The UK’s pro-Israel lobby in context.

[Searcher08]

And of course Apartheid South Africa and Apartheid Israel were really, really good friends (along with Taiwan!) but I'm sure their Uncle Sam approved of it...

Interesting to bring in Taiwan - I had always assumed that Taiwan was a 'last bastion' against the communists, but it was actually invaded by Chang Kai-Shek and the (Han Chinese) Kuomintang and the native inhabitants ruthlessly and violently suppressed and a corrupt private fiefdom established.

Doesn't a lot of this come down to granularity? ie just as there is no monolithic 'block' of Jewish power (Proof: See hava's posts on the extremely fractured nature of Israeli politics), there is *also* no 'monolithic' block of USA power.

There is a long history of Jewish solidarity with the ANC. I dated a Jewish girl who Dad was a lawyer in Cape Town and her family had to leave the country because they had been involved in representing anti-Apartheid clients and BOSS were getting involved. (This was similar to how UK Intel got involved against lawyers representing Sinn Fein - the Pat Finucane case)

I think framing things in terms of transnational players in a global ecosystem does not have to exclude hierarchical aspects - eg lions are at the top of the food chain in africa, but then seeing every aspect of the ecosystem as being 'controlled by lion behaviour' gives them an importance that squeezes out the effects of landscape, weather, plant life and other predators.
Conversely I think missing out on the hierarchical predation aspects of the ecosystem is like trying to understand a company without talking about cashflow.

Searcher, can you say more what you mean by "hierarchical aspects", especially how we would see and know that aspect in general- above and beyond questions of Palestine/Israel?

I am using hierarchy in the systems sense, not normative sense.

The best examples are:
1 Founding and role of the Bank of International Settlements, the 'Central Bank of Central Banks' which has a huge effect on global financial conditions such as on the Japanese recession.
2 Tragedy and Hope by Caroll Quigley
3 http://www.forbes.com/sites/brendancoffey/2011/10/26/the-four-companies-that-control-the-147-companies-that-own-everything/
4 The above extended this paper:
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/1107/1107.5728v2.pdf
S. Vitali, J.B. Glattfelder, and S. Battiston:
The network of global corporate control
Stefania Vitali , James B. Glattfelder and Stefano Battiston
Chair of Systems Design, ETH Zurich, Kreuzplatz 5, 8032 Zurich, Switzerland
corresponding author, email: sbattiston@ethz.ch

Abstract
The structure of the control network of transnational corporations affects global market com-
petition and financial stability. So far, only small national samples were studied and there was
no appropriate methodology to assess control globally. We present the first investigation of the
architecture of the international ownership network, along with the computation of the control
held by each global player. We find that transnational corporations form a giant bow-tie struc-
ture and that a large portion of control flows to a small tightly-knit core of financial institutions.
This core can be seen as an economic “super-entity” that raises new important issues both for
researchers and policy makers.

[American Dream]

Searcher- I think I follow generally.

In this particular case are you referring to the institutional power of Jews as a whole? "Zionists" as a whole? The State of Israel and its agents/allies? Some or all of the above? Or something else entirely?

[bluenoseclaret]

Sadly, I think anyone who supports or finds favour with the article:

"Beware of Left Anti-Semitism"

must be arrogant/deluded/mind controlled or God knows what.

AD ."Bluenoseclaret, you sure say that anyone who found the article to have any merit must be a very messed up person ..."

God....you're getting it. Not.

You don't come over as caring for people. Vermin comes to mind. Sad!

Not the first time.....

[DrEvil]

AD....Ah... the ad hominem.

"..Bluenoseclaret, you sure say that anyone who found the article to have any merit must be a very messed up person but you really didn't explain why. That's the simplest sort of ad hominem, with nothing much of substance added to the mix. What is it about the Rothschilds that you don't agree with?

And what is it about the article's take on economics that you disagree with? Is there a different understanding that you would propose instead?..."

AD.

."What is it about the Rothschilds that you don't agree with?"

I don't understand. What did the article say about the Rothchilds. People use it instead of saying Jews. Gosh.

DrEvil...I know.

"... is a transcript of a crazy video...."

Why do you say crazy.?

