Sunday, October 15, 2006

Sex Rings & NGOs - The Key?

Please check out the following article:

http://www.stamfordadvocate.com/news/local/scn-sa-torture2oct13,0,2214600.story?coll=stam-news-local-headlines

[Ed. Note, July 08, 2007:The above article is, of course, gone now. Disappeared to that place that all articles that actually contain news go. Here is, instead, a link to the actual video of this senator saying the quote: http://www.myleftnutmeg.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=3817 Hopefully this link will last.]

This reminds me to remind you all: Make sure that you sit down and watch even some of the interview (you couldn’t possibly watch the whole thing at once, it’s almost 8 hrs long) with Kay Griggs, the whistleblower wife of a colonel in the US Army who was totally in on some freaky mind-control/gay sex ring in the Marines. It’s really hard to see how or why this woman could possibly be making up what she is saying. You’ll see. Freaky shit though, be warned.


PART 1: Kay Griggs Talks: Desperate Wives (Blackmail In US Government 1 of 2)

PART 2: Kay Griggs Talks: Desperate Wives (Blackmail In US Government 2 of 2)


About this Abu Gharob stuff; it sure makes me think when a sitting US senator says,

I saw probably 600 pictures of really gross, perverted stuff… The bottom line was it was sex. . . . It wasn't primarily about torture”

Also from the article: “Asked about pictures showing mistreatment of detainees [at Abu Gharib] mentioned by Amnesty International, Shays said he did not see those images and ‘we also don't know where those could have been from.’”

Those would be the pictures that WE saw. Perhaps we are being fed an outrage to mask an even greater one?

And this senator is defending his comments (which were made yesterday) against an onslaught of counter-attacks by such unexpected sources as Amnesty International.

WTF?!?

The insanity of it all allows me to pull a, “Sometimes I wonder if…”

Sometimes I wonder if Amnesty International actually could be a “false-flag” operation? An organization perfectly willing to root out and expose (publicise) what we all agree are “possible” atrocities could avert our gaze and outrage away from something vastly more sinister: like, say, a world-wide, organized sex-ring (possibly Satanic or ritualistic in nature)?

Wouldn’t it be the stroke of genius (for the Satanic sex-ring-ers) to create a massively well-funded Non-Governmental Organistion (NGO) that got lots of press (but not too much – that would be suspicious) for standard torture and political imprisonment atrocities in the world. This actually sets the tone for the debate. Human rights abuses are limited to “standard” reasons and “standard” situations by what Amnesty International spends its time on. Ritualistic sex abuse and other such “fringe” issues would be pushed to the periphery. Amnesty International would now control what defines legitimate forms of not only human rights abuses, but also human rights activism itself.

This, of course, makes no sense. Until, that is, it’s factored in that there are now mountains of evidence, in the form of declassified documents, released archival documents and other anecdotal evidence that so many NGOs actually ensure that the opposite of what they are chartered to achieve, is achieved.

1. What has the Heart & Stroke Foundation achieved but exponentially rising heart disease and stroke rates? Same for Cancer Institute, etc.

2. American Psychiatric Institute presidents openly declaring that they will dissolve the family, foster a society of unlimited individualism. In other words: de-stabilise the very people they are supposed to protect. The burned out husks of humans afterwards become their patients. Has actually been wildly successful in creating the opposite of its outward purpose.

3. Rockefeller Institute: Heavily involved in MASSIVE endowments to the arts and, crucial to the point, education.
Just one example of the Institute creating an “opposite” effect: The Institute’s search for professors to write history books is well documented, with plenty of media interviews and articles (mostly from that time) with the professors who refused to work with the Institute (due to them having actual professional “credibility”, or “principles”): they would not RE-write history as expected by the Institute. Of course they eventually find profs who see things their way or are willing to write whatever to get bills or comfy postings.
Of the hundreds of textbooks the Rockefeller Institute has majority-funded, NONE of them mentions the Khazar Empire, which has long been completely verified by modern archeology to have reigned for hundreds of years in
Eastern Europe, casting a huge influence on the area and many subsequent cultures. Modern Jewry would not exist in its current form without the Khazars. Why is this not worth mentioning in a single Western High School? Especially when we are supposed to be totally tied into Israel’s fate.

4. The NRA shows up the loudest when it needs to create controversy. This swings people over toward gun control, as seen in “Bowling for Columbine.” So the NRA is actually working FOR gun control interests.

As I said, file this all under, “Sometimes I wonder if…” Make of it what you will.

No comments: