Friday, March 29, 2024

Back Story Of Elites

 Fellow Commoners,

  Josh Mittledorf, Danny Sheehan Interview  [Josh does very good work cooking this down, and Danny is also clear and concise in the video, but it is a lot of information.]
​  Do you know who Danny Sheehan is? I didn’t until recently. He’s been in the thick of every major event of the last 70 years. As a “people’s lawyer” with major investigative resources behind him, he has cross examined people and dissected evidence that shine a light on so many aspects of our post-war history.
​  In this two-part blog, I’m summarizing and organizing the content of this interview.​
​  Sample: "The story is that Nixon, as Eisenhower’s Vice President in 1960, had assembled a team of CIA agents (headed by aerospace billionaire Howard Hughes, staffed by mafia thugs) to assassinate Fidel Castro. He was overconfident that he would win the Presidency later in the year, and would be able to authorize the plan in 1961. In fact, Kennedy won the 1960 election, and he nixed Nixon’s plan. But three years later, Kennedy had alienated the CIA and other warmongers in Washington. The team that was tasked with assassinating him in Dallas was the same that Nixon had pulled together three years earlier to assassinate Castro. Sheehan emphasizes there is no evidence that Nixon himself was involved in the JFK assassination, but in 1972, he knew what had happened earlier, and he was afraid that he was going to be implicated. This is what motivated the Watergate burglary."
Topics of which Sheehan has had first-hand knowledge:
​  Roswell UFO crash
Yamashita’s gold
​  U2 incident
CIA sabotage and assassination attempts in Cuba
​  JFK assassination
Pentagon Papers
​  Watergate scandal
Karen Silkwood trial
​  Iran-Contra scandal
Catholic pedophile scandal in Boston
​  Drug smuggling by the CIA
And Danny thinks his biggest case is coming up this year…
​  UFO disclosure

  Book Review of First Class Passengers on a Sinking Ship: Elite Politics and The Decline of Great Powers, Richard Lachmann ,  by Corey R. Payne
​  For Lachmann, great powers, like all polities, are not unitary entities. Instead, they “are amalgamations of institutions...controlled by an elite capable of guarding its own interests.” It is “elite conflict over, and appropriation of, resources” which “explains why the richest and most powerful polities often failed to attain or sustain dominance.” In his view, “decline is the result of internal political dynamics that are specific to each great power” that can only be understood through an analysis of “the ways in which elites seek and attain the capacity to protect their particular interests” (12). The power of elites thus derives as much “from the structure of relations among various coexisting elites as it does from interclass relations of production”...
​..Lachmann finds that modern great powers varied both in the extent to which colonial elites were autonomous from metropolitan elites and in the level of influence colonial elites had on the metropolitan political-economy. The particular structure of elite relations in the Dutch, British, and U.S. empires—inwhich colonial elites had high influence but low autonomy—allowed each to achieve world-hegemonic status. Building from Wallerstein and Arrighi (and in explicit contrast to Mann), Lachman (49) defines world hegemony as “not just a quantitative or qualitative edge,” instead, it is the international institutionalization of a power’s advantages over rivals, grounded in both consent and coercion. Lachman finds that great powers were unable to become hegemons if there was too much elite conflict in the metropole, too much colonial autonomy from the metropole, a dominant metropolitan elite that was too unitary, and/or an infrastructural incapacity to control colonial elites. He demonstrates that the three hegemons of historical capitalism lacked all these factors, and that it was the (re)emergence of one or more of them that unraveled their hegemony.​..
..Lachmann’s analysis of the three world-hegemonic powers demonstrates that the very arrangements among elites which propelled great powers to preeminence ultimately proved to be their downfall. In less apt hands, the identification of such a pattern of elite politics in hegemonic powers—innovation, institutionalization, contradiction, transformation, paralysis—could verge on structural functionalism. But Lachmann’s analysis has no such flaw. By​ tracing the intricate political and economic relations among elites and​ among their actions, he demonstrates the contingency inherent in such a pattern. In this sense, Lachmann upends the faulty binary of ‘structure’ and ‘agency’ to demonstrate how the actions of elites at earlier points in time constrain the options available to elites at later points in time. While at first glance his analysis may appear to be one of ‘path dependency,’ upon closer inspection it becomes clear that it is, in fact, one of how such paths are produced, reproduced, and upended.​..
​..This is how Lachmann presents his work in relation to that of Giovanni Arrighi, whose trilogy on world hegemonies and historical capitalism serves as one foundation for the book. Arrighi’s analysis of states and classes is compelling, Lachmann argues, but for a complete picture it must be combined with a review of the internal political dynamics of hegemonic powers. While Arrighi is able to “specify what is needed in each era to achieve hegemony in the world system,” he is “less successful in explaining why particular countries achieve hegemony in the first place while others fail” (81). This gap is caused by Arrighi’s tendency to present countries as unified actors instead of addressing the internal conflicts within polities that, in his view, determine their changing positions in the world-system. Lachmann makes a convincing case. Arrighi demonstrates how innovations in political-economic arenas propel powers to world-hegemonic status, and how such success draws new competitors into the hegemon’s path of development. As capitalists in dominant powers come under increasing competitive pressure from these rivals, the virtuous circle turns vicious. Heightened competition leads to escalating social conflict, financialization, and the eventual breakdown of the bases of hegemony. Lachmann adds an important dimension to this story. As the virtuous circle turns vicious, he demonstrates how elites turn to political rivalry, guarding their own particularistic interests, shattering the bases of their previous cooperation, and setting off a spiral into conflict, autarky, and​ paralysis.​..
​..Polanyi surmised that “Unless the alternative to the social set up is a plunge into utter destruction, no crudely selfish class can maintain itself in the lead” (1944: 163). After reading First-Class Passengers on a Sinking Ship, such an observation seems to verge on ahistorical optimism. Lachmann’s magisterial book shows us that it is, in fact, the narrow self-interest of elites that is driving not only U.S. hegemonic decline, but also an increasingly chaotic world system, characterized by escalating militarism, a seemingly
unending rise in social inequality, and a pending climate catastrophe. Lachmann’s sobering and bleak conclusions for our collective future—in which the first-class passengers on our sinking ship head for the lifeboats while the rest of us are left to drown—are compelling.

