Power elites stealing our planet, freedom and future

by Meeuwis T. Baaijen

Important members of governments and institutions are secretly preselected and groomed (e.g., as WEF “Young Global Leaders”), and then elected or appointed, to work for the aims of the power elite.

This way, nations become pawns on the global chessboard. In the early 1990’s, three men took part in a US training course for global leaders: Nicolas Sarkozy, Gordon Brown and Jan Peter Balkenende. Fifteen years later, all three were (s)elected as prime minister in their respective countries: France, the UK and Holland.

The common people are “mind controlled” to believe the official narrative (also called “manufactured consent”, a term by Noam Chomsky; also called “perception management”).

The conspiratorial analysis of history is indeed more complicated, as it factors in the crucial role of hidden powers, which covertly direct the global puppet theater, using countries and institutions as their Punches and Judies, or chess pieces.

Cover-ups are a standard part of the operations of these powers, including the destruction of documents and other evidence. During the serious food scarcities in Europa, right after WW1, that happened on a massive scale, when Glafia agent Herbert Hoover (later rewarded with the 31st presidency of the United States) removed many shiploads of documents from all European countries, including Germany and Russia, in exchange for food (all these countries were starving). This document harvest ended up under lock and key in the newly created Hoover Institute at Stanford University, USA.

Were critical documents pertaining the true origins of WW1 destroyed in the process? Nobody knows. Likewise, millions of WW1 documents are still classified in the UK, and gradually disappearing, it seems. To protect whom, more than a century after the war? The fact that no official historian has ever protested such bizarre measures is self-explanatory: an independent analysis of these hidden documents would probably contradict the official version of history.

Is social science any different?

The received history is thoroughly contaminated by the ruling oligarchs, see Carroll Quigley’s Tragedy and Hope. Russia’s top-intellectual, Andrey Fursov, states that our scientific institutions are similarly shackled by a global Mafia:

“I would like to remind you about the research by Andy Coghlan and Debora MacKenzie published in October 2011 on the site of the New Scientist. This group of scholars showed that 147 companies, 1% of all companies, controlled 40% of the world economy. This is very indicative. This means that the modern economy, whose basic unit of analysis is the market, conceals more than it shows. Politics and the nation-state are fading away, and this means that political science, with its basic units of analysis— politics and the state — not only cannot adequately conceptualize, but cannot even merely depict real power relations, especially on the global level.

“Secondly, there is another serious problem with political science. Real power is usually secret or semi-secret, shadow power. Conventional political science has neither concepts nor methods, to analyse this type of power. The more democratic the facade of the western society was becoming in the 19th and 20th centuries, the less real power it had. This power was channelled into closed clubs, super-national structures, etc. What I am saying is banal and trivial, but political science in its present condition cannot analyse real power relations.

“So, a new social science is needed, studying the real world, and not that which professed scholarship defines as real. A new social science with new disciplines, new concepts, a social force which will be able to create such a new type of scholarship, has the best chance to win in the 21st Century”.

In the meantime, power and capital have been concentrated even more (see documentary Monopoly by Tim Gielen), but Fursov’s proposal for a “new social science” has never been implemented in any institution.

Yet far before Fursov proposed it, several brave professional and amateur historians have been using his method. They were often retired, because still employed researchers who dare to touch “the third rail” often find their careers suffering or blocked (“career suicide”): “You may rock the boat, but not the ocean.”

The analysis of conspiracies is a combination of historical research (mainly based on primary evidence: documents) and detective work. To solve a crime, detectives normally don’t concentrate on documents – as there often are none – but on secondary or circumstantial evidence: Cui bono? (Who benefits?); the money trail (“follow the money”); and motive, means and opportunity. These analysts are also alert on cover-ups, pitfalls, falsifications, and false tracks, including “false flags attacks”.

In my initial research on centuries long conspiracies and serial crimes, I mostly leaned on “controversial” or “unconventional” authors. Authors whose work, as explained above, is almost always heavily suppressed by the mainstream media (Wikipedia of course included) or classified as “looney conspiracy theories” or “racist” or “anti-Semitic” (see also Disclaimers). Yet in the last years of my 10-year study, I discovered several highly respected mainstream historians who basically supported the same thesis, although in very different terms, which results in a “convergence of evidence” (eight of them are mentioned in B10).

The resulting book is a counter-narrative to the official lies as told in Plato’s Cave. It is based on thousands of books and articles, interviews, and documentaries, analyzed during 10 years of more than full-time research. Its sources are high quality, but as an old Soviet joke goes: “The future is certain; only the past is unpredictable”. The past can never be replayed, but patterns can be discerned. And ideally, a solid, coherent, and logical framework can be formulated in which past and present event can find a place. In this case, that’s The Predators theory of history, see A8.1. It’s the antithesis of Marx’ class struggle, and of capitalism’s fake “free trade and competition” theory, and also of the WEF’s “Great Narrative”.

When I started this long and winding journey into the discovery of history, I had not the slightest idea where I would end up, and that so many nightmares would be mine. I simply went where the evidence was leading me. My only interest was finding out the truth on how the world really works. And especially, how 9/11 (the event that had triggered me) could have happened.

As a trained veterinarian, I had learned to systematically observe the symptoms of a sick animal or herd, to then examine it methodically. With the preliminary results thus obtained, the veterinarian or medical professional doesn’t jump to a diagnosis, but first formulates a list of hypotheses on the possible cause of the ailment: the differential diagnosis. To sort out the final diagnosis, additional examinations are often needed.

My differential diagnosis

My initial differential diagnosis of global history had many hypotheses: Illuminati, Skull & Bones, the Vatican, the Jesuits, the Jews, Phoenicians or Canaanites, Nazis, Freemasons, banksters, but David Icke’s aliens and shape shifting reptilians didn’t make it to my list. Yet as Poirot concluded in Murder on the Orient Express, “there were too many clues”. As it turned out, Lord Acton had formulated the correct diagnosis already 125 years ago:

“The issue which has swept down the centuries and which will have to be fought sooner or later is the people versus the banks.”

Acton was seen as “one of the most learned people of his age, unmatched for the breadth, depth, and humanity of his knowledge,” and “one of the most articulate defenders of religious and political freedom” in the 19th century. In brief, it’s the globalist banker dynasties plotting to steal our planet, freedom, and future, which they do by proxy, or in other words, by deceit. The others on the list above are just that, their – always exchangeable – proxies.

The intentions of these bankers are the same as those of the Greeks, Romans and Babylonians who established enslaving empires by blunt force. But their methods are far more sophisticated: by proxy, totally stealthy, and now combined with advanced technology and a 100% coverage of the globe. Their proxies close to us are people we trust, who behave and speak and look and smile and dress like us, because we elected or appointed them in our “democracies”.

Very clever indeed!

Taken from the Introduction to the new downloadable book The Predators versus The People, by Meeuwis T. Baaijen.

Subscribe to the Acorn