AD...Do you think the Rothchilds are relatively irrelevent in Global Banking/Credit Creation.? If so, what is the politically correct term for those who are relevant.?

My bad. I thought you had misread the article and thought the author was saying the bit you quoted.

I say crazy because I think it is crazy. Sounds like something you would come across at Stormfront.
You know - racist bullshit.

Edit: I'm sure AD can speak for himself, but:

You don't come over as caring for people. Vermin comes to mind. Sad!

Wow!

[Searcher08]

Searcher- I think I follow generally.

In this particular case are you referring to the institutional power of Jews as a whole? "Zionists" as a whole? The State of Israel and its agents/allies? Some or all of the above? Or something else entirely?

Something else entirely.

It is saying that the person who knows how to influence systems by systemic design can potentially accumulate very great influence over the system without owning it.

A Metaphor

Let's say I am an alternative therapist, a Reiki practitioner and fed up with with quality and variability and conflict within the profession. I decide something has to be done.
First, there has to be the setting up of standards and policies - the Board
Second, a function that looks to the outside and the future for opportunities and threats
Third, a function that coordinates between areas (think the person who produces the class timetables for a school at the beginning of each year)
Fourth, an audit function
Fifth, the practitioners

I am creating something that is not at the level of 'practitioner', it is the
"Global Reiki Institute"
Soonish, with a following wind, lots of backing / funding and strategic alliances (eg with global insurance companies, universities, international wellness organisations) we will have a situation where one person (me) has had a very big effect on global Reiki practice - the techniques used or not, the accreditation process, closeness or not to mainstream science etc etc.
Once it gets to a certain size, practicing Reiki becomes almost impossible without following my supra-organisations approach.

Now slim might come along and say
"Look, Search is a monomaniac who wants to take over the whole of Alt Med!!"
From HIS point of view, he has a valid point
From MY point of view, I just understand systems and organisations and don't like mess like some people saying 'Yes, Reiki can cure cancer' and others turning away people with no money and others being accredited for free.

The one day, I am bored and realise that there are now people setting up "Global Shaitsu Institutes" and I think... this could get messy... so why dont I work to create the (systemic) hierarchy above that....

So a few years later we have the 'Global Institute of Complimentary Medicine'
It has as it's members all of the Global Institutes of Shiatsu, Acupuncture, Naturopathy etc.

It was designed by myself, run by my first Global Reiki CEO, who is married to my daughter. Good guy.
Soonish, all certification for Alt Med practitioners on planet Earth now goes through us.

We are dealing with Global Pharma, The Vatican, Chief Rabbis, the EU, TPP... very different people than setting up the Global Reiki Institute level - sometimes with less than pleasant associations - but we didn't back down.

Some call it expediency, I call it pragmatism.

Whenever there is a new healing modality discovered, my worldwide information gathering network lets me know; rising healers come to my attention and those with aspiration meet me and my family, which I enjoy as much as the hilarious bunfights between my detractors saying I am an Evil Octopus controlling AltMed on planet Earth... and my apologists saying I'm getting this shit cos I'm Irish

*

[American Dream]

OK, let's say we identify a network like that and all the members are men, or wear brown shoes. Do we therefore conclude that men with brown shoes are running everything? It sounds like that this may not be the best- or the only- interpretation of what defines the nature of this power network.

In the case of thie hierarchy you mentioned, how do we get at the dynamics of the system(s) which empower the individual members, as well as get at the names, addresses and shoe sizes of the individual members?

Because in this case, there's so much more going on in the world than jewishness, finance capital, zionist ideologies, and/or affiliations with the State of Israel.

The believers in the world view of a Louis McFadden, or Eustace Mullins etc. have in my view focused on a small number of factors and under the spell of their own confirmation bias have tied themselves to a worldview which hurts most all of us. And yet they can believe so fiercely in these concepts that they may not see that their dogmatic beliefs are shaping their view of things to an inordinate degree...

[American Dream]

AD...Do you think the Rothchilds are relatively irrelevent in Global Banking/Credit Creation.? If so, what is the politically correct term for those who are relevant.?