​  Tom Luongo looks at coercion and sabotage between spiteful and ill-defined western elite factions: Asymmetric Response and the Perp Walk to World War III
​  Since the firing of VicToria “Cookies” Nuland from the State Department on March 5th (and make zero mistake she was fired) events surrounding Russia are accelerating. Last weekend’s attack on the Crocus Concert Hall in Moscow was supposed to originally happen on March 9th, apparently. It was to be timed with Joah BIi-Den’s! State of the Union address and meant as a severe warning to Russians to ‘make the right decision’ and vote against Vladimir Putin a week later.
​  That day the State Department issued a warning to all Americans to stay away from meetings, concert halls, etc. I think this was us finally acting like a grown up, because it begs a major question that doesn’t comport with unlimited US aggression towards Russia.
​  Why would we issue this warning knowing full well the Russians would respond to it and stop the attack?
​  It literally makes no sense. When Nuland is fired from the State Department, our first reaction was to see it as a shift in US foreign policy away from Russia and towards China. Toria lost a power play. See you at the auto show.
​  That sounds neat and compact… but is it the whole story?
Because then the attack actually happens two weeks later. A bunch of Tajiks go in, like the professional soldiers they are, shoot the place up and make their escape. Acting not at all in character for the ISIS head-choppers who were immediately blamed for this.​..
..For me, the MI6 angle is the first one to be considered in this attack, not the last one.
​  And the keys lie in that very timeline. Because, as opposed to assuming that the US is the catalytic agent for events here — easy to think because Nuland is involved — reframing this as a distinctly British operation (with help from rogue elements in the State Dept. and CIA, of course) yields a far more coherent narrative...
..What if Nuland was fired because knowledge of this attack finally reached the right people at State and the DoD? And they realized, rightly so, that an attack like this would make it nearly impossible for Putin to ignore and force his hand politically to escalate the war in Ukraine to a level that would justify to the people of the West that it was finally time for us to get involved over there.
​  You can hear the growing chat of “Putin must go” emanating from the think tanks on K Street and the halls of GCHQ.
​  Who wants that outcome? Who has been begging for that outcome for over two years? Who has staged provocation (Kerch, Nordstream, Bucha, hitting Russian ships in the Black Sea, ZNPP, etc.) after provocation to get Putin “on tilt?” Outside of Victoria Nuland’s office and Lindsay Graham, no one in the US has been fully committed to this the entire time...
​..The people who have made the most noise are the gods-damned British, who Nuland certainly works hand-in-glove with. The French and German Greens have been just as full-throated, so continental Europe isn’t being spared here either.
​  So, now here’s what I think the real story is surrounding Crocus. Nuland, MI6, and likely the Turks put this thing together using ISIS-K Tajik mercenaries to kill a bunch of Russians. The operational goal was to keep the US from turning its back on the malignant narcissistic colonialist assholes in Europe who need this war but cannot fight it. That’s the Yanks’ job.
​  US leadership, already deep in plans to extricate themselves from Europe and pivot to China, warn the Russians on March 7th which scrubs the March 9th operation after sending the major signal that things in Ukraine will calm down by firing Nuland on March 5th.
​  This is what real statecraft looks like
​  After that, the operation is still going forward but under someone else’s guidance (or just on auto-pilot). Nuland’s fingerprints are all over it. The US looks guilty as hell. What does evil do? It doesn’t sleep, it waits. And then we get the actual attack last weekend, after Putin wins a massive re-election. It still serves it’s primary purpose, force Putin’s hand.
​  Now, the kicker. Who issues notes of condolences to Russia for the attack? Shockingly, the US and NATO. In the past three years there hasn’t been one conciliatory utterance from Sec. of State Antony Blinken’s pie hole when it comes to Russia. He’s been the epitome of the anti-diplomat.
​  And yet, here he is issuing condolences to Russia. Then the US abstains from the UNSC council vote against Israel, another British project going completely haywire.
None of this tracks with the US and Russia are implacable enemies narrative folks. Not. One. Single. Bit. Of. It.
