I would like to introduce you to the leader of the Persian 4th Reich and the puppet master to the elites. His name is Aga Khan. He is the last bloodline relative to Muhammad and is the 'only' Shia Islamic leader - Shia Islam is a hereditary form of Islam. He is attributed with creating and institutionalizing the Ummah - unification of Islam.
His status goes far beyond him as a religious leader. He is a highly decorated individual receiving honorary degrees from top tear academic institutions, to military titles, and everything in between (list is long) from nations across the the world.
Furthermore, In 1957 the Khan family was recognized as the wealthiest family in the world.
His economic ventures include, but are not limited to:
Finance and insurance
This list much like the list of titles is endless.
The market or industry that is most interesting is philanthropy. Through philanthrope he and the expertise that surround him have been able to restructure the financial system by using the concept of 'aid' in which to sidestep the religious limitation on financial lending. He is a religious leader. What is being done here is that the characteristic that define Communal Aid allows not for interest based payments but rather community based action. It is community based action that facilitates non-usury lending to reap far greater long-term goals over usuries short-term gains. To quote the Aga Khan: "Change can take up to 20 years to take place". By applying 'aid' to interest groups communities he is essentially by their behaviour or willingness to act. This giving rise to the Aga Khan statement: "Western greed and ignorance is our greatest weapon". To think interest group community like the LGBT would sacrifice their own community members like sheep to the slaughter for free money. This willingness and consent to self sacrifice, leads us to the new financial system setting the grounds for an industry based war.
I encourage people to think about usury versus non-usury. As stated above aid is the exploit facilitating non-usury lending. As such international non-governmental organizations (NGO's) lay ownership to the voice, driving interest and intent of betterment for those who are in need. Taking money from every level of society and calling it charity as a means to neutralize the public reaction - how does one say not to a government handing billions in funding to help the hungry abroad?
Side Note: This is why I say the real issue we are facing is the marriage of ignorance with arrogance driven by empathetic reasoning, Empathy is the core of such manipulation and exploitation
The Aga Khan and his network of interest group communities (paid for in full) have been able to achieve this form of consenting theft by way of branding. That branding is civil society.
Lets take a moment to conceptualize civil society. Civil Society is a grouping of private sector organizations know as Non-governmental organization. They have been quietly and collaboratively centralizing global resources. As a collective, they have been persuading governments to relinquish managerial control and ownership of national resources and assets as a means of collaborative sustainability.
So that is their claim. Yet there seem to be a stark difference between claim and application. This philanthropy strategy, by the Aga Khan and his companions, is not to offer betterment of standards for the weak and vulnerable. Rather is is a strategy centralizing resources and established resources streams of tax money from around the world.
To think we are funding our own demise as the world is funding the war pursuant hereditary control of the religious and secular sectors. Quick question - how did it work for us last time? This pursuit has been structured and funded with NGO's acting as the financial head office(s) and interest based communities acting as bank branches. NGO's offering non-repayment loans to the branches and the interest group bank branching delivering funds, not for community development but rather staging the action necessary to facilitate change. Is it starting sound like a soft conquest strategy now. Does it put light on as to why a group like LGBT would be involved in a pro-Islam protest...Free money.
This reminds me of something I was told in grade 5. We were entering the era where multiculturalism was starting to become apparent. Assuming this was a general point of curriculum at the time the class was thought: "governments represent the domestic population. As such interest groups are used to give a voice to the voiceless".
I retort by asking. If interest groups 'were' acting as a voice of the voiceless, now that they own our government through lobbying, who 'now' speaks for the domestic population. See how the dynamic of power shifts without hesitation and without public awareness.
In sum, Aga Khan is the international man of mystery and is the antithesis to freedom. He, through funding, branded as civil society, has paid for interest group communities loyalties and actions directed at on all levels. If I'm not mistaken that is a textbook definition of conquest. The Aga Khan is at the helm of the Persian 4th Reich and they are pursuant of global hereditary control of the religious and secular sectors.
Remember, you are not a slave, you are a volunteer.