I will start by stating, I must be on to something, because this article stems from a conversation I was having with someone in the comments where it was posted at msn.com. One of my responses was under review and the page needed to be refresh in order reference review results. Each time I refreshed the page, my browser downloaded a file. I am assuming the file would cause issue and deleted all of the, along with the comments. For this reason I want to present a general idea of what was being discussed.
If someone has the means and want to look into the document I still have them and would appreciated to know more.
I am not in support of either nation in this conflict. I do not see them as allies. I do understand and have compassion for the people involved. The innocent bystander, the civilian, are the one who pays the greatest cost of war. Both, in the short and long-term. I am not speaking against the people but rather the leadership. Who are using people like pawns of their person pursuit. That pursuit was hereditary control. With that being a dying agenda, the tide is changing. Now the pursuit is escaping accountability and rebranding.
We are hearing about how this will end poorly for Putin. I thought this wasn't going to end well for Ukraine and Canada. Ukraine being a nation that is being destroyed for the sake of destruction. There has not been an attempt to overthrow nor has there been a single reginal claim following an attack.
Now Canada being the only major foreign player should lead one to question intent and interest. First question why such involvement as Canada is not a military based nation. second, the tyranical leader of Canada has imposed himself as the voice of this war. Is anyone not concerned by this. Trudeau driving Canada into an authoritarian regime is aiding an authoritarian regime that is being attacked by another authoritarian regime.
Trudeau has been pushing billions out to foreign nations in the name of civil society that has gone to fund many authoritarian leaders around the world. Why is Canada as a nation investing our tax basin into what is often referred to as the 3rd sector of society which is a private entity investing in community and institution.
Civil society is the private arm of institutional and communal facilitating 3rd party influence and authority while maintaining anonymity behind organizational branding. Basically funding interest group communities to apply the necessary institutional pressures that will lead to incremental change. These incremental changes ushering in complex social change. Rendering the institutionalization of foreign interest and intent.
Think about it for a moment. Let use a hypothetical example to highlight my point. A leader transfer billions in national capital in order to develop institutions in the name of aid and betterment of people. Now the institution was built with money from a given nation, yet it is owned by an individual and is than labeled with the individuals name. Now the institution is seen as being built on private investment and for that reason becomes a private institution. With its funding being drawn by the same foreign national theft that paid for the institutional development.
I ask how far are you as a person willing to go in the management of these complex revenue streams. Better yet, how far are you will to go in order to ensure such methods are not exposed, leaving you accountable. Civil society does not only fund institutional development but is also funds communities themselves. Funding complex social change and using the exploitation of the weak, vulnerable and oppressed as your cannon fodder.
Now when you assemble the weakest members of a given community and fund their attempts to pressure complex social change, one has to ponder how they ever thought they could win with such militia members. Next is the question of how to escape the mess that was created by such funding. Here is a real world example. 2 days prior 9-11 was the discussion how $1.3 trillion dollars being unaccounted for with the American budget.
What I am trying to allude to is that war is the great escape but also act as the great developer. It allows for budget issues to be explained away as expenses associated with the pressures of outside sources. The masses, out of fear of greater unrest tends to accept a give reasoning given by the perceived authority.
This is where civil society really shows its interest and intent. I ask, how did a nation of people with a long and rich, history, heritage, and culture, as soviets become Europeans within a single generation. Institutional conditioning is how. Education being that institution. Not requiring an emotional state to drive behavioural expression. Instead they condition developing minds, molding them to a desired perceptual framework. Remember, perception influences culture and culture motivates behaviour.
Now with interest group communities applying the necessary pressures for changes within the institution. Such changes allow for 3rd party influence and the key is to embed the group with its interest and intentions within the institutional culture. This is achieved through hiring or replacement of the levelers or actors of influence on an executive level. It is at this point that civil society panders to greed by paying for ignorance. The malleability of children's minds is almost endless.
So the population has been perceptually redefined. Now is the development of icons and totems are next. How do you destroy the symbols of one's history, heritage and culture without disrupting the people? We learnt through the Syrian conflict, that war is the means. A nation with a history longer than our recorded history is turned to ash. From that ash comes the new google smart city. Outside of screams for aid and funding there was not a single murmur of how they as a people were being redefined.
So we have civil society acting as the vehicle with interest group communities in the drivers seat of change. Now this is where things get really interesting. At the helm of civil society and its promotion is the Aga Khan. His claimed pursuit is hereditary control of the religious and secular authority. He is the bloodline of Muhammad. With hereditary control comes a volunteer based labour market. This is stated by him directly. So I ask, how does that differentiate from slavery? He is also the leader of non-usury banking. He through his agency has seized most nations institution of education in guise of management and global standardization. I refer to him as the leader of the Persian 4th Reich.
Now through the network of NGO's and not-for-profits he has establish alliances and companionships amongst the most conflicting groups. As he has said before, it is all about making things equitable. Trudeau unlike any other was born into a companionship with the Persian 4th Reich through his father. Aga Khan was almost like a surrogate father to him. For this reason the Aga Khan has conquered our land. As for the Ukraine leadership they were inaugurated in 2006's Die Quadriga ceremony and Russia was brought in in 2011. The ceremony ended in 2011 with Putin. I guess he was seen as the authoritarian that would reveal the organization as an old Nazi alliance.
This award is relating to contributions to civil society. We have come to see that civil society is a conquest strategy. A trojan horse or sorts. This network, alliance, companionship, whatever you may call it illustrates that these players of conflict are are working together towards a mutual shared goal. That being hereditary control of the religious and secular authority. With you and I as slave. Sorry, volunteers.
Now that all attempts to address and readdress the agenda have failed now it is time for scapegoating and developing. Development intended solely on the sustained enrollment of our enemies amongst us.
Link to claim of volunteer based labour markets
Episode - civil society contemporary communism
Link to inauguration of Ukraine leadership
Link to Puttin inauguration into companionship of Persian 4th Reich
Link to Ada Khans institutional seizer
This piece was inspired by this article and contextually is somewhat of a response