​  Now, guess who refused to even acknowledge the Russian loss of life? Yup … the UK.​..
..So, in this context, Blinken’s condolences have to be taken as a real fig leaf to Putin. Sadly, both sides have to continue gearing up for future conflict because it’s the prudent thing to do, even if neither side wants it. Sound familiar? It’s reminiscent of the story of WWI.
​  The US was led into the trap in Ukraine by Nuland and her co-collaborators in MI6 and Europe over the past decade. All three players, the US, UK and Europe had reasons for Ukraine, but all were ultimately different...
​..And now you have the ‘who benefits’ from this operation. The US saw no upside in brutally killing hundreds of Russian civilians, knowing full well it would be US doing the majority of the fighting. The UK and EU need the US to do this because if the US comes out of this war unscathed (like in WWII) then the current arrangement will continue, and their plans for domination will fail.
​  And this is why these people have become so unhinged and so histrionic in the past few months as the US refuses to send more aid to Ukraine. It’s why Emmanuel Macron is pushing all-in, he’s a lame duck president easily sacrificed here. It’s why British perfidy behind the scenes has to be your first suspect in any act of horror. It’s why Germany is politically paralyzed between its gasping industrial class and the revolutionary Greens who actually run the government.
​  It’s why their hatred for the US is so nakedly apparent now. The US is trying to walk away from the old, sclerotic, malignant narcissists of Europe and they cannot handle it.​..
​..Removing Nuland removes a lot of the bureaucratic momentum. But it doesn’t mean that things change on a dime. Course corrections take time. This operation in Moscow was a long time in the making. It wasn’t going to be stopped. Delayed? Sure. But it actually happening speaks more to the other players involved not the US.
  And that brings me to the Francis Scott Key bridge. As an event it deserves its own article, but I think you know where I’m going with this. There is a vanishingly small probability that this was an accident caused by an old ship with a spotty maintenance record, a Ukrainian captain, and an Indian crew...
​..This was an attack on US soil by a foreign power. And the first group of people we’re supposed to think who did it was the Russians. Why? Revenge for Moscow, after we were set up to look like the ones who did that, to the people who matter… the ones making the decisions.
​  The fact that the US and Russia both have tried to deflect blame for both of these incidents away from the other is a very big tell. It says clearly that both sides are aware of the dangers these attacks on their sovereignty represent and are unwilling to use them as a casus belli. It’s the most encouraging part of all of this. Rational people are still trying to slow the climb up the escalatory ladder.
​  The problem is they aren’t in control of the situation. If the US wanted war with Russia, we’d already be there. That means someone else does.
​  Note the lack of “Russia did it!” coming from the US. Note now the FBI came out immediately, with no investigation, and said this was an accident, not an act of war, which it most likely was.
​  The question then is, “who committed the act?” We will never find out the truth to this but our prime suspect has to be the one who has the motive to get the US to go “on tilt” and move into position to defend Ukraine openly.​..
​..I think this again is one of those “orgies of evidence” to frame Russia for something someone else did for very different reasons. And that reason is pure, unfettered, narcissistic revenge for the US having the temerity to walk away from its responsibilities (as they have defined them) in Europe.
​  These people have been very clear now for years, either the US goes along with their plans for the future or it will be destroyed from within. This attack on the Key bridge in Baltimore is a nightmare event, meant to be a catalyst for a breakdown of the US economy, creating chaos during an election year.
​  It could easily ripple through our property, debt and equity markets in the coming weeks. Attacking the US puts pressure there while lifting some of the focus away from the deterioration of Europe’s economy.
​  This is an event that the more I think about it the more it turns into an Agatha Christie novel, with everyone having motive to attack the US for entirely different reasons. So, I won’t come to any definitive conclusion here, even though you know who my prime suspects are.

