally weakened society and endeavors to structurally weaken it. This is important because structure and values are essentially what define a society. So, once you remove structures and values from people, they have no society anymore.

In this subsequent vacuum, those with the power and resources to do so will swoop in and create a new society per their values and structures. It will so happen to be that, once this collapse occurs, those with the power and resources will be those who orchestrated the collapse. They will immunize themselves from the chaos they manufactured. This is why destabilization is important.

So, in what manners has the structure of our society been eroded? Well, essentially, through the engineering of various deep events, movements, and even political programs that are corrosive towards a society. The social and political pressure that can be woven out of these things is enormous and effective. This pressure can be used to alter a society’s structure.

The use of engineered events should not be confused with “crisis”, which is the penultimate stage of active measures. Crisis refers to a specific, major structural deep event that will lead to the overall fulfillment of the four-part active measures operation. Destabilization most certainly involves its own crises and deep events. Just wanted to get that aside.

So, how has destabilization unfolded throughout history? Well, Bezmenov stated that the first stage, demoralization, was [exceptionally] completed by the 1980s. Demoralization is important to have before destabilization because if you have no values then you cannot judge immoral or unconstitutional changes that are being made. We already saw in the last article how society has indeed lost its ability to make moral and political judgements.

If the 1980s marks the close of the demoralization phase, then the 1980s must also mark the beginning of the destabilization phase. This certainly makes sense, as this time period would be dominated by two suspicious establishmentarians: George H. W. Bush and Bill Clinton. These men, if Bezmenov holds true, should have overseen events in our nation, and the World, that altered the status quo. Let us examine these men now.

George H. W. Bush’s dirty deeds might be lesser known to most, and not just for partisan reasons, simply because they are lesser known. The Bush family is perhaps one of the most prominent American political dynasties, along the likes of the Kennedys, Roosevelts, and Rockefellers. The Bush family is exhaustively covered in Russ Baker’s well-researched Family of Secrets. Some things we can cover here is how Prescott Bush, George H. W. Bush’s father, helped Hitler come to power (see Anthony Sutton’s Wall Street and the Rise of Hitler) and was a member of the Yale Skull and Bones secret society. Samuel P. Bush, George H. W. Bush’s grandfather, was a Rockeffeller associate, Cleveland Federal Reserve board member, and a member of the Wall Street-dominated War Industries Board in World War One (to understand the importance of Wall Street in terms of WW1 see chapter 12 of The Creature from Jekyll Island, “Sink the Lusitania!”).

George H. W. Bush himself was also a Bonesman, like his father, and deeply involved with the Deep State. Since at least 1963, Bush had been connected to the CIA, as revealed by an FBI memo exposed in 1988. This could be pushed as early as 1953, since a memo from the CIA itself shows that Bush went into business with one Thomas J. Devine, a CIA agent who had “resigned” to go into “private business” (something CIA agents frequently do); Devine, by the memo’s admission, would remain operational until 1968. This means that Bush’s appointment as CIA director in 1976 wasn’t meaningless, but was instead a promotion at the culmination of a years-long career.

Bush also had some involvement with the drug trade, not only as CIA director (the agency behind it), but even more directly. Namely, he – along with other Deep State actors (such as William J. Casey, who would become the CIA director under Reagan-Bush) – operated an account at the investment firm Bishop, Baldwin, Dillingham & Wong. According to Rodney Stich, the CIA heavily influenced this firm, and it was involved with drug trafficking and money laundering (Stich 2006, pp. 342-343). Ironically, despite his involvement, George H. W. Bush would help amp up the War on Drugs in 1989.

This is where we come to discuss destabilization. The War on Drugs has been the most destabilizing event in history, along with the similar[ly engineered] War on Terror. The War on Drugs provides two benefits for the Deep State: funding and control. Back in 2017, it was reported that the global drug trade was worth around a half-trillion dollars, and in previous articles I have mentioned the multi-billion-dollar opium trade in Afghanistan; even a minor stake in either of these would provide the Deep State with a lot of money in addition to the budget it is appropriated by national governments. Control has been gained via the War on Drugs due to the immense militarization and expansion of the U.S. police force; the War has also destroyed Black communities, making them dependent on Democrat-backed welfare programs, fulfilling Lyndon B. Johnson’s desire to “have them n*****s voting Democratic for two hundred years” (Kessler 1996, p. 33).

This is the ingenuity of the Deep State. They created the drug problem, and now they are trying to end it. Why? Because even by ending it, they retain funding and control. Think of the marijuana tax that pothead activists proposed, so that the government could still get something out of legal drug trafficking. Furthermore, the proliferation of drug culture that would come following drug legalization would be the proliferation of yet another CIA-backed psyop. Racial justice and drugs have also been highly conflated; the racial justice movement, as seen in the last article, is derived from cultural Marxism (the ideology behind demoralization) and, in my article “How the Left is Backed by the Deep State”, I've shown how it is also backed by the Deep State.

Bush also was involved with terrorism. In 1979, the Jerusalem Conference on International Terrorism was held, considered by many to be the cornerstone for the War on Terror. At this event, which was hosted by future Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, George H. W. Bush presented the address “The U.S. and the Fight Against International Terrorism.” Yes, Bush Sr., you surely fought against terrorism by funding mercenaries, narco-terrorists, and other terrorists throughout your Deep State career.

Finally, we can look at the Gulf War. What people do not realize about Iraq and Hussein’s regime was that it was heavily in debt to Saudi Arabia (America’s best friend in the Middle East, like Israel) and was picking a fight with Iran. America, according to Watergate journalist Bob Woodward, was trying to create a stalemate between the two countries by feeding both intelligence (Woodward 2005, p. 507). Excluding the Iran-Contra affair, which was just a get-rich-quick scheme, relations between America and Iran were faltering throughout the 1980s and 1990s. Iraq was the new cool kid on the block, since they had made friends with Uncle Sam.

However, there was something that Iraq wasn’t giving America in return: oil. Iraq is notoriously oil rich, and Hussein barred the West from access to this resource by nationalizing the industry in 1972. However, the Deep State worked tirelessly to appease Hussein, likely to get him to reopen his reserves. From backing chemical warfare, to aiding in Saddam’s WMD program, to helping build a multi-billion-dollar pipeline in Aqaba, the U.S. threw all it could at Saddam to pacify him. Yet, he would not budge. In the words of Ramsey Clark (a suspicious yet very anti-Establishment figure), “The United States engaged in a pattern of conduct beginning in or before 1989 intended to lead Iraq into provocations justifying U.S. military action against Iraq and permanent U.S. military domination of the Gulf.”

The Gulf War was started to destabilize Iraq and the Middle East and make room for the region’s geopolitical restructuring per America’s interests. Just days before the invasion of Kuwait, American ambassador April Glaspie – a graduate of the Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies, a major feeder of the American diplomatic service and intelligence community – stated to Hussein, “We have no opinion on your Arab conflicts, such as your dispute with Kuwait.” Obviously, this was a lie, since it took only a few weeks for Bush to start up Operation Desert Shield and come rushing to Saud— I mean Kuwait’s aid.

The most important detail about the Gulf War comes from the infamous “Nayirah testminoy”. Nayirah, who appeared on Capitol Hill on October 10, was presented as a Kuwaiti nurse who witnessed Iraqi soldiers enter a hospital and kill infants in incubators. This heinous accusation fired up the American public and essentially sold the war to the people. The truth, however? Nayirah was the daughter of Kuwaiti aristocrat Saud bin Nasir al-Sabah. She was trained by Lauri Fitz-Pegado, who has been listed as a member of the Council on Foreign Relations (since 2003), was a member of the Clinton administration (as a campaign staffer, then Commerce Department official), and is a graduate of the aforementioned Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies.

