The realignment took place insidiously. I sat on the couch in the living room, as I often did. Only now I lived alone in the apartment. I clearly squatted there far too often in the last 12 months because the job situation had become increasingly precarious for the past year. My old employers from the alternative media scene went through hard times, and my efforts to shoot classic commercials for the mainstream came to nothing. The reasons were probably indirectly mine. I lacked the inner conviction for many topics that brought money, which I probably also radiated unconsciously during the acquisition process.
The fact was that even before the official separation from Amelie, my savings kept shrinking. Of course, the money also reduced any belief in becoming a responsible father, which at some point became the most important parameter of all for Amelie. Consequently, the pressure on the relationship, specifically me, also increased. This, in turn, had a fatal interaction with my career. It was an endless cycle of suffering, which killed any form of autonomy already in the bud. In early 2014, I was even forced to slave away in Barcelona, building trade fairs. It was a grind that reminded me too intensely of my time in the Bundeswehr, even in light of the casual environment.
Now that Amelie was gone, she didn’t put any more pressure on me. She temporarily let me have her condo and moved out. This grace gave me a window of a few months to rearrange my life. That was a lenient move—a sign of her unconditional love. But still, the situation was not that uncomplicated.
For many people, a relationship breakup would have been upsetting enough. However, various other parameters were not normal because I was still living in a theatrical reality in the global sense. There were substantially more terrible prospects in the spectrum of my existence—fears that reduced my partnership drama to a footnote.
I was firmly convinced that the chances of an all-encompassing, transformative process in the form of a 3rd world war stood at far more than 50%. No question about it – by this time, a dramatic deterioration in relations between Russia and NATO had occurred. I would describe the escalation of tensions as a “landslide.”
Just the year before, the US was well on its way to flattening another country after Libya. This time, they were targeting Syria, but the Russians put a whole armada up against the American aircraft carriers in the final act.
So I don’t know how the rest of the World assessed that, but that development made me cringe. I was also utterly susceptible, but I will go into the reasons in detail later. Anyway, in 2014 – the year of my separation – an open conflict broke out between the two systems on the edge of Europe when a chirpy color revolution, steered by secret service offshoots of the West, split Ukraine. This, in turn, led to Crimea being annexed by Russia.
In the Western media, the annexation was portrayed as an illegal and almost belligerent land grab. Although I am not an expert in international law, this assessment may well be correct. But the moral high-mindedness displayed by the West was so marked by a blatant double standard. This hypocrite was outrageous, especially when the NATO intervention committed a similar breach of law in Kosovo.
One should not forget that the majority of the Crimean inhabitants traditionally and ethnically felt that they belonged to the Russians. The Crimean peninsula became part of Ukraine when the country was still a part of the Soviet Union. Khrushchev drew an internal border quasi-arbitrarily, which was illegal even under USSR law but had only purely legal consequences. It should be mentioned that the Russians had taken Crimea from the Crimean Tatars not so long ago, but that is not to be a history lesson here.
The bottom line for me was that the Western account was a form of exaggerated propaganda. The tendentious interpretation became more and more evident as it became clear on closer examination that a broad majority of Crimean residents had no confidence in the puppet government in Kyiv and honestly preferred to crawl under the skirt of Mother Russia.
Of course, I was not there physically, and depending on the source or propaganda ear, one could certainly come to the opposite opinion. As far as my intuitive perception was concerned, it was clear what kind of production was being played out there on the big stage and what possible scenarios could result from it.
Nor was I alone in my concern about a global conflict of biblical proportions. In Germany, a spontaneous counter-movement was forming in many cities: the Monday demonstrations. A form of spontaneity in the ranks of the population that, in my opinion, is rarely found. Looking deeper into history, you learn that many revolutionary movements were promoted or even directed by forces in the background, secretive groups, and occult institutions. Today, the World’s governments have official organizations for this purpose, which have their task in their name: secret services. A closer look reveals that hardly any political movements still exist that have not been controlled or infiltrated at some point by some three-letter agency.
Before returning to the Monday demonstrations, I would like to elaborate further here. Secret services have the word “secret” in their root word. It is rarely straightforward what operations they carry out and what sub-organizations they have working for them. The biggest mystery probably remains the question of the personal agenda behind certain operations. The clandestine nature of such intelligence actions always provokes speculation in my mind about an all-encompassing global plan by powers outside of state structures. It is a search for a possible overarching agenda of an all-encompassing system.
Let’s just think of Prescott Bush. This is the father of old George Bush, the former president of the United States who flattened the Iraqis before his son. This Prescott Bush was a great supporter of the Nazis with the help of the Union Banking Cooperation. What interest did American bankers have in promoting America’s enemies? Did the US perhaps need an enemy?