This week, the NTSB presented a minute-by-minute timeline from when the Dali left the port, to when it struck the bridge, using information from the voyage data recorder (VDR) on board. The VDR is often compared to an airplane's black box, but the NTSB says it's much less comprehensive in the data it provides. But at some point, the VDR shut off, then came back on. There's two minutes of data missing.

​  Charles Hugh Smith​,  Fire, Then Ice: Our Deflationary Future
​  To stave off the pain of debt saturation / over-indebtedness, monetary authorities collapse the currency and the economy it supported, unleashing maximum pain on everyone who used the currency or owned assets denominated in the currency.
​  A new dollar is then introduced at a ratio of 1 new unit to 100, or 1,000, or 100,000 of the old dollars. Everyone's financial wealth is wiped out. Tools, skills, precious metals, buildings, mines, farms, etc., still retain their intrinsic / productive value, but the monetary reset means everyone whose phantom wealth was a form of debt is wiped out.
​  This dynamic makes perfect sense, and it's a well-worn pathway for nation-states. Empires, however, might choose differently. The difference between a nation-state and an empire is generally under-appreciated. A nation-state can destroy its currency and bankrupt everyone holding its bonds / debt and start over, but an empire cannot be quite so cavalier, for the "reserve currency" of the empire is its foundation of power...
​..To preserve the Empire, it becomes necessary to wipe out the debt and the phantom wealth it created, 90% of which is held by the hyper-wealthy, super-wealthy and merely wealthy. This is the class that has concentrated wealth and power to the point of destabilizing the social, financial and political orders, and so those tasked with preserving the Empire (the State within the State) will have to strip this powerful class of its phantom wealth indirectly, as the class is too politically powerful to be taken down head-on.
​  Recall that deflation--the decline in the price of assets, goods and services--is beneficial to wage-earners, as their earnings go farther as prices fall. Profits become harder to come by, and those lending and speculating on ever-higher asset valuations are wiped out.
​  From the Imperial point of view, this is all good: given that the only goal is to preserve the currency from evaporation, then the takedown of the hyper-wealthy class that threatens to destabilize the Imperial order is equally essential.​..
​..Fire, then ice: as inflation (fire) threatens the Imperial currency, the Empire must choose deflation (ice) to preserve its foundation. Currency in active circulation is lumped in with the phantom wealth of debt-based assets, but they are two different things, as Aristotle observed (oikonoma and chrematistics). Just as inflation works slowly to erode the value of labor, deflation works best if it too is gradual, slowly extinguishing phantom wealth over time.
​  I have endeavored over the years to explain that the concentrated wealth and power of the hyper-wealthy pose an existential threat to the Imperial Project, and the showdown between debt-created phantom wealth and the bedrock of the Imperial Project, its currency, will play out in the next 6 to 8 years.