Pegado was also a member of the Hill & Knowlton Strategies public relations firm, which put together this whole shtick on behalf of the Kuwaiti government. Hill & Knowlton is a very interesting company to look into. Since 1987, it has been owned by WPP plc, a venture of Anglo-Jewish business magnate Martin Sorrell (long-time member of the Trilateral Commission, World Economic Forum – he even married the advisor of Klaus Schwab – and the Harvard Business School). Hill & Knowlton has a very interesting history, which you can read about here; this history involves close government cooperation (called an “unelected shadow government” by 60 Minutes), supporting tobacco companies, endorsing the climate change agenda, representing the International Monetary Fund (see chapter six, “Building the New World Order” of G. Edward Griffin’s The Creature from Jekyll Island), and – more recently – doing work for the W.H.O. during COVID.

It was this network of Bush-MIC-linked companies and personalities that helped build the momentum for the Gulf War. This built the momentum for the Iraq War, which killed hundreds of thousands of civilians on trumped up charges. Since all this, the wasteland of Iraq is now the turf of oil multinationals. Just as intended.

Now, the Clintons, currently, are well-known for their infamy, at least among conservatives/Trumpers. However, let us go in order; we’ll focus on the Clinton Foundation soon enough. A number of claims have been made about Bill Clinton’s background, such as he was recruited by CIA agent Cord Meyer; while stuff like that is a bit hard to corroborate, what is known is that Clinton was a chapter-leader of the Masonic Order of DeMolay, a Rhodes Scholar, and a Oxford- and Yale-educated WASP. Another interesting aspect of Clinton’s background is that he became close friends with Yale graduate Strobe Talbott (who was also a Rhodes Scholar, which is how they met), a zealous globalist and future Brookings Institution president who was Clinton’s Deputy Secretary of State and Russian policy advisor (despite being a Russian agent himself).

It doesn’t end there. You also have the Clinton’s criminal involvement in the Whitewater scandal. Clinton also pardoned far-left terrorist Susan Rosenberg, and this was at congressman Jerrold Nadler’s request. Nadler, who was directly involved with the Democratic Socialists of America from 1977 at the earliest and 1995 at the latest.

Now, I do not want to make this is an article about Clinton, I can do that another time and reproduce much of the content already shared. However, I just want to make us all certain we are looking at a Deep State functionary, not just a poor lil’ neoliberal demonized by the meanies on the Right. Having met Bill Clinton, let us see how he destabilized America.

          First and foremost, Clinton helped lay the foundation for the 2008 recession. How so? Firstly, Clinton helped expand the Community Reinvestment Act, which is widely considered responsible for the subprime mortgage crisis. Secondly, Clinton’s unpopular 1995 bailout of Mexico is stated by some commentators and economists as the beginning of the bailout culture that permeated the Great Recession. How the often Ivy League and carefully curated economists that work for the White House did not foresee economic trouble beats me.

          We can also return to the War on Drugs. Clinton has been implicated in the Iran-Contra affair and drug trafficking, and not by the usual ensemble of conservative/conspiratorial/libertarian/populist outlets, but by hardcore left-wing ones such as CounterPunch. This makes his pardon of drug kingpin Carlos Vignali a bit more interesting. The Huffington Post, another leftist outlet, has accused Clinton of helping exacerbate the opioid crisis. As you should remember, considering it’s only been a few paragraphs, the War on Drugs is totally a Deep State scheme as old as the 1970s, and the effort to end it by the same Deep State assets is an ingenious scheme to open one door where another has closed.

          So, what we have just seen, in a birds-eye view of two presidencies and two decades, is two destabilizing megaprojects: the War on Drugs and the Great Recession. While the primary event focused on was drug trafficking, since the Recession was not sparked until 2007, we still see that the Bush and Clinton presidencies had a great influence on some significant events. The War on Drugs helped to destabilize countless American communities, and has contributed severely to the rise of the American police state.

          After Clinton and the 1990s we see the turn of the millennium, and the rise of Bush 43. George W. Bush will prove to be just as immoral of a Deep State asset as his father. Bush Jr.’s field of expertise? Terrorism.

