THE FACTIONAL INFIGHTING HAS BEEN NOTICED

THE FACTIONAL INFIGHTING HAS BEEN NOTICED…

For some time in various blogs but more importantly in interviews dating back some time (almost a decade now) I've been advancing the hypothesis that there is massive "factional infighting" going on in the deep state(s) of the West, and particularly in the USA. My position has been rather simple (and some would say, simplistic), namely, that Mr. Globaloney was essentially like the Mafia, with various dons representing various families and interests, all sitting around their conference tables sipping brandy, smoking cigars, and figuring out how to make more money and dominate the world, while on the streets their lackeys were shooting at each other. In other words, far from viewing Mr. Globaloney as a monolithic, all-encompassing and omni-competent monolithic conspiracy, it had its own internal fissures and fractures along factional lines, and that as it grew closer and closer to its goal of eradicating nation-states, that factional infighting would only increase as it approached its goal, for one faction, and one faction alone, could be the "winner" in the global domination game. Or to put it country simple: globalism is a self-defeating enterprise.

Part of my rationale for this view was the fact that beginning around 2005-2010, it became clear that some of these factions had realized that their globaloneyism wasn't panning out quite as planned, and that there were serious risks to their power base (i.e., North America), and that they would eventually have to "reshore" industry into that base. Trump, on this view, wasn't so much a "fluke" as an inevitability; the choice between Darth Hillary and Trump was a choice between very different deep state factions and agendas.

Now, however, it seems that others have finally noticed this factionalism and infighting, and in The Financial Times, no less, in an important article by Alastair Crooke reproduced over at Zero Hedge (this story was brought to my attention by A.F.; many thanks!):

The Citadels Of America's Elites: Fractured And At Odds With Each Other

There are many crucial points in this article, but for me, the main one was this:

Martin Wolf was first off, with a piece dramatically headlined: The looming 100-year, US-China Conflict. No ‘mere’ trade war, he implied, but a full-spectrum struggle.

Then his FT colleague Edward Luce, pointed out that Wolf’s “argument is more nuanced than the headline. Having spent part of this week among leading policymakers and thinkers at the annual Aspen Security Forum in Colorado,” Luce writes, “I am inclined to think Martin was not exaggerating. The speed with which US political leaders of all stripes have united behind the idea of a ‘new cold war’ is something that takes my breath away. Eighteen months ago the phrase was dismissed as fringe scaremongering. Today it is consensus.”

But behind this "consensus" there's another problem, and it's that factional infighting:

The two FT correspondents effectively were signalling – in their separate articles – that the US is entering on a momentous and hazardous transformation. Further, it would seem that America’s élite is being fractured into balkanised enclaves that are not communicating with one another – nor wanting to communicate with each other. Rather, it is another conflict between deadly rivals.

One such orientation insists on a renewal of the Cold War to sustain and renew that supersized military-security complex, which accounts for more than half of America’s GDP. Another élite demands that US dollar global hegemony be preserved. Another orientation of the Deep State is disgusted at the contagion of sexual decadence and corruption that has wormed its way into American governance – and truly hopes that Trump will ‘drain the swamp’. And yet another, which sees DC’s now explicit amorality as risking the loss of America’s global standing and leadership – wants to see a return of traditional American mores – a ‘moral rearmament’, as it were. (And then there are the deplorables, who simply want that America should attend to its own internal refurbishment.)

But all these divided Deep State factions believe that belligerence can work.

However, the more these fractured, rival US élite factions with their moneyed and comfortable lifestyles, cloister themselves in their enclaves, certain in their separate views about how America can retain its global supremacy, the less likely it is that they will understand the very real impact of their collective belligerence on the outside world. Like any cosseted élite, they have an exaggerated sense of their entitlement – and their impunity.

