Prelude to the antichrist - Part 13

Western Civilization’s Unrelenting Expansion – Part 6

1.After these things Paul departed from Athens, and came to Corinth; 2.And found a certain Jew named Aquila, born in Pontus, lately come from Italy, with his wife Priscilla; (because that Claudius had commanded all Jews to depart from Rome:) and came unto them (Acts 18:1-2, emphasis mine).

The greatest honor that the United States can bestow upon an individual is to grant a national holiday named in recognition of their birth-date. Thus far, only two Americans have been granted this lofty distinction: George Washington, for his role in the Revolutionary War and the fact that he was the country’s first president; and Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., for his fight to bring equality to the black citizens of this country. In addition to the two Americans whose lives are celebrated, this country has also set aside a day to pay tribute to one of the most notorious criminals this side of the Cross—Christopher Columbus.

It could be argued that the most significant event in world history in the last millennium and a half is the Columbus invasion. In fact, it is difficult to imagine the world that we live in today without the exploits of Christopher Columbus. The year 1492 is perhaps the most famous year on the Western calendar, and it is no coincidence that it is the demarcation of the medieval period and the Renaissance. As Europe was emerging from the throes of the Dark Ages, King Ferdinand of Spain commissioned Columbus to launch an attack on the indigenous people of the Americas. They had their sights on a future that was to be illuminated by the blood of the indigenous people:

For as much of you, Christopher Columbus, are going by our command, with some of our vessels and men, to discover and subdue some Islands and Continent in the ocean, and it is hoped that by God's assistance, some of the said Islands and Continent in the ocean will be discovered and conquered by your means and conduct, therefore it is but just and reasonable, that since you expose yourself to such danger to serve us, you should be rewarded for it. And we being willing to [honor] and [favor] You for the reasons aforesaid: Our will is, That you, Christopher Columbus, after discovering and conquering the said Islands and Continent in the said ocean, or any of them, shall be our Admiral of the said Islands and Continent you shall so discover and conquer…which you and your Lieutenants shall conquer, and freely decide all causes, civil and criminal, appertaining to the said employment of Admiral, Vice-Roy, and [Governor], as you shall think fit in justice, and as the Admirals of our kingdoms use to do; and that you have power to punish offenders (excerpt from Privileges and Prerogatives Granted by Their Catholic Majesties to Christopher Columbus : 1492 (emphasis mine)).

Western expansion under Columbus was the classic case of an outsider coming in with sufficient force to disrupt the mode of thought and the mode of action of the current landholders and eventually wiping them out. It was an all encompassing wave after wave of colonists, who over the course of about 300 years came into North and South America and the Caribbean to transplant Western culture into a world where there was no room for multiculturalism and bilingualism. In fact, the African slaves who were brought to the shores of the Americas were not permitted to speak their language, practice their customs or serve their God. This implied code of conduct, which brought the Americas and the Caribbean under the whip of colonist slave masters, is the reason why Haiti is the poorest country in the Western Hemisphere.(1)

Haiti resisted the French colonialist since the slaves were first brought over from Africa, and on January 1, 1804, an African born slave named Jean-Jacques Dessalines declared independence from the French after 50,000 French soldiers lost their lives in the uprising. In 1804, Haiti became the first black republic in the world and was the first country in the Western Hemisphere to abolish slavery completely. However, in the 1830s, the French demanded reparations from Haiti in the amount of 150 million francs in gold. By the turn of the twentieth century, it was spending 80 percent of its national budget on repayments to France and in 1947, Haiti finally paid off its debt, plus interest.(2)

It was not long after President Jean-Bertrand Aristide made a demand for restitution in 2003 that he was forced into an involuntary resignation by American forces. Although this is not the story that the mainstream media was playing out in the United States at the time, Aristide contacted Congresswoman Maxine Waters and Randall Robinson, founder of TransAfrica, to explain that he was removed from office by an American led coup d’état.(3)

The timing of Aristide’s demand could not have been better for America and its Western allies. They were embroiled in the War on Terror; consequently, his appeal fell under the radar screen and largely upon deaf ears. The irony is not lost on me that the first black republic was overthrown by the Bush Administration during its struggle to bring democracy to the Middle East.