​  The International Court of Justice (ICJ) has ordered Israel to allow uninterrupted shipments of food into Gaza. Before issuing the legally-binding order, the Hague-based court warned that “famine is setting in” in the besieged enclave.
​  Issued on Thursday, the order commands Israel to take “all necessary and effective measures to ensure, without delay, in full cooperation with the United Nations, the unhindered provision…of urgently needed basic services and humanitarian assistance,” including food, water, and medicine.
​  The ruling comes two months after the court ruled that “the state of Israel shall take all measures to prevent the commission of genocide in Gaza,” including by blocking humanitarian aid shipments.
​  “The court observes that Palestinians in Gaza are no longer facing only a risk of famine … but that famine is setting in,” the judges wrote in Thursday’s ruling. Israel can help alleviate this looming famine “by increasing the capacity and number of land crossing points and maintaining them open for as long as necessary,” they noted.
​  The Israeli military controls all entry and exit points to Gaza except the Rafah crossing between the enclave and Egypt. However, Cairo allows Israel to determine when the crossing can be opened, and Israeli troops inspect every truck that passes.​..
..At least 27 children have already starved to death, the ICJ judges noted on Thursday.
​  Thursday’s order was requested by South Africa, which filed a legal action last year accusing Israel of committing “systematic” war crimes and genocide in Gaza. Israel denies that it is committing genocide and insists that its military campaign against Hamas – which has killed more than 32,000 Palestinians, mostly women and children – is legitimate self defense.

The Israel lobby is fractured, and so at last is the Jewish community
The Palestinian genocide is providing a moment of reckoning for the Jewish community.

'Israel' seized 50 square km of Palestinian land in 2023: Report

​  Security Council ceasefire resolution brings ‘little hope’ to Gaza as Israeli genocide rages on
​  It has been nearly a week since the UN Security Council’s ceasefire resolution, but little has changed in Gaza. When the resolution first passed with a U.S. abstention, it was met with Israeli protests and gave rise to the perception that, this time, Israel would be beholden to the UN. That turned out to be a fantasy, provoking discussion on whether the UN system has any real influence over what happens on the ground.
​  For one thing, airstrikes continued in Rafah, and the assault on al-Shifa hospital has entered its twelfth day. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu suspended the Israeli delegation that was supposed to meet with Biden in Washington before agreeing to reschedule the visit. The White House, for its part, said that the Biden administration hadn’t changed its position towards Israel’s war and that the resolution was “non-binding and has no impact on Israel’s capacity to go after Hamas.”

Israel Mounts Largest Attack On Syria In Years, Over 40 Dead

Gonna need a LOT of electricity: In Historic Reversal, US To Restart A Shut Down Nuclear Power Plant For The First Time Ever

  Meryl Nass MD is going all out for 2 months. Do the same. Tip that thing over! Tools Below: CALLS to ACTION--Naomi Wolf's Daily Clout and I put this together
The WHO meets in 60 days and we simply MUST stop them by throwing spanners (wrenches) into their works. 
​  We can do it. They have left themselves open in so many ways

WHO Summary for activists who want to help at the state level

  Dr. Nass is keeping up the pressure. Do the same. Exert pressure.  The Pandemic Treaty is on the rocks. Developing nations don't want to pay for the expensive buildout of a biosecurity system while all they get is a measly handout for sharing bioweapons
​  Adding two more weeks of negotiations was hastily agreed, as what was to be the final International Negotiating Body session just ended.

Louisiana Leads the Way​ , 37 Senators Voted NO to Globalism and to a pandemic information vaccination tyranny

​  Here is a model letter that might be a starting point for an attorney general to notify the President that he will not agree to transfer health sovereignty of his citizens to the WHO​ ,  Meryl Nass MD
A joint Sovereignty Coalition-Door to Freedom effort to help you approach lawmakers. Door to Freedom is here to give you all the assistance we can muster in our mutual quest to remain free.

​  Here is our Model State Resolution​ , Need your help getting resolutions like this passed and getting governors and AGs to go along.​ Meryl Nass MD
​  The “basis for action” language is intended to cover orders or directions in which a third party like the federal government is inserted between the WHO or WEF and the state. If the order originally came from the WEF or WHO it will not be obeyed, no matter who issues it to the state.

  This is the full text of the July 18, 2022 petition from State's Attorneys General to the US Dept. of Health and Human Services
 As the attorneys general of Oklahoma, Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, South Carolina, Texas, and Utah, we respectfully petition the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to amend its definition of “public health emergency” in 42 C.F.R. § 70.1. See 5 U.S.C. § 553(e). The Rule exceeds the agency’s authority and infringes on U.S. and State sovereignty by unlawfully delegating to the World Health Organization (WHO) the authority to invoke health emergency powers solely based on decisions of the WHO...  

  If you have some "Mad-money", Dr. Nass has a whimsical suggestion: 
Can you help Andrew Bridgen sue Matt Hancock for his COVID crimes and lies? The case can't go forward without costs being paid.​  A relatively small sum, luckily.

Assisting Justice (took this picture with roses and garden tools)

No comments:

Post a Comment