These élite factions – for all their internal rivalry – however seem to have coalesced around a singularity of talking and thinking that allows the dominant classes to substitute for the reality of an America subject to severe stress and strain – the fable of a hegemon which still can elect which non-compliant governments and peoples to bully and remove from the global map. Their rhetoric alone is curdling the atmospherics in the non-West. (Italicized emphasis added, boldface emphasis in the original)

Being a proud member of "the deplorables," I look at this and see a fundamental problem, which Crooke's article also points out: with the deep factional divisions reflecting very different primary objectives and agendas, there is no unity of vision or purpose and hence no real ability to coalesce around a grand strategy, which mere "belligerence" is not. A real (and rational) strategy would be to figure out how to expand the economy such that the bloated military-industrial complex no longer accounts for half of the USA's gross domestic product, and hence rein in its influence over ever aspect of policy formation. To allow things to continue along the same lines as they developed under Eisenhower is a recipe for disaster, not a strategy, for sooner or later those global hegemonic empires always contrive an enemy, and a war to get rid of that enemy. Think of Britain's pre-World War One maneuverings to encircle Germany, and then to wage war against it.

This deep factional infighting creates a situation in which it is increasingly difficult for foreign nations to assess the USA's direction, as powerful bureaucrats can, and do, institute policy to influence the nation. Consider the implications of Crooke's warning here:

The leader of any nation is never sovereign. He or she sits atop a pyramid of quarrelling princelings (Deep State princelings, in this instance), who have their own interests and agenda. Trump is not immune to their machinations. One obvious example being Mr Bolton’s successful gambit in persuading the Brits to seize the Grace I tanker off Gibraltar. At a stroke, Bolton escalated the conflict with Iran (‘increased the pressure’ on Iran, as Bolton would probably term it); put the UK at the forefront of America’s ‘war’ with Iran; divided the JCPOA signatories, and embarrassed the EU. He is a canny ‘operator’ – no doubt about it.

And this is the point: these princelings can initiate actions (including false flags) that drive events to their agenda; that can corner a President. And that is presuming that the President is somehow immune to a great ‘switch in mood’ among his own lieutenants (even if that consensus is nothing more than a fable that belligerency succeeds). But is it safe to assume Trump is immune to the general ‘mood’ amongst the varied élites? Do not his recent glib comments about Afghanistan and Iran suggest that he might leaning towards the new belligerency? Martin Wolf concluded his FT piece by suggesting the shift in the US suggests we may be witnessing a stumbling towards a century of conflict. But in the case of Iran, any mis-move could result in something more immediate – and uncontained.

In other words, each of those factions can initiate policy, and the possibility arises that they could each initiate some mutually contradictory policies via false flags at the same time. By the same token, each can withhold crucial information, and as gatekeepers to the Executive, can pretend to act with executive approval to initiate a policy, and then turn around and present the Executive with a fait accompli. Consider only the maneuverings of some of these factions first under Obama, and now under Trump, to force the executive into military actions in the Middle East, which both men, at least so far, had the good sense to avoid. If that sounds familiar, it should, because they tried the same thing under Kennedy during the Bay of Pigs and Cuban Missile crises. And that, of course, may be the real unspoken lesson here, for Kennedy managed to coalesce those feuding factions into opposition to him, and he paid for it with his life, and the rest of the century was spent in conflicts.

See you on the flip side...

48 thoughts on “THE FACTIONAL INFIGHTING HAS BEEN NOTICED…”

  1. The key question is what will be the key exports from the US? Right now, the global medium of exchange, our chief export, is the Dollar. That Dollar is a private note masquerading as a US Note. So in essence we have a feudal or fascist banking system. The problem with that arises in the result of this set of policies remains that export of Dollars undermines the real economy. This was seen throughout history and a poignant example is Britain in the 1840’s.

    Mr. Trump keeps talking about our export of Dollars to China and Europe. That is what he means when he says “we are losing x billions of Dollars per year to China.” Make no mistake, the group of factions supporting Mr. Trump are energy, manufacturing, mining, and Tesla tech groups. The great weight to be removed, alluded to by Mr. Trump, is the negative pressure of a private export currency on individual wealth and manufacturing.

  2. Loxie Lou Davie

    Thank you ALL for your marvelous comments!!! I can always come here to feed my starving soul, knowing there will be highly intellectual musings!!! What an AMAZING place this is!!! 😉

  3. Gosh and Robert,
    your comments here
    gizadeathstar com/2019/08/france-announces-it-will-weaponize-space-with-laser-satellites/
    got me thinking. Imagine that.

    It seems worth noting that by piecing the various parts of the pedo/trafficking puzzle we have been shown that some of the factions (puppet masters) become briefly more visible. Lynn de Rothschild is easily connected with the Hollywood control filers in NXIVM (however its spelled) through her close relationship with Bronfmans. She’s a little less easily connected political control filers through her support of David Brock, the Clintons and all. These folk don’t come along on your ride without bringing a list of monsters like Podestas, Alefantis, Clintons, Silsby, Weiners,………………..
    While Saville control filed the Royals and Brit politicos, Epstein control filed mostly east coast politicos and it seems a few of the wealthy and academia.

    Perhaps we do need a new category: the pedo file. We can just keep adding to the list like a Muckety.com diagram (ven?) and work out more and more who zoomed and is probably zooming who.

    1. ZDB, it is important to ‘rank’ the various Players, so as to not get caught-up in the minutiae. If I was to use a LotR analogy, I would put Epstein at around the level of Gríma Wormtongue. “Deep State princelings” would be like the Middle Earth war-leaders that Sauron was collecting for his assault on Gondor. Lynn de Rothschild and those of her clan would be like Orcs. These are all tactical-level Players.

      Note that we have not yet ‘found’ any of the Nazgûl, also called Ringwraiths, in the visible, on-stage Players. They are a whole order ‘higher’. In LotR, they were ancient rulers who were brought-down and corrupted by the use of the minor Rings (controlled by the One Ring). By analogy, these could be the Anunnaki. Real Anunnaki, on Earth. They would remain hidden, as they are genetically immortal or very-long-lived but can still be physically killed. They need to be identified, but carefully – they are rumored to be telepathic. They are strategic-level Players.

      The next Big jump is up to Sauron. ‘He’ holds the whole group together. In the LotR world, he has had a physical body, but it has perished. By analogy, we on Earth are looking for someone who is no longer physical. An energy being. This being is only known by its effects (negative). It will not be physically-found by reading the news…

      There are basically two ways to find it: Develop our own ‘capabilities’ (become more like Gandalf), or find capable allies (Elrond, Galadriel, Bombadil, and Higher). Until we find it and ‘deal’ with it, there will be no peace…

      1. I think I put any and all of the Baur clan above the Deep State Princelings. I put the control filers (Epstein, Bronfmans, Saville, Sandusky, Manson,……….) at the level of orc lords. There clerical employees working for bigger players. Epstein? for Maxwell and Wexner. Saville? I wonder. Directly for Rothschild? Bronfmans? almost certainly directly for Lynn R.

        Other than that, I concur. There’s a whole structure here we’re getting more and more glimpses of.

      2. goshawks… can I ask what you mean when you said ” we on Earth are looking for someone who is no longer physical” ? I’m familiar with the movie and Sauron, but I’m curious as to what brings you to this statement because it goes along with some things I’ve been looking at for sometime now.

        1. Brasyl, here we get to non-physical (metaphysical) research – including from various Higher texts – and experiences that I have personally had. They may or may not even be appropriate to these blogs. Suffice it to say that I am convinced that there is a Higher dimension at work in Earth affairs.

          Beyond the Bauers of this world, there are real wizards/sorcerers/sages (both in body and not) and shading-up to ‘folks’ who have never been physical. Then, we get to ever-higher planes and occupants with ever-greater innate powers. At some point, we transition to the Infinite.

          As I infer it, “Sauron” (our Sauron) is someone/something from the higher planes who can still ‘reach down’ to appearing physical. Somehow, ‘he’ has skin in the game. An investment. Otherwise, why bother playing with the ants? Perhaps ‘he’ incarnated here, and was whacked by some Neanderthal or Atlantean; who knows? Or, ‘he’ could be a spirit-being leading the Anunnaki and a formation-spirit of their ‘ideals’.

          For me, this whole area is still a “work in progress,” as they say. I just have a feeling that knowing-about this aspect is vital

          1. Super tough and pertinent topic to keep focused. That’s where analogy’s help. Looking at analogies instead of looking at the topic directly is like looking at shadows cast by the sun instead of directly at the sun. Hence we all refer back to stories we know. Gotta think it’s why we learned em in the first place.

            Along these lines, I made a distinction about these pedo monster franchisees. Most folk don’t realize that Charlie Manson was in the same business as Epstein, Sandusky, Saville, Alefantis (real name?), Bronfmans, John of God,. Colonia Dignidad,……………….and with the same people.. The folk who run these ops profit from and mk ultra the lives of thousands if not hundreds of thousands. Indirectly millions. Us.

            The distinction is that it is one thing to do evil to people. It’s another to believe in the evil and it gives you some Aleister Croweley type demonic power. There’s a reason Marina Abramovic is involved with ops like Alefantis’, Epstein’s and all. It’s a whole lot of effort to convince a whole lotta folk that evil exists and is powerful. My experience with powerful beings is that they’re uniformly humble and careful to let evil fade to naught. Those who put forth effort to be powerful (especially the crazy effort Croweley’s adherents put forth) are decidedly and messily not.

            That belief seems important to this crowd. With systems they want in place it seems their prey’s beliefs are important to the predators too. Perhaps if for nothing else than to help with Judas goats. Either way by definition if one believes in GOOD then by that definition one has gotta be ok. More than ok. Who would define GOOD as subject to some odd definition of evil and a band of baal worshipers?

            A favorite nun used to answer our question “Can God make a stone that God cannot lift?” with simple and humble “I don’t know. It’s a mystery and not my job to know.” What Marina Abramovic and her franchisees apparently are posing is similar but stupider. Feels like they’re trying to ask “Did God make a stone that crushed God with a white hot flame? Forever?”

            It’s that constant and final aspect we always get from Luciferians. It always comes down to that this deity or that deity is ok. They are all ok. And they all happen to be different manifestations of Lucifer. Whatever. Means indicate the ends. They’re not justified by the ends. If Croweley and all are so powerful and justified, then why are they’re means (and ends) so intentionally and nastily messed up?

    2. Robert Barricklow

      ZDB
      What concerns me here is the hardcore element;
      the human sacrifices. This has interfaced with the pedophile ring at a deeper level. This has “history” that goes way back. This also ties in w/ritual & blood in/blood out.
      Still, I fantasize that some day, some time;
      brave men/women might take them on for size.

  4. Robert Barricklow

    I never read Lord of the Rings. I’ve seen the movie & cartoon versions. I read/heard literature critiques of it; but have never read it. I’ve read lots of fantasy book and I’m reading one now/Theft of Swords by Michael J Sullivan.
    But to stop being human is their agenda.
    Yet, these factions are composed of a winner take all agenda. That they are willing to gamble our lives is a given; but their own[by extension, their families?] ?.
    Very dangerous times.
    So many trip wires.
    So many at cross purposes/cross swords.

    Then there’s the others outside of Earth’s orbit;
    who may actually have some skin in this deadly game.

    Interesting times indeed; for humans or otherwise.

    1. It’s worth the read – especially now when as an adult you can flow through it. I never was much for the movies. Too disappointing to miss whole aspects that I loved – like Bombadil. And his Lady.

    2. RB: For what it’s worth, LotR is a good work of fiction worthy of at least one reading. This has been nearly annual pilgrimage for me. It reads at a steady pace with a few sections where Tolkien lays foundations. He invented languages, mythologies and poetry to give the races a cultural matrix. IMHO, he is a master wordsmith and a great builder of imagery with economy. The Silmarillion is also worth at least one reading to get a foothold on the backstory. The latter work is compiled from the notes of Christopher Tolkien using fragments of stories his father wrote companion to the original work but never was able to publish. This accounts for the latter’s disjointed appearance–and the change in metaphysical tone. An argument can be made that nothing in these works is truly original, but the beauty is found in how he arranges them to tell an interesting story within a familiar world view.