          Again, the best treatment of the Bush dynasty available is Russ Baker’s Family of Secrets. This 500-page book contains an absolute mother lode of info on the Bush family and, as the title says, their secrets. I can only give a sliver of Baker’s content here in this article. George W. Bush is a member of the Skull and Bones secret society, like his father, and was involved in much immoral horseplay when young (Baker 2009, pp. 138-147). In 1977, Bush Jr. founded the oil company Arbusto Energy, like his father did decades earlier with his own Zapata Oil.

A 5% stake in Arbusto was held by James R. Bath, an associate of the Sauds and Bin Ladens (Baker 2009, pp. 280-282), and the Bank of Credit and Commerce International, the criminal bank associated with the Clintons. Bush later moved on to the Soros-backed Harken Energy Corporation, and while there he was accused of doing insider trading.

          When Bush became President, he got quick to work. His predecessor Clinton laid the foundations for what Bush would become famous for. Oh, don’t let the idea of cooperation between the neoliberal Democratic and neocon Republican shock you, the Bushes and Clintons are closer than peas in a pod; the partisan system is a ruse, after all. As discussed before, the Gulf War set the foundation for the destabilization of the Hussein regime, and for all of the Middle East. All that was needed now was a reason to send in the cavalry.

          Within ten days of taking office, the Bush administration met and committed to the goal of overthrowing Saddam Hussein. Alleged weapons of mass destruction, which – as stated earlier – Western companies were helping produce, were to be used as the excuse. The British government, via MI6, was operating “Operation Mass Appeal” to feed false information to the nation that would make it willing to go to war. As mentioned, Bush relied on similar false WMD charges.

          By 2001, the public was no longer as fired up. What was once a 70-30 divide in public opinion earlier in the decade was nearly 50-50 now. This polarized public opinion defined the Vietnam War, and war hawks were very wary of another epidemic of Vietnam Syndrome; that could not be allowed. The Deep State needed to reorganize the Middle East, which is what its quasi-feudal neocolonial ideology depends on.

This is where destabilization comes back into the main focus. The Deep State is always looking and willing to kill two birds with one stone; conquer the Middle East, and further destabilization of society. The best way to accomplish their goals was via a structural deep event. Something traumatic needed to occur that would serve as both an impetus to invade, and an impetus to alter the fabric of society. This would be the September 11 attacks, which Bush, however implicitly, tied to Hussein.

Most of the writings I’ve seen questioning the official narrative of 9/11 tend to be exhaustive studies that would fit into small booklets. I am already at thirteen pages and have only just gotten started. So, I, for the sake of time, want to only present two pieces of evidence, and only in regards to the Twin Towers (although, never forget WTC 7). While this might seem like a shockingly small amount of evidence for such a claim, I believe these are the most convincing and are gateways into further 9/11 truth research.

The first exhibit I want to examine is the eyewitness testimony of explosions in the Twin Towers. While NIST, the federal agency primarily tasked with investigating 9/11, has stated in an FAQ that “there was no evidence…of any blast or explosions in the region below the impact and fire floors…”, nothing could be further from the truth. Such an ignorant example should be expected of NIST, however, since it is, one, a tool of the federal government, and, two, has been guilty of omitting and manipulating data.

Chapter 8 of The 9/11 Toronto Report contains a list of 156 eyewitnesses, nearly 80% of which were firefighters, who reported hearing explosions. 60% reported hearing an “explosion”, while another 25% used terms such as “implosion”, “blast”, or “bomb”. Firefighters are trained professionals, they know what they are doing, and you cannot overcome the unanimous firsthand testimony of over 150 experts. NIST created a computer simulation that did not include explosions, but they had nothing to base this off of, especially with 156 reports to the contrary.