Not irrelevant- but certainly not running everything. One standard term for those who are empowered within the status quo would be "the Power Elite". Maybe a hundred years ago or more the Rothschilds were bigger and more powerful, but still not running everything. Most of the people who came up with those theories were bourgeois reactionaries and/or monarchists and/or disinformation specialists.

[Searcher08]

OK, let's say we identify a network like that and all the members are men, or wear brown shoes. Do we therefore conclude that men with brown shoes are running everything? It sounds like that this may not be the best- or the only- interpretation of what defines the nature of this power network.

In the case of thie hierarchy you mentioned, how do we get at the dynamics of the system(s) which empower the individual members, as well as get at the names, addresses and shoe sizes of the individual members?

Because in this case, there's so much more going on in the world than jewishness, finance capital, zionist ideologies, and/or affiliations with the State of Israel.

The believers in the world view of a Louis McFadden, or Eustace Mullins etc. have in my view focused on a small number of factors and under the spell of their own confirmation bias have tied themselves to a worldview which hurts most all of us. And yet they can believe so fiercely in these concepts that they may not see that their dogmatic beliefs are shaping their view of things to an inordinate degree...

My description is oriented to 'system design skills', not power. Sometimes they come to be the same the thing. Sometimes not
For example, if you look at how Brazil became a modern country, a great deal of that is due to the Rothschilds. If you are looking at the growth of India, family companies like Tata (which as companies go were pretty ethical) were helped grow by them. It was actually pretty interesting stuff, which I found through their public archives.

The (male) characters cames across as kinda stuffy bright toffs who led somewhat wasted youths, then networked at Uni and discovered a talent for both institution creation and dealbrokering - and certainly it wouldnt surprise me if being Jewish assisted the latter

They Far Rightist tropes include: they own most of the planet, they hate Christians and Arabs, they are responsible for all wars, they are a monolithic block.
The Far Leftist tropes are: it's always a Far Right code for Jew, they are not all that big or powerful now, they dont own Central Banks, talking about Rothschilds = antiSemitic

All of these are either demonstrably untrue or unbacked assertions.

Your (huge) question about empowerment:
Some personal factors I have found make a big difference...
Teach people about how to *design effective organisations* that are engineered to have structure of accountability and transparency and responsiveness.
Teach people about (and personally model) personal effectiveness - how to get things done.
Teach people about how to create clear space both physically (clutter clearing) and mentally (having a clear head)
Learn CPS (creative problem solving) and use non-standard,distributed approaches to physically meeting - things like Open Space and approaches like Triarchy and Hetrarchy

I see huge rich creative complexity created by small numbers of people doing these simple things and 'replicating' themselves. Exponential 'explosion' of cooperation, perhaps facilitated by full-on external need (climate change etc)

[American Dream]

OK, let's say we identify a network like that and all the members are men, or wear brown shoes. Do we therefore conclude that men with brown shoes are running everything? It sounds like that this may not be the best- or the only- interpretation of what defines the nature of this power network.

In the case of thie hierarchy you mentioned, how do we get at the dynamics of the system(s) which empower the individual members, as well as get at the names, addresses and shoe sizes of the individual members?

Because in this case, there's so much more going on in the world than jewishness, finance capital, zionist ideologies, and/or affiliations with the State of Israel.

The believers in the world view of a Louis McFadden, or Eustace Mullins etc. have in my view focused on a small number of factors and under the spell of their own confirmation bias have tied themselves to a worldview which hurts most all of us. And yet they can believe so fiercely in these concepts that they may not see that their dogmatic beliefs are shaping their view of things to an inordinate degree...

My description is oriented to 'system design skills', not power. Sometimes they come to be the same the thing. Sometimes not
For example, if you look at how Brazil became a modern country, a great deal of that is due to the Rothschilds. If you are looking at the growth of India, family companies like Tata (which as companies go were pretty ethical) were helped grow by them. It was actually pretty interesting stuff, which I found through their public archives.

The (male) characters cames across as kinda stuffy bright toffs who led somewhat wasted youths, then networked at Uni and discovered a talent for both institution creation and dealbrokering - and certainly it wouldnt surprise me if being Jewish assisted the latter

They Far Rightist tropes include: they own most of the planet, they hate Christians and Arabs, they are responsible for all wars, they are a monolithic block.
The Far Leftist tropes are: it's always a Far Right code for Jew, they are not all that big or powerful now, they dont own Central Banks, talking about Rothschilds = antiSemitic

All of these are either demonstrably untrue or unbacked assertions.

Your (huge) question about empowerment:
Some personal factors I have found make a big difference...
Teach people about how to *design effective organisations* that are engineered to have structure of accountability and transparency and responsiveness.
Teach people about (and personally model) personal effectiveness - how to get things done.
Teach people about how to create clear space both physically (clutter clearing) and mentally (having a clear head)
Learn CPS (creative problem solving) and use non-standard,distributed approaches to physically meeting - things like Open Space and approaches like Triarchy and Hetrarchy

I see huge rich creative complexity created by small numbers of people doing these simple things and 'replicating' themselves. Exponential 'explosion' of cooperation, perhaps facilitated by full-on external need (climate change etc)

I have about two brain cells I can rub together for heat and light right now- maybe three- so my response will not be extensive or detailed, so here's my question:

The Rothschilds, so what?

If one really does reject the puerile myths of the reactionaries and racists- and who can deny that there are many regarding the Rothschilds- then what is left? What makes their story exceptional as compared to other get rich quick stories and adventures in finance capital? Are the claims in the movie about Libya described before really worthwhile? How many of those who go on about the Rothschilds will really claim anti-Racism as a central value and then walk their talk?

[bluenoseclaret]

Well worth watching:

Gilad Atzmon on Ken O'keefe's Middle East - PTV pt.1

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nI7r1eQDGxo

"Atzmon and O'keefe scrutinize the role of language in political discussion and Palestine solidarity discourse in particular. In this segment they examine Zionism, Israel, Jewish tribalism and the usage of the 'J word'."

Gilad Atzmon on Ken O'keefe's Middle East PTV pt2

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JzV58561Fgw

"Atzmon and O'keefe look into the terminology that diverts the attention from the crimes committed in Palestine. In this segment Atzmon argues that Zionism, Colonialism, and Apartheid are there to divert the attention from the unique characteristics of the Jewish national project. O'keefe and Atzmon also look into BDS, infiltration, George Soros, Liberal Zionism, NGO, Civil Society and the transformation of nations into a bunch of beggars."

Enjoy..

[American Dream]

How many of those who go on about the Rothschilds will really claim anti-Racism as a central value and then walk their talk?

Penny Rosenwasser is a far more admirable- and real- sort of (jewish) anti-racist, who has a long and well-respected history of working on liberation struggles, especially Palestine/Israel.



Continues at: http://pennyrosenwasser.com/pdfs/chapte ... xcerpt.pdf

[American Dream]

You don't come over as caring for people. Vermin comes to mind.

Shades of an earlier iteration of Settler Colonialism- and please note that it was not part of a world jewish conspiracy:

Historian Francis Parkman, in his book The Conspiracy of Pontiac and the Indian War after the Conquest of Canada [Boston: Little, Brown, 1886] refers to a postscript in an earlier letter from Amherst to Bouquet wondering whether smallpox could not be spread among the Indians:

Could it not be contrived to send the Small Pox among those disaffected tribes of Indians? We must on this occasion use every stratagem in our power to reduce them. [Vol. II, p. 39 (6th edition)]

I have not found this letter, but there is a letter from Bouquet to Amherst, dated 23 June 1763, [189k] three weeks before the discussion of blankets to the Indians, stating that Captain Ecuyer at Fort Pitt (to which Bouquet would be heading with reinforcements) has reported smallpox in the Fort. This indicates at least that the writers knew the plan could be carried out.

It is curious that the specific plans to spread smallpox were relegated to postscripts. I leave it to the reader to ponder the significance of this.

Several other letters from the summer of 1763 show the smallpox idea was not an anomaly. The letters are filled with comments that indicate a genocidal intent, with phrases such as:

"...that Vermine ... have forfeited all claim to the rights of humanity" (Bouquet to Amherst, 25 June)

http://www.nativeweb.org/pages/legal/am ... _jeff.html

[American Dream]

[Searcher08]

OK, let's say we identify a network like that and all the members are men, or wear brown shoes. Do we therefore conclude that men with brown shoes are running everything? It sounds like that this may not be the best- or the only- interpretation of what defines the nature of this power network.