      For what they are the movies are introductions to both of Tolkien’s major works: The Hobbit and the LotR triology. A lot of material was added to unify the movies while distorting the works, and a lot of material in the books was left out of the movies to simplify their version of the main plot. Some characters were fused with others, making the whole effort to me a failure. (I’m particularly aggravated with the movies treatment of Arwen. In the book most of her action parts belonged to Glorfindel, and the romance portion was more muted. Arwen was there in cameo–but her gravitational pull as a symbol there cannot be denied. In this respect her role is purely a medieval construct–but a powerful one! To satisfy post-modern social convenience the movies required strong female leads, so Arwen was promoted into one. The shield-maiden was always a strong female role because of the story and a prophecy–but that is a textual matter.) I’ll skip any analysis of the movie released this year about Tolkien’s life because it’s bovine excrement. For the man himself see Tom Shippey’s biography.

      1. Robert Barricklow

        No doubt it should have been, and should be on any reading list. My problem w/it is that it is so well known; so promoted. The reason I’d read it is to see what’s obfuscated; from, for example the movie versions. In Wizard of Oz the shoes change from silver to ruby.
        Total obfuscation, of Willian Jennings Byran’s silver presidency issue, and reason for the book.
        But, I think of this book more as establishment fiction. I never cottoned to Dune either. My brother’s favorite and he was more revolutionary than me. Sadly, he had an auto accident
        in the middle of nowhere,
        and left this world.

        Well… , the White Rabbit is calling…

        1. (RB, I am so sad to hear about your brother. Condolences and RIP.)

          The books are really worth reading (or audio-book). Great words to inspire! And note how different the books are from the movie version: No ghosts from the ‘Paths of the Dead’ at the battle for Gondor. Humans and Elves carried the day!

          TLotR: Return of the King – The Battle of the Pelennor Fields

          “And then wonder took him, and a great joy; and he cast his sword up in the sunlight and sang as he caught it. And all eyes followed his gaze, and behold! upon the foremost ship a great standard broke, and the wind displayed it as she turned towards the Harlond. There flowered a White Tree, and that was for Gondor; but Seven Stars were about it, and a high crown above it, the signs of Elendil that no lord had borne for years beyond count. And the stars flamed in the sunlight, for they were wrought of gems by Arwen daughter of Elrond; and the crown was bright in the morning, for it was wrought of mithril and gold.

          Thus came Aragorn son of Arathorn, Elessar, Isildur’s heir, out of the Paths of the Dead, borne upon a wind from the Sea to the kingdom of Gondor; and the mirth of the Rohirrim was a torrent of laughter and a flashing of swords, and the joy and wonder of the City was a music of trumpets and a ringing of bells. But the hosts of Mordor were seized with bewilderment, and a great wizardry it seemed to them that their own ships should be filled with their foes; and a black dread fell on them, knowing that the tides of fate had turned against them and their doom was at hand.

          East rode the knights of Dol Amroth* driving the enemy before them: troll-men and Variags and orcs that hated the sunlight. South strode Éomer and men fled before his face, and they were caught between the hammer and the anvil. For now men leaped from the ships to the quays of the Harlond and swept north like a storm.

          There came Legolas, and Gimli wielding his axe, and Halbarad** with the standard, and Elladan and Elrohir*** with stars on their brow, and the dour-handed Dunedain, Rangers of the North, leading a great valour of the folk of Lebennin and Lamedon and the fiefs of the South****. But before all went Aragorn with the Flame of the West, Anduril like a new fire kindled, Narsil re-forged as deadly as of old; and upon his brow was the Star of Elendil.”
          .
          .
          * Dol Amroth was the largest city in Western Gondor. It was governed by the prince of Belfalas, Imrahil, and was home to the famed Swan Knights.
          ** Halbarad was a Dúnadan Ranger of the North, who (with his men) accompanied Aragorn, Legolas, and Gimli through the Paths of the Dead.
          *** Elladan and Elrohir were the twin sons of Elrond the Half-elven and Celebrían of Rivendell [Elves].
          **** lands of Southern Gondor.