Was the Bush coup a response to Aristide’s demand for restitution or is Haiti under the chronic chastisement of the West for its military victory over France more than 200 years ago? This conundrum becomes more significant when we consider that the Western world has endeavored to remove all vestiges of other cultures from its society since Columbus’ fatal strike. However, it is discovering, to the horror of many, that it is an extremely difficult task to wipe away the cultural embrace of other societies; for it is the soul of their civilizations. Consequently, the West has been forced by the yearning of the human spirit to tolerate multiculturalism and bilingualism. However, there have been loud voices in the Western world that are calling for America to abandon its tepid embrace of a multicultural society. Most notably among the dissenters are Tony Blankley in his book The West’s Last Chance: Will We Win the Clash of Civilizations; and Pat Buchanan in his books State of Emergency, The Third World Invasion and Conquest of America, and The Death of the West, How Dying Populations and Immigrant Invasions Imperil our Country and Civilization.

Blankley’s, Buchanan’s and a myriad of others’ books urge the West to reverse its experiment with a social concept that has eroded the European values that propelled America to the technological apex of human civilization. However, the late Samuel P. Huntington, former chairman of Harvard University’s Academy of International and Area Studies, brings a more urgent, some would say racist, cry for Western nationalism. He is perhaps the most influential author demanding that Western Civilization return to the values and distinct culture of the British settlers who ‘founded’ America. He predicted the current war between Islam and the West in his book The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order, and was the most quoted author during the period immediately following September 11th.

Clash of Civilizations first appeared as an article in the influential periodical on international relations—Foreign Affairs; the house organ of the Council on Foreign Relations. According to the editors, Huntington’s article generated more discussion (controversy) than any article in the previous 50 years. The article evolved into the book of the same name, which details a road map for Western democracies to establish an international order, which he claims is the best safeguard for world peace. Huntington’s sequel to Clash of Civilizations titled Who Are We, The Challenge to America’s National Identity, confronts the viewpoint that America can remain the leader of the world by embracing varied cultures. According to Who Are We, Europeans came to the United States with a distinct culture which included social, religious and legal values that were once adopted by non-European immigrants. Huntington espouses the notion that American citizenship will be devalued if immigrants are permitted and encouraged to bring their cultural values to America and not embrace its European values.

Who Are We is a very disturbing look at white nationalism by one of America’s premier intellectuals. Huntington, never known for his willingness to back away from controversy, seems to suggest that white Americans should gear up for a “racial hygiene” that eliminates any trace of multiculturalism by apparently predicting the resurgence of racism in the West:

“…the various forces challenging the core American culture and Creed could generate a move by native [white] Americans to revive the discarded and discredited racial and ethnic concepts of American identity and to create an America that would exclude, expel, or suppress people of other racial, ethnic and cultural groups. Historical and contemporary experience suggest that this is a highly probably reaction from a once dominant ethnic group that feels threatened by the rise of other groups. It could produce a racially intolerant country with high levels of intergroup conflict (Who Are We, page 20, emphasis mine).”(4)

Huntington is emphatic in his belief that white Americans should pursue a path of sequestration against “people of other racial, ethnic and cultural groups.” If white Americans went into full-throttle, expelling, excluding or suppressing citizens of other ethnic, racial or cultural groups, it would not be without precedent. History is replete with majority groups turning against their country’s minority. However, what should be unsettling to any ethnic minority in America or Europe is that the Western world continues to demonstrate that its appetite for ethnic cleansing has not been diminished over time.

…to be continued

© 2011 David R. Tolson

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Latin_American_and_Caribbean_countries_by_GDP_%28nominal%29


[2] http://blog.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2010/01/13/cancel_haitis_debt 

[3] http://www.nathanielturner.com/aristidekidnapped.htm
http://dissidentvoice.org/Mar04/Pitt0302.htm

[4] I challenged Professor Huntington in 2005 when he held a book signing in Washington, D.C. I quoted this section from page 20, and asked him pointedly if he believed that white Americans were willing to revert back to the age of Jim Crow in order to sequester people of color. He denied it, but had no response when I asked him why he inserted something in his book that he did not believe would happen.

Prelude to the antichrist - Part 12

Western Civilization’s Unrelenting Expansion – Part 5

“[I]t’s idiotic to expect people to be stopped by some scrap of paper called a property deed. Property rights are a superstition. One holds property only by the courtesy of those who do not seize it (Bertram Scudder, 1957).”[i]

I was recently in a debate with some men at a restaurant I frequent, who advance the ridiculous notion that no good thing has ever been produced by the Western World. Once our friendly sparring session was over, one of the guys pulled up his calendar on his Android to check an appointment; his comrade in arms hopped in his Mercedes Benz and departed for home; and the last brother logged off the Internet and packed his lap-top until our next rendezvous. What hypocrisy! I’d have more respect for these men, and their view of the West would be more noble if they shunned the evil and the good like they were the plague.

Like most informed individuals, I have my criticisms of the West, but I must concede that I appreciate many of the accoutrements that are available in America and abroad: Protection against unreasonable search and seizure; the Fifth Amendment shield against self incrimination; freedom of religion; the right to own property, a business or other assets; and as an author and teacher, I particularly value the freedom to write and speak without censorship. I also love the idea of living in a modern society, filled with gadgets and tools that increase my productivity and enhance my leisure time.

Who wouldn’t want to live in a society that offers the prospect of the pursuit of happiness, along with the other perks of a democracy? Well, if one looks at the social landscape right now, the answer seems pretty simple—democracy is winning the war of ideas. And one could easily make a strong argument that the average person would fare better under a democracy than under any other social system. However, a historical examination of Western democracy causes its luster to diminish. It is one of history’s great paradoxes.

A study of Western democracy is a study of the destruction of human civilization. From its incipient steps on the shores of the Americas to this moment, the presence of Western Civilization has brought death and destruction to mankind, and there lies the paradox: How is it that a society that gave the world the Renaissance; the Industrial Revolution; the 40-hour work week; the concept of overtime, double-time, triple-time and hazard duty pay; paid vacation, holidays and healthcare; instant communication; high-speed transportation; massive computing power; the American dream; and rescued the world from the tyranny of World War II, have caused so much widespread misery to humanity?

The Native Americans were one of the first to witness the carnage that followed in the wake of Western expansion: their lands were seized and their societies decimated at the hands of the European settlers. This land-grab initiated a domino effect that resulted in the Atlantic slave trade and the subjugation of the Caribbean. By the time the West had focused its attention on Africa, its imperialist appetite had become so efficient, it was able to carve up the entire continent in 15 short years.

In what would later become known as the ‘Scramble for Africa,’ the European powers set up a framework for divvying up the Dark Continent. In 1885 the Berlin Treaty established the ground-rules for how the Western powers would seize control of Africa, offering each nation access to various parts of the land free from interference by others, giving new meaning to the phrase ‘honor among thieves.’ By the turn of the 20^th Century, there was no more land to be had.

What the Berlin Treaty could not predict, however, was that once the latecomers to imperial expansion – Germany and Italy – had sunk their teeth into the confiscation of the African continent, they were not going to be satisfied with the imperial limitations offered them under the terms of the agreement. Italy snatched parts of Libya and Germany sought to gain hegemony over the crumbling Hapsburg and Ottoman empires. Britain and France took note of Germany’s growing influence in the region, and their alarm intensified as Germany forged an alliance with Austria-Hungary and Turkey. Hostilities between the European expansionist powers soon erupted into the European Civil War, better known as World War I. The struggle for German expansion came at the expense of other Western imperial powers which had made prior claims on territories Germany was seeking to annex.[ii]

Germany lost New Guinea, as well as its European and African territories at the conclusion of World War I. However, she came back and seized control of many of those same regions, igniting World War II, and then in a dazed state of déjà vu, she lost them again. In an unusual stroke of imperial irony, both world wars were the results of Western Civilization engaging in a tug-of-war over territories that were already under its control. Those wars taught the Western aristocracy that if it did not want to experience further attrition, then it had to confine its imperial ambitions to non-Western regions.

With the exception of the hiccup between the end of African colonization (1900) and the end of World War II (1945), Western Civilization has been on an otherwise unrelenting, clandestine march toward global rule since the Nina, the Pinta and the Santa Maria. During this 500 year period, no region in the earth has been unscathed by its imperial predation: It has devoured Andean Civilization, Mayan Civilization, Hindu Civilization, Japanese Civilization,[iii] and many of you reading this article witnessed the destruction of Eastern Orthodox Civilization, where the former Soviet Union sat at the perch of leadership. And if we consider the hundreds of societies simpler than civilizations that have been destroyed by the West, it brings into sharper focus how absolute Western incursion into other cultures has been.[iv]

If we consider that the Chinese are drinking themselves to death with the hemlock of Western Capitalism, the only formidable foe that stands between the West and its total domination of the earth is Islamic Civilization. Islam is formidable in the sense that there are more than one billion Muslims in the earth, and Pakistan has nuclear weapons, while Iran is pursuing its own nuclear weapons’ program. These nuclear ‘chips’ by Pakistan and the push by Iran to enter the atomic poker game, permits a dying Islam to cling to its centuries old modes of thought and actions. However, America’s sustained wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, along with the recent cries for democracy in Africa and the Middle East, demonstrate that Islam’s capacity to resist the crave for Western values has significantly diminished since the days of U.S. flag burning under Ronald Reagan. And in order to accelerate this shift towards democracy in the Muslim world, the Western powers have made plain their willingness to invade sovereign nations that stand in the way.