 Here are a few examples of these firefighters’ testimonies of explosions:

• Roy Chelsen (was in North Tower): “All of a sudden we heard this huge explosion, and that’s when the tower started coming down. We all started running.”
• Keith Murphy (watching from South Tower): “I had heard right before the lights went out, I had heard a distant boom boom boom, sounded like three explosions. I don’t know what it was. At the time, I would have said they sounded like bombs, but it was boom boom boom and then the lights all go out. … All of a sudden I could feel the floor started to shake and sway.”
• Robert Dorritie (South Tower): “I guess we got about three-quarters of the way across when we were deciding which way to go into the south tower. That’s when I looked up, and the tower started coming down, which at the time I said I thought it was a secondary device. I had warned the guys about secondary devices on the way down.”
• John Sudnik (from South Tower): “The best I can remember, we were just operating there, trying to help out and do the best we could. Then we heard a loud explosion or what sounded like a loud explosion and looked up and I saw tower two start coming down.”
• Greg Hansson (North Tower): “Then a large explosion took place. In my estimation that was the tower coming down, but at that time I did not know what that was. I thought some type of bomb had gone off.”

Just five out of 156. Feel free to click on the link given above to see the full list of eyewitness testimonies. These firefighters and other witnesses did indeed see and hear something, and NIST cannot simply write that off. One plausible, yet dishonest, attempt official-narrative-pushers could make at explaining away these testimonies is that the sound of a gazillion-ton steel skyscraper collapsing is going to sound like a giant boom. However, two things disprove this: One, the fact that the collapse of the Twin Towers was structurally impossible (necessitating some other factor), and, two, the actual evidence for explosives, which is second proof I will be presenting.

          While NIST has reported since 2011 that there was no evidence for explosive materials at the WTC, the opposite has been known since 2009. In this year, The Open Chemical Physics Journal of Bentham Science Publishers published the article “Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe”. This 25-page article took actual physical specimens of WTC debris and examined strange, microscopic, red-and-gray chips found within (see image on PDF page 4). This substance was collected in four samples from random spots around Ground Zero by random people over several days; the fact that the same substance could be found in totally separate places means there must have been a lot in the tower before it was destroyed.

          What did this article reveal? Well, the study, which was overseen by a number of researchers with skills in chemistry, physics, engineering, and other disciplines, came to a very shocking conclusion: The substance seen in these several samples is none other than nanothermite (PDF page 23). Now, that might not seem shocking at first, but it should be when I tell you that nanothermite is a military-grade explosive produced using nanotechnology (hence nanothermite), and in the 1990s it was proprietary technology of the U.S. military. Regular thermite is one thing, but highly specialized thermite produced with nanotechnology? No cave-dwelling jihadis whose boss is on dialysis are capable of acquiring that.

          The use of [nano]thermite on 9/11 explains a number of puzzling events at Ground Zero. For example, it explains (and also confirms) a number of eyewitness and photographic testimonies of molten metal at Ground Zero. It explains how fires that likely did not exceed a few hundred degrees centigrade brought down fireproofed, steel-based structures that would require vastly hotter temperatures to even become slightly compromised. Most importantly, it explains how temperatures at Ground Zero were still in the hundreds (Celsius) after several days, and why fires were still burning after months (nanothermite burns very hot and very long).

          Now, obviously, such damning evidence cannot be allowed. The mainstream media was quick to [make attempts to] discredit this article and suppress its conclusions. One hilarious alternative explanation is that the “thermite reaction could have occurred with aluminum metal and any oxide that happens to be near it.” I, I cannot even…oh that’s just awful. Mechanical engineer Gordon Ross, quite unnecessarily, has to explain why such an explanation is awful:

“Now I will never claim to be good at chemistry but I know that if I leave margarine, flour, sugar and fruit in a cupboard, when I next open the cupboard I will not find a fruit crumble. Some mechanism is required to convert the ingredients. Similarly, if I take these same ingredients, set them alight and throw them out the window, I still will not get my fruit crumble. The mechanism must have some order.”

          Go ahead, try it at your own house. If you want to make some spaghetti and meatballs tonight, get your spaghetti, boiling hot salted water, meatballs, hot oil, and seasonings, and just throw them out a window at the same time. If you don’t have confidence in that method, or fail to make dinner doing that, then you should not accept such a foolish counterargument to the presence of nanothermite.