In the case of thie hierarchy you mentioned, how do we get at the dynamics of the system(s) which empower the individual members, as well as get at the names, addresses and shoe sizes of the individual members?

Because in this case, there's so much more going on in the world than jewishness, finance capital, zionist ideologies, and/or affiliations with the State of Israel.

The believers in the world view of a Louis McFadden, or Eustace Mullins etc. have in my view focused on a small number of factors and under the spell of their own confirmation bias have tied themselves to a worldview which hurts most all of us. And yet they can believe so fiercely in these concepts that they may not see that their dogmatic beliefs are shaping their view of things to an inordinate degree...

My description is oriented to 'system design skills', not power. Sometimes they come to be the same the thing. Sometimes not
For example, if you look at how Brazil became a modern country, a great deal of that is due to the Rothschilds. If you are looking at the growth of India, family companies like Tata (which as companies go were pretty ethical) were helped grow by them. It was actually pretty interesting stuff, which I found through their public archives.

The (male) characters cames across as kinda stuffy bright toffs who led somewhat wasted youths, then networked at Uni and discovered a talent for both institution creation and dealbrokering - and certainly it wouldnt surprise me if being Jewish assisted the latter

They Far Rightist tropes include: they own most of the planet, they hate Christians and Arabs, they are responsible for all wars, they are a monolithic block.
The Far Leftist tropes are: it's always a Far Right code for Jew, they are not all that big or powerful now, they dont own Central Banks, talking about Rothschilds = antiSemitic

All of these are either demonstrably untrue or unbacked assertions.

Your (huge) question about empowerment:
Some personal factors I have found make a big difference...
Teach people about how to *design effective organisations* that are engineered to have structure of accountability and transparency and responsiveness.
Teach people about (and personally model) personal effectiveness - how to get things done.
Teach people about how to create clear space both physically (clutter clearing) and mentally (having a clear head)
Learn CPS (creative problem solving) and use non-standard,distributed approaches to physically meeting - things like Open Space and approaches like Triarchy and Hetrarchy

I see huge rich creative complexity created by small numbers of people doing these simple things and 'replicating' themselves. Exponential 'explosion' of cooperation, perhaps facilitated by full-on external need (climate change etc)

I have about two brain cells I can rub together for heat and light right now- maybe three- so my response will not be extensive or detailed, so here's my question:

The Rothschilds, so what?

If one really does reject the puerile myths of the reactionaries and racists- and who can deny that there are many regarding the Rothschilds- then what is left? What makes their story exceptional as compared to other get rich quick stories and adventures in finance capital? Are the claims in the movie about Libya described before really worthwhile? How many of those who go on about the Rothschilds will really claim anti-Racism as a central value and then walk their talk?

Accepted - but saying 'So what'
Respectfully, for me your framing illustrates the problem:

Take away the Far Right bullshit tropes and you are mostly left with Far Left conversation suppressing bullshit tropes about them. Like saying "So what?" Or one I have seen a lot
"They are the same as..." (add in any wealthy family)

No they are not.

The evidence is clear to anyone who could be bothered doing some actual research ie at their public website.

Personal point:
I have an allergy to 'the same as...' - in creative thinking sessions it is the single biggest no-no, because it can kill innovation - much more than heated argument.

So I would like to ask you

Let's hypothesize that there actually IS a 'So What'?
Then what?

To me their role is still unclear, however what I have come across shows at least for me it is a really important conversation to engage in and that there is as much smoke and mirrors from the Left as from the Right on the subject.

[American Dream]

"So what?" was not a definitive statement of repudiation but it was a sort of challenge- an asking of "What have you got?

Those questions were all real- and very, very serious:

If one really does reject the puerile myths of the reactionaries and racists- and who can deny that there are many regarding the Rothschilds- then what is left? What makes their story exceptional as compared to other get rich quick stories and adventures in finance capital? Are the claims in the movie about Libya described before really worthwhile? How many of those who go on about the Rothschilds will really claim anti-Racism as a central value and then walk their talk?