When President George W. Bush invaded Iraq in 2003, he did so under the pretext that Saddam Hussein participated in the September 11^th attacks and that Saddam was pursuing an arsenal of weapons of mass destruction. On its face, this invasion seemed to be a logical response to an ambitious tyrant who participated in the worst attack on U.S. soil since Pearl Harbor and who was becoming an even greater threat to world peace; however, further examination of this war proves otherwise.

It was not long after the Iraq invasion that Bush and his supporters had to concede publicly that there were no weapons of mass destruction and that there was no linkage between Saddam and the 9/11 attacks. However, one would reasonably conclude that with a nearly surreal intelligence apparatus, Bush should have drawn those conclusions before committing American resources to war. The most reliable evidence that the Bush administration was promoting in the preparation for the Iraqi war was the famous “16 words” from a dubious intelligence report that alleged that Saddam had attempted to purchase “yellowcake” uranium from Niger during the Iraq disarmament crisis. However, in 2002, nearly one year before the invasion in Iraq, former United States diplomat, Joe Wilson, went on a fact-finding mission to Niger, at the request of the CIA, to investigate these allegations, and he concluded that “[I]t was highly doubtful that any such transaction had ever taken place.”

Wilson went on to contribute an op-ed piece in the July 6, 2003 edition of the New York Times entitled “What I Didn’t Find in Africa,” where he concluded that “Based on my experience with the administration in the months leading up to the war, I have little choice but to conclude that some of the intelligence related to Iraq's nuclear weapons program was twisted to exaggerate the Iraqi threat.” Ironically, this is the same conclusion that officials from U.K. Prime Minister Tony Blair’s office drew in the now infamous Downing Street Memo. It was their accrued opinion that Bush was twisting the facts to accommodate the foreign policy goal of removing Saddam: “Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy.”[v]

It is clear that Bush’s dubious campaign for war in Iraq was a thinly veiled attempt to remove a Muslim leader, who was hostile to the West, and replace him with a more accommodating figure, while simultaneously maintaining a justifiable presence in the Middle East. With “boots on the ground,” the United States and its Western allies would have more surgical access to influencing the affairs of the region. Therefore, it is no coincidence that the current dissent in the Middle East and Africa has avalanched into a region-wide cry for freedom. Since the coup d’état of Saddam, the United States has funneled billions of dollars and other resources into promoting Western democracy and destabilizing the Islamic regimes in that part of the world.

I have been a big critic of former President George W. Bush (see my four part series on his presidency), but I will concede that he must be somewhere gleefully rehearsing his lecture series titled, “I Told You So,” and President Barack Obama is following his imperial footsteps. His invasion into Libya, betrays the peace initiative that he campaigned on, and certainly defies the spirit of his Nobel Peace Prize. However, once you understand that no man/woman can ascend to the presidency of the United States without the tacit approval of the aristocracy, then you will realize who employs Obama.[vi] What makes the Western drive for global hegemony so extremely ingenious is that it now has an African American face to do its bidding.

Notwithstanding that Westerners may oppose Libya’s form of government, Moammar Gadhafi is obligated to suppress any social unrest in his country. It is irrelevant that the dissent may be fueled by cries for democracy. If demonstrations erupted across America advocating the overthrow of its form of government, the president of the United States would have a legal responsibility to subdue the demonstrators. In fact, 18 U.S.C. makes it a federal offense to “knowingly or willfully advocate, abet, advise, or teach [others to] overthrow or destroy the government of the United Sates,” and such lawbreakers shall be subject to a prison sentence of not more than 20 years.[vii] I’d have to believe that most nations have a similar ban on demonstrations that promote the overthrow of its government.

Does not America’s participation in the NATO attacks on Libya rise to the highest level of hypocrisy? On the one hand, it will prosecute those who advocate the overthrow of its government, but on the other hand it has demonstrated a willingness to topple regimes which block the road to global domination. Between 1945 and 2005, the United States has attempted to overthrow more than 50 foreign governments.[viii] In an EU poll, that ranked which countries contribute most to world instability, the U.S. was seen as a bigger threat to world peace than Iran, Iraq and North Korea – the trio dubbed the “axis of evil” by President George W. Bush.

For more than 70 years, the world was conditioned to believe that the Western nations were the only barrier between freedom and a world ruled by Communist dictators. However, in one of history’s great surprises, Communism passed away in the middle of the night without firing one desperate shot for survival, and in the greatest irony of all, Western Civilization has made the global soil fertile for the rise of the antichrist.