          1. Robert Barricklow

            Goshawks,
            Appreciate your steadfastness in your belief in these books and of the treasures they hold.
            I could not give the them the attention; nor, due diligence digging down deep required.

            Indeed, Dr. Farrell’s work is quite enough of a challenge as it is.
            There, I’ve already gotten more back,
            than I’ve put in.

      1. Don’t do it Robert. You’ll get 24 copies from everyone here at GDS. BTW, start with the Hobbit. Ya gotta. It’ll take ya a few days to get through it. Put Leo Kotke’s Armadillo on repeat play the whole way too.

  5. You’ve over complicated the factions…

    1) Neo-Con: Trump-Nentanyah-Brexit
    Oil-Finance-War
    Old Money Oligarchs-Privatization-Heritage Foundation-Ayn Rand
    Rothschild-Koch-Mercer-Aldelson

    2) Globalist( United nation softies)- Hillary/Obama
    Media-Tech Oligarchs-China Lovers-NSS-New Money

    Pick your poison. If your in the bottom 95% You have two options

    1) You want to work in the oil feild ,FIRE SECTOR, have a car and live in the suburbs but eat unregulated food and drink unregulated water, drive on toll roads vote RIGHT

    You want to live in a shoe box, stack and pack and have dialey rations of beyond meat/grain but have no car/house, play videogames and buy cheap trinkets and toys vote LEFT.

  6. We are just game pieces in this great game that has spanned millennia. Who are the real players we know not we are only the pieces on this deadly game board and our elites the biggest of fools who dream they are the masters of the game.

  7. A Fist Full of Dollars
    Interesting layout of competing factions. Wonder if someone is Yojimbo-ing the factions?
    Thank you for sharing. Off to read the article.

    1. nice reference. It’s Gandalf keeping the Trolls arguing until daylight. These are all stories of the same plot. Hegellian dialectics everywhere.

  8. You and all the commenters have delivered wonderful insights and beautifully crafted summaries of what is happening. Seeding this awareness for all to learn is a gift of above almost anything else.

  9. With Goshawks invoking the memory and theology of Tolkien I will only add the following. These elites are a multitude of “Gollum”, sitting in the dark, emitting gutteral sounds and chanting, “my precious” in memory of a lost treasure of which they desire to repossess at their fellow’s ruin. They never seem to remember they were themselves murderers first, then thieves second. All who bind their affections to the technology of “will to power and possess” are bound to this technology’s fate. As a technology the Ring’s fate is sealed. Though one may desire it one cannot possess what is not rightfully theirs to receive. They are only part of a whole. This world belongs to another–not as a possession, but as a place of habitation for a community of individuals who were created to live, to love and to dream.

    There are ways to win. Like Gandalf, Tom Bombadil, Aragorn, Galadriel, Faramir and Sam, only those who reject this technology and use what the Creator has granted them to do good within their own sphere’s of influence found themselves in the end. As a work of fiction, LotR has much to say about the nature and character of spiritual warfare–and of our proper spiritual response to our role in it. Though its foundations are Christian, it resonants with clarity far beyond the boundaries of the tradition that midwifed its birth. Speaking as the prophet for the Creator at numerous stages in Tolkien’s work, Gandalf always reminds us there is plenty of room for hope. All we are expected to do is to play our parts as best we can.

    1. When you pull back to reveal the big picture, looks like the “Georgia Guidestones” are actually their playbook. Who was it that said the truly evil in casting their nefarious spells, are compelled to display their intentions to their prey.

      1. It feels like it’s a trick to kinda Judas goat the prey into following through for their playbook as though it’s prophecy. The kinda trick a drug addled undernourished impoverished under-educated misled man might fall for.

          1. Robert Barricklow

            LOL!
            [You really have to try very hard to escape being glyphosated, even one day alone.]

