Using fake revolutions to prevent real ones

Pete appeared in the comments below to second the notion that the Cuban “revolution” of the late 1950s was a staged event and that Fidel Castro was an American agent. Read about it in his 2016 blog post, Was Comrade Fidel a Fraud?

I read much more into this phenomenon than Cuba alone. Other candidates for this form of stagecraft include the attempted Venezuelan coup d’état in 2002, the rise of the African National Congress and installation of Nelson Mandela as president in South Africa in 1994; the toppling (without violence) of the Soviet Union and all its client states in the early 1990s.

Jail sentences and jail breaks are a common occurrence for fakes – Castro was merely let go by Battista, and Mexican “drug lord” Joaquin “El Chapo” Guzman has escaped prison twice now, as did serial killer Ted Bundy. Also, remember that short French Corsican guy, Napoleon …

The strategy is sound. Our overlords pay close attention to underground movements, and are always at work to nip revolution in the bud (which is why, in my opinion, so many blacks are in U.S. prisons for minor offenses). However, when a real revolution cannot be prevented, another layer of strategy kicks in. They run in controlled opposition to lead it, that is, they send in fake leaders and stage fake revolutions to prevent real ones and the rise of real leaders.

There was another series if staged events where a rebellious group of colonies were allowed a fake revolution to prevent a real one, back around 1776 or so. The “new” breakaway country has since had 43 different men serve as president, of whom 42 can trace their lineage to British royalty. (The exception, Martin van Buren, has Dutch roots.)

This points to our founding fathers as British agents, and explains why George Washington and his troops miraculously escaped Long Island during the war … the British let him go. It means that the same group of people, the peerage, who governed England then and now, also govern the U.S. to this day. They are hidden in plain sight.

15 thoughts on “Using fake revolutions to prevent real ones

  1. This points to our founding fathers as British agents, and explains why George Washington and his troops miraculously escaped Long Island during the war …

    Didn’t know that the “Dunkirk Miracle” had such an old precedent …

    Like

  2. Blogs like this are merely “intellectual playpens.”

    Let’s all get off the internet and actually do something. Now that we know the truth, who’s up for joining forces and starting a real revolution?! Let us all make America a real democracy!

    Like

      1. LMAO at least we can still have a sense of humor 😉 Maybe ask for volunteers for leadership positions, and then send them all off a cliff? Test their blood maybe? I’m reminded of that cult classic from 1982 ‘The Thing’, starring Kurt Russell….he had to test the blood of everyone at this remote Antarctic base with a hot copper wire to reveal the parasitic alien. Can’t help but see a message in there somewhere. Didn’t the royal nobility supposedly have elevated levels of copper in the blood? ie: blue bloods? My fallback strategy is to shelter in place with voluminous quantities of beans, bullets, bourbon and boobs and pray for the sweet relief of death. Funny I find myself not giving two shits these days, but it is a form of tragitainment. You can almost smell the setup, some scripted Trump drama…maybe the ‘good cops’ will come in and take out the ‘bad cops’. We welcome in our new NWO overlords after a barrage of wikipedia-esque style limited hangouts. Maybe some scripted data dumps, some real ‘barnbuners’ to push our buttons and get us enraged. Maybe some huge ‘exposes’ on things like 911, and the various hoaxes. It seems they were created to be unraveled…perhaps at the appropriate time. The old crew of crisis actors replaced with the up and comers in one glorious revolution for the ages…

        Like

        1. It is just life, you know, and discovering the underlying processes at work (governance by fear, tension and hoaxes) is not as cataclysmic as you seem to imagine. It has always been this way, and will continue on. I enjoy solving riddles and puzzles – I just printed off the Wiki 50-page summary of the Tiananmen “massacre.” Right at the outset they admit it didn’t happen, but they couch it by saying that while that part was fake, there was a real massacre elsewhere. I still remember watching CNN that night as a supposed Chinese military official came on the set and told them to stop broadcasting, and the scene ended, the set went dark. That was the “massacre,” mere power of suggestion, probably filmed on a stage in Atlanta.

          Anyway, lighten up … the world is not ending, we’re not entering the dark ages. We’re just experiencing life on a higher level of awareness, and because there are so few of us, we are not a threat. It’s a playground, nothing more.

          Like

          1. “Anyway, lighten up … the world is not ending, we’re not entering the dark ages.”

            Are you sure about that? Actually, we may in fact be in, or starting to be in, a very dark age: Consider the frauds and problems in science, medicine, art, music, etc. caused and perpetuated by TPTB. Why no real progress in cancer and disease research after decades of massive spending? NASA frauds? Physics research? Miles Mathis writes about the modern art shit show – no real art is being produced. No real developments in the arts, music, literature and film (Today’s movies are apparently mainly for propaganda and mass disinformation and manipulation purposes). And God knows how many other frauds that we don’t know about that are having a detrimental affect on our lives.

            I’m thinking that TPTB were not as firmly entrenched (or may not even have existed in its current form) during the Renaissance in Europe, if they were, western civilization would not have developed as far as it has because TPTB would have prevented any real science, art and technology from developing. But maybe TPTB were following a different game plan back then: being stewards of society and fostering its rational growth and development, rather than being exploitive and destructive like today.

            TPTB is a blight on society and civilization. Just because we cannot see and feel our “chains” (both mental and physical), we are still slaves and denigrated as people.

            Liked by 2 people

          2. Yeah I agree. I guess I’m just not satisfied with the ‘status quo’, mediocrity, and the race to zero. We could live in a very different world. It appears TPTB are constantly sabotaging our collective efforts, and forcing periodic ‘resets’ using various means so there is no progression, no stability, only steps backward. They have facilitated an entropic system that appears to be collapsing in on itself…an accelerating shit show. Fine by me, I guess I’ll just have to feast on shit sandwiches. Ultimately, i don’t think they are going to like the end result of what they ‘created’. Going against the natural order never seems to pan out. I don’t appreciate being forced to ride shotgun on someone else’s suicide mission. With a bunch of sociopaths in all the key positions, I don’t see how this is going to turn out well for any of us. I hope I’m wrong, but I smell a setup…an engineered train wreck and watch the phoenix rise from the ashes. I think you about summed it up, I’m not happy one ioata about being a slave…these chains wear heavy.

            Liked by 1 person

        2. When they released the “28 pages” I thought that something would happen in the year 2016. I still believe that they want to introduce a New Islam in the middle East, an Islam that is secular and pro-science. The House of Saud can play the role of the evil Muslims that did or were connected to 9/11 as in the “28 pages”. Maybe the big thing or things will happen in 2018. The Economist Magazine made a prediction in 1988 that we will have a world currency in 2018. So 2018 is 30 years since the Economist’s prediction and 70 since the creation of Israel. There are a few “prophecy” websites that say that 2017-2018 is an important period.

          Like

          1. I think this is about to happen, with the engineered rise of Russian/Iranean influence in this region. See the Syria “conflict”, where (I’m pretty sure) only the average Syrians suffered. This goes hand in hand with the demise of the USA as center of power, illustrated by the public dismantling of Trump.
            A few years ago, I fell for some doomsoothsayers, too. Got some gold, silver, and rotting food reserves …

            Like

    1. Right, (Brian) Chief! Lost? For “real democracy” may I suggest simply, change channels; please, go to Democracy Now, or Thom Hartmann on Free Speech TV. Before we part company, perhaps you could share with us one democracy that did not end in fascism? Happy voting.

      Like

  3. What do you think about the anti-federalists, or the people who wrote the anti-federalist papers. I read about 25 anti-federalist papers (maybe 2 years ago). I will probably find some time to read the rest. I agree with the principles found in these papers. One of the papers even talks about the Order of Cincinnati and how it can lead to the formation of an American nobility. It is not certain who were some of the people who wrote them (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Federalist_Papers). But names like George Clinton look suspicious. For example they say that Clinton withdrew his objections after the introduction of the Bill of Rights. But many anti-federalist papers pointed out many other problems that were definitely not solved by the Bill of Rights. Maybe people like Clinton were a fake opposition that tried to fool the people that were anti-federalists.
    I also had an admiration for John Lilburne, who was important during the English Civil Wars of 1642-1650. Another important name that I admired was Arnold of Brescia. Other interesting names are Cola di Rienzo and Girolamo Savonarola.

    Like

    1. I have long forgotten about the Federalist papers. Thank you for a great comment. But remember that I suggested that the point of a fake revolution was to take the place of a real one, which was going to happen no matter. I don’t doubt the debates were sincere and the intellects of high quality. It was inevitable that the colonies were going to break from the mother country and go their own way. Hence the need for the peerage to step in and provide false leaders. I just don’t see the Brits losing that war as they did.

      And anyway, less than a hundred years later the 14th amendment would put an end to federalism, and the Brits were surely pulling levers behind the scenes. All of the high-minded debates behind the original constitution were rendered moot.

      Like

    2. Some very smart cats back them. Back in my ‘militia phase’ I came across some of these papers. I was always struck by this commentary:

      “While in The Federalist No. 46, Madison argued that a standing army of 25,000 to 30,000 men would be offset by “a militia amounting to near a half million of citizens with arms in their hands, officered by men chosen from among themselves . . . .” [119] The Antifederalists were not persuaded by these arguments, in part because of the degree of control over the militia given to the national government by the proposed constitution. The fears of the more conservative opponents centered upon the possible phasing out of the general militia in favor of a smaller, more readily corrupted, select militia. Proposals for such a select militia already had been advanced by individuals such as Baron Von Steuben, Washington’s Inspector General, who proposed supplementing the general militia with a force of 21,000 men given government- issued arms and special training. [120] An article in the Connecticut Journal expressed the fear that the proposed constitution might allow Congress to create such select militias: “[T]his looks too much like Baron Steuben’s militia, by which a standing army was meant and intended.” [121] In Pennsylvania, John Smiley told the ratifying convention that “Congress may give us a select militia which will in fact be a standing army,” and worried that, [p.34] with this force in hand, “the people in general may be disarmed.” [122] Similar concerns were raised by Richard Henry Lee in Virginia. In his widely-read pamphlet, Letters from the Federal Farmer to the Republican, Lee warned that liberties might be undermined by the creation of a select militia that “[would] answer to all the purposes of an army,” and concluded that “the Constitution ought to secure a genuine and guard against a select militia by providing that the militia shall always be kept well organized, armed, and disciplined, and include, according to the past and general usage of the states, all men capable of bearing arms.” [123] excerpt from: THE MILITIA AND THE CONSTITUTION: A LEGAL HISTORY
      by William S. Fields* & David T. Hardy**

      Today you have these ‘select militias’ existing in every State in the form of the National Guard and Naval Militia. Then you have the regular standing armies on top of that…anyway, the media seems much more powerful now than standing armies. You don’t need to fire a shot when you can win the psywar.

      Like

  4. calgacus: you are a cultivated fellow. Appreciate your erudition. Any enemy of my enemy (the De’ Medici) is my friend… as in Girolamo Savonarola.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s