…to be continued

© 2011 by David R. Tolson

---

[i] Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged (New York: A Dutton Book, 1957) p. 135.

[ii] Chinweizu, The West and the Rest of Us, White Predators Black Slaves and the African Elite, (Legos: Pero Press, 1987), pp. 14-19. (“As a result of Germany’s imperial ambition, Britain and France teamed up with Russia in an effort to prevent the coalescence of Germany, Austria-Hungary and Turkey. When in 1914 Serbia sought to assert her independence from the Hapsburg Empire, Austria moved to crush her. Russia moved to aid Serbia; Germany and Turkey moved in to protect their ally Austria; and Britain and France went to aid Russia. The Entente powers were finally pitted against their feared rival, Germany, and World War I began.” (p. 18 of The West and the Rest of Us.))

[iii] Carroll Quigley, Tragedy and Hope, A History of the World in Our Time, (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1966), p. 7.

[iv] Quigley, p. 8.

[v] Downing Street Memo, July 23, 2002, p. 1.

[vi] The electoral college was instituted as the means of presidential selection in order to guarantee the succession of power and to eliminate the possibility that a ‘popular’ candidate, who may not have the best interest of the aristocracy at heart, will be elected.

[vii] 18 U.S.C. §2385: US Code advocating overthrow of the US Government

[viii] William Blum, Rogue State, A Guide to the World’s Only Superpower (Maine: Common Courage Press) pp 1-2.

Prelude to the antichrist - Part 11

Western Civilization’s Unrelenting Expansion – Part 4

For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming

themselves into the apostles of Christ (2 Corinthians 11:13).

Some branches of human knowledge are nearly impossible for all but a few to understand. When Albert Einstein introduced his theory of relativity, there were only a few scientists who could grasp its implications. Although researchers have had more than 100 years to travel the learning curve of relativity, its counter-intuitive nature is still extremely difficult for many people to comprehend.

If at the threshold of the 19^th Century I had offered a hand-held gadget that I called a mobile phone and promoted it as a device that offered instant communication with someone who was virtually anywhere on earth, I’d have been viewed in the same light as a salesman peddling a bogus cure for impotence. However, two centuries later, mobile phone technology has evolved into an indispensable component of our human landscape; yet, most people do not understand the technological process behind its ease of use: to over-simply the electronic wizardry behind a cell phone—it converts spoken words into digital data, or zeroes and ones, called bits, and then transmits that data pack to a relay station, where it is relayed further to other stations or to a satellite, which then transmits the zeroes and ones back to another mobile phone, where the digital data is translated back into intelligible conversation.

And if life lasts another thousand years, we can only imagine the inexplicable discoveries and technologies that will have been developed, from populating planets in distant galaxies with human life to traveling back and forth through time. However, not all mind-bending concepts are as benign as mobile phone technology.

It could be reasonably argued that preceding World War II, Germany was at the pinnacle of Western culture: It gave the world Bach and Beethoven; Bavarian Motor Works and Daimler Benz; Einstein and Marx; aspirin and x-rays; and a host of other artists, concepts and products. However, Adolf Hitler was able to convince millions of people of the virtue of eliminating the Jewish population from the earth. And more than 60 years later, historians are still bewildered by the notion that a man would nearly realize his ambition of total Jewish annihilation and find millions of willing executioners, in an apparently civilized society, to aid him.

In the introduction to this series, I examined Revelation chapter 6, which reveals the four horsemen of the apocalypse. This will be an incomprehensible reign of terror where at least one fourth, and possibly as much as one half, of the world’s population will be killed. If we concede that Hitler, Mao, Stalin, Rhodes or any other despot was evil, Revelation chapter 6 demonstrates a cabal of men who surpass evil. I am certain that I could say without fear of contradiction, that most people cannot imagine the pathology that is necessary to intentionally massacre as many as half the people in the earth. It will take a group of purely evil men, whose hearts are divorced from any vestige of morality to kill 3.5 billion people; yet, this is exactly the road that society is traveling. However, the collective attention of society has been intentionally, and I might add, masterfully, divided to keep the masses away from focusing on humanity’s most urgent issues, like its own destruction at the hands of satanically inspired men.

I don’t mean to diminish the significance of the questions of abortion, same-sex marriage, illegal immigration, deficit spending, or any other ‘premium’ social concern, but these issues have been deliberately injected into the social discourse to keep the nations polarized. Consequently, if liberals are fighting conservatives, and the poor are fighting the rich, and whites are fighting blacks, and American citizens are fighting illegal immigrants, then we will never be able to focus on the larger social issues: Why gas prices are rising contrary to market forces? Or why a handful of men were permitted to play ‘Russian Roulette’ with the mortgage market and no one has been imprisoned? Or why the U.S. taxpayer was required to rescue the reckless management of our nation’s economy? Or why we invaded Iraq with absolutely no evidence that Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction or that he participated in 9/11? Or who are the architects behind the push for globalization and what are their motives.