    2. Concerning LotR , I have read that Tolkien built-in a subtlety , both terrifying and reassuring. Although all the good-side Players got Frodo to where he needed to be (inside Mt Doom, with the One Ring), Frodo was ultimately defeated by Sauron. He was ‘turned’. I have read that Tolkien wanted to make sure the reader knew that it was a mere mortal (Frodo) jousting against a full angel/demon-class entity:
      http://tolkiengateway.net/wiki/Sauron
      “Sauron was the greatest and most trusted servant of Morgoth before and during the First Age. Originally a Maia of Aulë named ‘Mairon’…”

      Morgoth was a full Creator-class entity; Sauron was one step down. Immense Power, whether for good or ill. When it came down to the final will-Sauron-survive ‘tussle’ (with Sauron probably ‘present’ via the One Ring), Frodo was out-classed; he had no chance. Period. That is the terrifying part…

      The reassuring part is that there were other, good-guy, entities (all the way up) that wanted Sauron ‘gone’. They usually like to work subtly*, so all they had to do was slightly-rearrange a pebble near Gollum or similar ‘influence’. And down Gollum went, with the One Ring in hand…

      (Note that I am not disparaging all the good-guy characters that got involved, including Frodo. They, collectively, got the One Ring to a point where only a small ‘nudge’ was needed for its destruction. They were acting in the ‘collective’ or ‘immanent’ aspect of God…)
      .
      .
      * Tom Bombadil was not even mentioned in the movies, so I made a lengthy comment on his extreme importance in getting the One Ring destroyed:
      https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2019/02/aquaman-khal-drogo-actor-may-play-duncan-idaho-in-new-dune-film/?comments=1&post=36859301#comment-36859301

      1. Yes, Gosh. Thank you for your comments and the links. I’m very familiar with the material in Tolkien’s legacy and still learned a thing or two in them. Perhaps I may engage in that forum and discuss some of my ideas about the work there. For this audience, though a couple additional observations are due.

        I’m very much aware of Sauron’s history with Morgoth/Melkor. ZDB’s point with Beorn was received well as I almost included him in the list. In the end he was left out because he made no significant appearance in LotR as a major character–and at the time in the plot he does appear in The Hobbit, no one is really aware of Bilbo’s possession of the “One Ring.” Those who know he possesses a ring only consider it to be a magic one. The characters I did mention share a common experience: they knew something about it, they dealt with their moments of temptation, and they passed the test not to succumb to that “will to power to possess”–even to make things right. And, yes, Frodo’s failure is a sign of his mortality in a spiritual sense–but as a Christian practicing Catholicism Tolkien can view this “will to power to possess” as the chiefest of the deadly sins. It’s an amalgam of many into one matrix–and it’s secret Sin at that. Any temptation that is not shed, even for its ultimate disposal, cannot be resisted forever. That is why he needed companions and a rival–one who desired the “One Ring” as strongly as he. Frodo was redeemed by the sacrifice of another–driven by the desire to possess it. There are a lot of ways to play this, and you and I could do this all day. But, perhaps you and I can meet elsewhere to engage in these conversations. I only mention these thoughts here so as to define why the “elites” are driven to their madness–and are utterly helpless to escape it without some type of intervention. Frodo was saved, but he was never the same. (That piece even goes back to Weather Top, but that is a rabbit trail for another time.)

        1. Good points. Hadn’t thought that way of Beorn. Think I like him better now. I will forever identify most with Bombadil.

          I think there’s more to Tolkein than any of us have gotten. Gone down a couple rabbit holes about him. They reminded me a little of the various rabbit holes out there on Kubrick. Overall, what I hate and love most of Tolkein is his development of Smeagol. He is the true everyman – er at least everyman who fails. All the the failed characters fail in the same manner as Smeagol. His is the most painful and most prolonged. The name Gollem is far too significant.

          Before now I always thought Catholicism was the martyr complexed religion. It’s an aspect I feel compelled to Beorn out of life. It feels like a default to superstitions of much older much more tyrannical religions.