          Anti-truthers have also attacked the credibility of the researchers/journal in order to get around the article’s conclusions. The two main ways that The Open Chemical Physics Journal is discredited is by arguing that a hoax paper was submitted to the same journal and was accepted, and that the editor-in-chief of the journal resigned after the nanothermite paper was published. Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth has given a good defense of the journal, and I will reproduce it here (you might as well also take a look at their ten-part series “Debunking the Real 9/11 Myths”).

          First off, what about this hoax paper? Well, here is the truth: while the paper was accepted, it was not published. Its acceptance is not even questionable, too, since the editors of the journal stated the paper was only accepted so as to determine the true identity of the author. The people who created the hoax article also came out saying, “We cannot conclude that Bentham Science journals practice no peer review, only that it is inconsistently applied.” This is a non-issue, and it is an “issue” that has only been documented at one of Bentham’s hundreds of journals.

          Although, does the journal’s editor-in-chief quitting soon after the article’s publication shed some negative light on it? No. The editor-in-chief could have challenged the researchers to a duel for all I care, treating this as evidence of the article’s illegitimacy is stooping to impossibly low levels of scientific integrity. Science is based off evidence, not ad homines, and we should be look at the evidence of the article, not superficial and secondary details about it.

          Another person put the matter of the editor’s resignation this way: “Marie-Paule Pileni [the editor-in-chief] points out that because the topic lies outside her field of expertise, she cannot judge whether the article in itself is good or bad.” I do not want to say more on this matter, since it entirely comes down to a logical fallacy. However, if you are interested, a decent article on it can be found here.

          So, as we can see, a huge number of people reported hearing the same exact thing: explosion[s] at the World Trade Center. Scientific, empirical data has shown that nanothermite residue was found in randomly selected samples of WTC debris. The conclusion, based on the fact that the same material can be found all throughout the debris, is that a large amount of it must’ve been in the towers before 9/11. A microscopic morsel of crude thermite is one thing, but military-grade nanotech entirely owned by the U.S. military? Ehh…

          Again, the whole host of evidence for controlled demolition on 9/11 is vast. No article I have seen has been below two or three dozen pages, and surely an article of my own making would be similarly long. I do not wish to leave you with two, albeit convincing, examples, however. I invite you to look at resources such as AE911Truth’s series “Debunking the Real 9/11 Myths”, their documentary 9/11 Experts Speak Out, and ISGP’s detailed technical analysis of the World Trade Center’s destruction.

          Right after 9/11, the once divided public sentiment on an invasion of Iraq flipped to a 70-30 divide. Europeans in several countries, such as Germany, France, the Netherlands, and others, supported the War on Terror/invasion of Iraq post-9/11. Support for the Blair government’s handling of the War on Terror, in light of 9/11, was also very positive in the United Kingdom. Even if any of these opinions collapsed in following months, that meant nothing, as the global aristocracy had enough time to dupe the public and send thousands of tons of ordinance careening into Iraqi neighborhoods.

          The American Deep State was very ready for 9/11. Not only can we find evidence of foreknowledge of 9/11, but within a month the United States Congress had put together the PATRIOT Act and got it passed as law in only three days. The PATRIOT Act (which, FYI, Joe Biden bragged about creating) is an absolutely unconstitutional monster. For the last two decades, the American republic has been tormented by it, and it is through the authoritarian measures of the Act that our liberties have been fervently eroded.

          The PATRIOT Act has remained untouched after two decades, and despite so much opposition. One case against it brought forth by the ACLU was dismissed due to “the subjective fear of surveillance.” The judge behind this action was Thomas Selby Ellis III, a Reagan appointee who a few years earlier had rejected a lawsuit by German citizen Khalid El-Masri for being tortured by the CIA due to mistaken identity. Ellis was a lawyer for the law firm Hunton Andrews Kurth for seventeen years; Hunton Andrews Kurth was, for two decades, the home of Lewis F. Powell Jr., a Nixon-appointed Supreme Court Justice who was close friends with Edward R. Murrow, a high-profile journalist for the CIA-affiliated CBS and its equally CIA-linked boss William Paley. Just thought I’d mention that.