The answer to any of these questions will give you a glimpse into the pantheon of the Western gods, where the plan for a one-world government resides. As a subtle tribute to this pantheon, Rhodes Scholar and former President Bill Clinton gave a veiled acknowledgment of this antichristic scheme during his 1992 acceptance speech at the Democratic National Convention by citing Carroll Quigley:

“As a teenager, I heard John Kennedy’s summons to citizenship. And then, as a student at Georgetown, I heard that call clarified by a professor name [Carroll] Quigley, who said to us that America was the greatest Nation in history because our people had always believed in two things – that tomorrow can be better than today and that every one of us has a personal moral responsibility to make it so.”[i]

Quigley, Clinton’s history professor while at Georgetown University, was given two years to examine Western Civilization’s secret plan to rule the world (see part 10 of this series for more on Carroll Quigley). Clinton’s acknowledgment of Quigley was very significant during his run for president: He campaigned on the theme of “change;” however, he had to assure the Western aristocracy that his mantra was in no way intended to interfere with their policy goals and objectives. Consequently, by invoking Quigley’s name, he signaled to them, that as president of the United States, their aim of bringing the world under the domination of the West would be his top priority. And during his eight-year tenure, he violated the trust of his three largest constituents—African Americans, Labor and the Gay Lobby—while actively promoting the global agenda of the Western aristocracy.

First, Clinton promised to end the military’s ban on gay service personnel; however, once he ran into the opposition, he backpedaled from his support and offered the watered down policy of “Don’t ask, don’t tell,” and then dropped them from his national agenda.

Second, while Clinton was president, he signed two landmark pieces of legislation that adversely affected the African American community: Welfare Reform; and the Crime Bill. And during his tenure, we saw the explosive use of the sentencing disparity between those who were peddling crack (the black side of cocaine), and those who trafficked in powder (the white side of cocaine). Someone who was found guilty of possessing five grams of crack cocaine was given a mandatory sentence of five years in prison; the same sentence for one who was guilty of possessing 500 grams of powdered cocaine.[ii]

The African American community also saw deep erosions in the affirmative action laws that applied to employment, business opportunities and education during Clinton’s presidency. This is disturbing, given the fact that Clinton claimed to support affirmative action. However, the best he could offer in defense of the onslaught to eliminate affirmative action was a clever saying – “Mend but don’t end.”

Clinton’s infidelity towards his African American constituents and the gay community does not necessarily suggest that he pursued an antichristic, global agenda. It simply demonstrated that these two significant allies were not a priority during his administration. However, in what was his most egregious betrayal, his pursuit of free trade agreements, which transplanted American jobs overseas, reflected his responsibility as a Rhodes Scholar to bring the world under Western rule.

During Clinton’s tenure as president, we witnessed an acceleration of entire industries migrating overseas. The labor movement, his largest constituent, watched in horror as he signed the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT). NAFTA and GATT are free trade agreements that encourage domestic corporations to move their manufacturing plants overseas and to take advantage of the lower production costs that these free trade agreements made available. They eliminated trade protections that made such moves unfeasible prior to the enactment of the laws, and subsequently permitted American corporations to send hundreds of thousands of jobs overseas without any sanctions.

NAFTA and GATT would appear on their faces to be agreements that would be championed by conservative Republicans. However, Clinton did more to accelerate Western globalization during his eight years as U.S. president than the combined 12 years of Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush. And those who understand that Clinton’s academic roots were nourished through his Rhodes Scholarship will understand that he was simply fulfilling his oath to his secret society when he signed those bills into law.

Notwithstanding Clinton’s apathy, some would say hostility, towards the interests of his constituents, he remains one of the country’s most popular Democrats, which at a deeper level of human nature, reflects the nation’s inability to recognize a fox with the keys to the hen house.

…to be continued

Alexzanda Gordon-King contributed to this article

© 2011 David R. Tolson

---

[i]http://www.4president.org/speeches/billclinton1992acceptance.htm (The tribute to Quigley can be found towards the end of the speech.)