    3. Robert Barricklow

      Loved it from the get-go… !
      My precious/such an outstanding metaphor for those under powers; spell.

  10. We know the last “cold war” was fake, and allowed both sides to over fund their MIC’s. Anybody else think this is just lather, rinse, repeat….where both sides, again, get to screw the proles in support of their respective MIC’s ?…just sayin’..

    1. We would just be with the delusions of slugs, formerly poor people, with power of socialism.

      1. … And wouldn’t that be great. I much prefer naive PayPal Elon Musk than “resistance is futile” AI Musk.

  11. Also worth bearing in mind that Martin Wolfe has attended the annual Bilderberg Group conference every year for many years.

  12. Joseph: “…for one faction, and one faction alone, could be the ‘winner’ in the global domination game.”

    Gandalf (élite wizard) to Saruman (élite wizard) :
    “There is only one Lord of the Ring. Only one who can bend it to his will. And he does not share power!”

    The point Gandalf was trying to make was that – even if Saruman ended-up on the ‘winning’ side – he would soon be thrown under the bus (disposed-of in some manner) by Sauron. And by way of transition into this article, note that Sauron was in no way human . He was effectively immortal. And he wanted to ruin and rule Middle Earth. And further note that the “One World Order” phenomenon has planning cycles in the multi-hundreds to thousands of years. Way beyond human attention-span. Hmm…

    The élite factions (“Deep State princelings” – I like that) only think like Saruman: decades (maybe centuries) rather than millennia. As such, they can be ‘played off’ against each other by someone with a much-longer planning cycle. I would see the various élite factions as caught within this ‘game’. “Sauron” is playing with them, and they do not see it.

    Contrary to Joseph, I believe that we will only discover the ‘pattern’ to events on Earth by discovering our own personal “Sauron.” We have to stop thinking in human terms…

    1. This has been my thinking for years now.
      That war in “Heaven” was never fully concluded and the losing faction was quarantined on Earth. I’m sure this has festered in “their” minds for millenia and retribution is sorely sought after. We are techhologicly capable of bringing about the Apocalypse they so earnestly desire and are prepared to burn the world to the ground in order to achieve it. That final battle looms large on the horizon.
      Mankind is but the pawns in a cosmic game of chess; maybe some are just now beginning to realize this and have concluded they backed the wrong horse in order to further their own interests.
      We live in interesting and perilous times.

    2. As I follow along Tommy Williams’ narrative (Manna World Holding Trust (MWHT) and THI fame), the gist I get that jives with what you outlined is that Rothschilds were loaned/gifted $20M in 1512 or so to take over the planet and its resources. They harvested every resource bringing it all to Marduk and he’s given them paper notes in return. All worthless now that he’s gone. And now MWHT owns the planet and is in the process of giving it all back to humanity and emancipating us from our millenias of slavery to Marduk and all.

      What we see of the Deep State Princelings and the fighting factions is them all struggling with each other as they realize their accounts, their assets, everything is all frozen. They’re frozen out and losing what they thought was control. And they are not acknowledging MWHT. I don’t know Tommy Williams nor Marduk nor MWHT nor THI from Adam. As far as I can tell this narrative is a scam or an allegory much like Rod Serling did in the political fires of the ’50’s.

      It might be worth noting that the various narratives we’re all trying to grok – from the legacy media and the tech oligarchs’ media and whatever other programming is being thrown at us – that these narratives share some common threads. Dialectics is one of them. Longer range planning beyond what is to date our consideration is another.

      Trying to step back and get a bigger picture. And perhaps avoid getting sucked into this not so civil war being foisted on Americans this decade.

    3. Contrary to Joseph??? I’ve spent a significant portion of my life, research, and publications taking the LONG view and have NEVER denied the existence of “Saurons”, personal or otherwise…

      1. “Contrary to Joseph” was meant as within this blog. Nowhere was a “Sauron”-level mentioned within this blog. I am aware of your religious training/education. Perhaps I should have said, “”Contrary to Joseph not mentioning ‘Saurons’ in this blog” or something. No offense meant…

Comments are closed.