          9/11, the PATRIOT Act, and all other connected laws and events thoroughly changed American and global politics. It destabilized civilization like no one thought possible. The involvement and entrapment of numerous countries in the War on Terror fraud due to 9/11 – such as most of Europe – has spread this destabilizing effect to many countries. The draconian terror unleashed on America in the wake of 9/11 is undeniable.

          While the eating up of limited hangouts and the public outcries against perceived government injustices might make it seem like people are not being fooled, anything is but the truth. The nation re-elected people like Bush and Obama twice, despite their severe abuses of the Constitution and liberty; even Trump, despite being such a contrarian, used the PATRIOT Act to violate a man’s right to habeas corpus. Since 9/11, various candidates who likely would’ve done better for our country have been snuffed out, pushed off the stage in favor of the preordained Establishment candidates. Steve Forbes was teased as a “dork robot” and characterized as “awkward” by Times journalist Calvin Trillin, a member of the Yale Scroll and Key secret society who has – more recently – published works mocking the effective COVID treatment Ivermectin and deriding the January 6 Capitol Hill protests. Dennis Kucinich was straight up suppressed by the mainstream media, one perpetrator being the well-known Mockingbird affiliate ABC News.

          A demoralized public can only do two things: Pretend it cares, or not care. By voting for left-wing woke candidates such as Sanders, Biden, Clinton, Obama (and whoever else has come up or will come up), or poorly vetted characters on the right (such as Kasich or Cruz, a Princeton- and Harvard-educated preppy married to a CFR member), either side tricks themselves into believing, “Oh yeah, I’m on the right side of history, and I’m voting for the best person.”

Think about all the discussions of “the lesser of two evils” during the 2016 election. While Trump is likely an authentic Establishment turncoat, no presidential election should come down to “the lesser of two evils”, that’s absurd! Both candidates should’ve been thrown out with the largest write-in vote in history.

Connecting this back to destabilization, the demoralized vote for those who destabilize, who continue the demoralizing trend, which causes more destabilizing characters to be clothed with power. The various events listed throughout this article, whether fabricated or manipulated, have resulted in continued destabilization and demoralization. 9/11 has demoralized our country extremely, as I have mentioned, with all the damage done to the Constitution.

The manipulation of the Gulf War, of the Iraq War, of the Afghanistan War, these have produced endless wars that continue to destabilize and demoralize our country. They demoralize us by feeding us constant news of war, terror, and death from all around us, and by promoting apathy. They destabilize us by producing the chaos that sparks migrant crises that send hordes of Muslims into Europe, which causes madness to proliferate (not demonizing Muslims; there is simple little compatibility between the values of secular, liberal Europe and Islamic Arabia).

Very clearly, we are living in the age of destabilization. After the demoralizing ideology of Marxism began to take over in the 1940s/1950s, this continued for decades, until the Cold War ended. Then, with that being done, we entered the age of endless wars, constitutional erosion, chronic otherism, the national security state, and other political plagues. Such events bring us closer and closer to the fruition of the Great Plan (Reset?), and farther and farther from happiness and liberty.

Soon, and very soon, we will be faced with the Elite’s magnum opus. We will be presented with an unprecedented global calamity that will change everything. That is why, in the next article, we will focus on our third active measure: Crisis.

 

 

BIBLIOGRAPHY

• Baker, Russ. Family of Secrets (Bloomsbury Press, 2009).
• Kessler, Ronald. Inside the White House (Simon & Schuster, 1996).
• Stich, Richard. Those Ugly Americans: 20^th and 21^st Centuries (Silverpeak Enterprises, 2006).
• Woodward, Robert U. Veil: The Secret Wars of the CIA, 1981–1987 (Simon & Schuster, 2005).