[ii] The desperate sentencing guidelines seem to betray common logic on a number of fronts: 1) The five-gram threshold is an indiscriminant dragnet that captures the crack user with the “talented” street vendor who may be juggling just enough of his illegal product to claim it is for personal use if apprehended by law enforcement; 2) In a legal system that claims “Justice is blind,” the notion that there is such a considerable distinction between the black side of cocaine and the white side seems to suggest that she peaks every so often; and 3) And more importantly, the sentencing guidelines made the egregious, and possibly illegal, assumption that anyone found with five grams of crack was guilty of trafficking and not simply possession. This is significant given the fact that five grams is less than one-fifth of an ounce, or 0.176 ounces to be exact.

Under the United States Constitution, the presumption of innocence is an implied guarantee for every citizen who has criminal charges leveled against them. Although the constitutional rights to remain silent and to have a jury trial may be extended to an individual possessing five grams of crack, it is a dubious protection given the disparity in sentencing. This institutional bias; some would say racism, strips the possessor of five grams of crack of his presumption of innocence, once we consider the fact that his powder-possessing counterpart is not assumed to be trafficking until his contraband exceeds 500 grams.

Congress had set a self imposed mandate to change the crack-powder disparity by December 31, 1999, which would have altered the guidelines during the Clinton Administration. However, this adjustment was not made until President Barack Obama signed the Fair Sentencing Act on August 3, 2010, nearly 10 years after Clinton left office. However, the disparity was simply reduced and not eliminated: it went from 100:1 to 18:1 under the new law.

Prelude to the antichrist - Part 10

Western Civilization’s Unrelenting Expansion – Part 3

But unto you I say, and unto the rest in Thyatira, as many
as have not this doctrine, and which have not known the
depths of Satan, as they speak; I will put upon you none
other burden (Revelation 2:24).

Did a lone gunman assassinate President John F. Kennedy, or as Oliver Stone portrayed in the movie JFK, was there a conspiracy to murder him in order to prosecute the Vietnam War? With a cocktail of fact and conjecture, Stone brought to life what I believe is a reasonable explanation on why John Kennedy had to be killed. According to the movie, he stood in the way of a multi-trillion-dollar, multi-national conglomerate – the Military Industrial Complex – that was intent on fighting a war in Southeast Asia for its own nefarious purposes.

JFK depicts Jim Garrison, the implacable District Attorney from New Orleans, who began an investigation into the assassination of President Kennedy, and his probe resulted in the arrest and trial of New Orleans businessman Clay Shaw. Although a jury acquitted Shaw, JFK rekindled the debate on what really happened at Dealey Plaza on November 22, 1963. Despite the acquittal of Shaw and the Warren Commission’s[i] conclusion that Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone in Kennedy’s assassination, most people are dubious. According to a 2003 Gallup poll, 75 percent of Americans do not believe that Oswald acted alone.

In 1976, the House of Representatives established the U.S. House of Representatives Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) to investigate the assassinations of Kennedy and Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., as well as the assassination attempt of Governor George Wallace. The HSCA only complicated the matter of Kennedy’s death by concluding that he was very likely assassinated as a result of a conspiracy.

The evidence uncovered by the HSCA must have been compelling for it to contradict the findings of the Warren Commission; however, it strikes me as peculiar that given the weight of this commission, no further inquiry has been made into the death of this country’s 35^th president. I would think even if Congress did not see the urgency in further investigations to determine the extent of the conspiracy, that the media would pursue its own research. However, to be fair, many researchers, including Mark Lane, Henry Hurt and Seymour Hersh, have published investigatory accounts of this tragic event; yet the country seems to have a collective yawn when it comes to solving the greatest mystery in American history.

Certainly, an exhaustive study of Kennedy’s death is beyond the scope of this series. However, what is relevant in this and all conspiracies is the level of secrecy that is necessary to carry out the criminal activity without being exposed. The David Ferrie character in JFK, played by Joe Pesci, said it best during his interrogation by Garrison: “Oh man! Why don’t you stop!? This is too [expletive] big for you! Who did Kennedy?! It’s a mystery, wrapped in a riddle, inside an enigma! Even the shooters don’t [expletive] know!” The very next morning, Ferrie’s nude, lifeless body was discovered in his apartment, and according to George Lardner, Jr. of the Washington Post, who was the last person to see him alive, Ferrie was in good spirits when he left him at four o’clock that morning.[ii]

Stone and other researchers have demonstrated in their investigations of Kennedy’s assassination that certain secrets are above the scrutiny of anyone. It goes without saying that it took a very powerful cadre to execute a plan to assassinate an American president and evade exposure for nearly 50 years.

In his book, Tragedy and Hope, A History of the World in our Time, Carroll Quigley offers a glimpse of the 20^th Century through the period of Kennedy’s assassination. What is significant about this classic study is that Quigley’s historical narrative ceases in 1964; not because further examination would not reveal additional relevant material. But according to Quigley, the period between 1962 and 1964 marked the end of an era of historical development and was the pause before a new era was ushered in. He notes, almost naively, that this demarcation is clearly demonstrated by the fact that the leaders of all the major countries, except China and France, and many lesser ones were removed in this period.[iii]

Was the Kennedy assassination part of a larger global plot to commandeer the direction of human civilization? We may never know for sure, since by their very nature, malicious schemes for planetary control demand strict secrecy. However, when we consider the absolute certainty that an end-time government will be secretly instituted by satanic forces, it does not take massive doses of suspicion to view the larger, global events with a fair amount of skepticism.

The challenge that face students of bible prophecy is to distinguish which sequence of events are part of this furtive plan, which is so incredibly cunning, that many people fail to discern it, despite the fact that it is being erected right before their eyes. Scholars of equal sincerity disagree on who is behind this docile march towards world government: some say it is the Illuminati; others say the Pope and his Jesuit doppelganger, also known as the “Black Pope;” still others say it is the work of the Masonic order, or other secret societies. However, it is my position that these entities lack the capacity to control the flow of commerce, technology and global finance – the buttresses of this system of world government.

The state of our current world is the result of secrets. Everybody has one; from preserving the benign fiction that Santa Clause really does leave the North Pole on Christmas Eve mounted on his sleigh to the more ominous conspiracy of global conquest. The usual suspects – the Illuminati, the Vatican and the Masons – may have had a role to play over the years in prepping the terrain for the son of perdition. However, as I have consistently demonstrated throughout this series, the only institution that can build and maintain the antichristic system of government is Western Civilization. And Carroll Quigley peered into its inner sanctum, and revealed their obsession with destroying all non-Western modes of thought and action:

“There does exist, and has existed for a generation, an international Anglophile network which operates, to some extent, in the way the radical Right believes the Communists act. In fact, this network, which we may identify as the Round Table Groups, has no aversion to cooperating with the Communists, or any other groups, and frequently does so. I know of the operations of this network because I have studied it for twenty years and was permitted for two years, in the early 1960's, to examine its papers and secret records. I have no aversion to it or to most of its aims and have, for much of my life, been close to it and to many of its instruments. I have objected, both in the past and recently, to a few of its policies, but in general my chief difference of opinion is that it wishes to remain unknown, and I believe its role in history is significant enough to be known…At the risk of some repetition, the story will be summarized here, because the American branch of this organization (sometimes called the ‘Eastern Establishment’) has played a very significant role in the history of the United States in the last generation. The original purpose of these groups was to seek to federate the English-speaking world along lines laid down by Cecil Rhodes (1853-1902)…At the end of the war in 1914, it became clear that the organization of this system had to be greatly extended.”[iv]

Quigley does not suggest any evil motivations for this aristocratic network; however, he does concede the clandestine nature of their efforts. In his book, Anglo American Establishment, he further distills the role that Rhodes played, through his scholarship fund, in this effort to destroy non-Western modes of thought and action:

“The Rhodes Scholarships, established by the terms of Cecil Rhodes’s seventh will, are known to everyone. What is not so widely known is that Rhodes in five previous wills left his fortune to form a secret society, which was to devote itself to the preservation and expansion of the British Empire. And what does not seem to be known to everyone is that this secret society was created by Rhodes and his principal trustee, Lord Milner, and continues to this day. To be sure, this secret society is no play thing like the Ku Klux Klan, and it does not have any secret robes, secret handclasps, or secret passwords. It does not need any of these, since its members know each other intimately.”[v]

It is obvious that Quigley sees virtue in a world devoid of multi-culture, and does not oppose the destruction of other civilizations at the hand of the Western aristocracy. He in fact applauds it and laments that the social planners of the Western world are not more transparent about their intentions. He advocated the broadest possible publicity, which history has proven time-and-time again, is often the most effective means of concealment.

…to be continued

© 2011 David R. Tolson

---

[i] The Warren Commission was established on November 29, 1963, by President Lyndon Johnson to investigate the death of President John F. Kennedy. The Commission presented its final report to President Johnson on September 24, 1964, and made public three days later.

[ii] Henry Hurt, Reasonable Doubt, An Investigation into the Assassination of John F. Kennedy, (New York: Henry Holt and Company, 1985), p. 264.

[iii] Carroll Quigley, Tragedy and Hope, A History of the World in Our Time, (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1966), p. x-xi.

[iv] Quigley, p. 950-951.

[v] Quigley, The Anglo-American Establishment, (New York: Books in Focus, 1981), p. ix.