Or remember how the CIA built the Taliban and al-Qaeda and how American foreign intelligence helped breed a conspiratorial network of radical religious warriors. Background politics knows plenty of cooperation and symbiosis between diametrically opposed organizations—sometimes groups that we were officially at war with each other. Intelligence warfare knows no boundaries.
Enough books deal with this topic alone and how Western intelligence agencies use left, right, or religious extremists to push their agenda. The range of credible sources with robust evidence is all-encompassing. I had extensively studied publications from this context, which is why such clandestine machinations were, for me, a fact in global geopolitics.
The quintessence from it is simple: One rarely finds a gathering of people with a deep inner concern, without which secret services, mostly steered over relevant NGOs, do not have their fingers somewhere in the play. For example, I would like to cite only the many V-Mann scandals in Germany that have surfaced regularly. Also, the current events in Ukraine showed clear signs that via NGOs of George Soros and the CIA massively intervened in the revolutionary events on the Maidan. The patterns are always the same! Also, all other color revolutions, such as the “Arab spring,” were initiated by the same “global players.”
I had not seen a genuine revolt from the middle of the people without manipulation by secret services for a long time. The same is valid in the future also for terrorist attacks! If one looks more exactly, intelligence services have almost always contributed to it. That fact made the Monday demonstrations a real unicorn. The mass movement seemed to me to come from the middle of society. Any external institution did not steer it. At least that’s how it looked in the early stages.
Let’s stay for a moment with the all-encompassing manipulation of the masses. Besides the many exposed machinations of certain institutions of a secret power structure, there are enough successful operations so perfectly staged that they tangent at most to the realm of conspiracy theory. There is, ergo, no evidence of external influence. However, in such cases, it helps to ask, “Who does it benefit?” It takes a lot of digging to see a systemic picture of the overall extent of global conspiracy reality. From my perspective, it was apparent that the explanations of political events fed to the masses rarely illuminated the factual backgrounds.
The conspiracy theory is such a realm that it behaves similarly to quantum physics—a kind of Heisenberg uncertainty principle. Many connections can no longer be proven conclusively or even objectified, but clear patterns emerge by looking at the larger context. At some point, a complex structure becomes discernible. The perception and interpretation of these indications of a global conspiracy vary in the different “truth movements.” One does not always have to accept alternative explanations. It is often enough to question the official announcement seriously. All skeptics of the mass media eventually realize that something is rotten in the global system. Still, each individual develops their own explanation of who and what might be behind it.
The consensus or central point of criticism that most of the “truth movement” agree on is the manipulative practices of the mass media. Some media groups are part of larger consortia closely intertwined with arms corporations. Other leading media outlets are downright mouthpieces of NATO. One should not mistake viewing NATO as a purely defensive alliance. It has become increasingly evident that tendentious reporting has artificially fanned the flames of conflict. We experienced this case relatively obviously in 2014 with the topic of Ukraine. Only this time, it wasn’t about some revolution in the Middle East, where people could argue at the dinner table about whether it was about weapons of mass destruction or whether the West was, after all, more interested in natural resources. As a result of the events in Ukraine, growing tensions developed between the two nuclear powers. That worried people.
Let’s not even talk about what these political puppets contributed to the escalation. Here, a war was to be sold to us. Many people in Germany felt this, although it was done relatively subtly. The well-known scheme of how to legitimize a warlike confrontation is PRS – Problem, Reaction, Solution. It is an ancient principle for mass control.
Basically, PRS is an intriguing ploy to make an idea palatable to the people, which in principle cannot be in their interest. The elite uses this bizarre trick since no new laws or political decisions can be implemented by the ruling system against the people’s will – certainly not in a democracy. No people in the World want war or more surveillance, for example. So how do you sell something like that?
If, for example, the system wants to spy on its citizens better or simply wants to study their consumer behavior extensively. It will always have difficulty arguing for a corresponding law that undermines privacy. A critical mass would quickly form to oppose such an agenda. However, it is a different story when these measures seem to make sense in a particular context, or the spin is turned so that the people believe that their own safety must be monitored.
Ideally, to achieve that, you create insecurity or even a threat to society. That is the “P” in PRS. The system artificially establishes a problem through the work of intelligence agencies, e.g., by infiltrating, founding, or promoting and controlling terrorist organizations. With terror and fear, you can manipulate sheeple virtuously. They are traumatized and thus made docile. The traumatization or fear is the desired reaction, hence the “R” in the equation.
In the end, the sheeple themselves cry out for more surveillance. Maybe you have to make the idea more palatable to them through the mass media, but that’s how you get people hooked. At this point, the system has to be quite careful. A critical mass may become suspicious at this stage because they smell a rat. The best thing is to make it look like an open debate.
Ideally, the sheep themselves come to the supposed realization that it would make sense to add a few more sheepdogs to the troop. If it works out perfectly, they’ll throw their precious privacy overboard. That’s the solution they’re after, and the PRS formula is in full effect.
If you want a war, it’s similar. You just have to ensure that the other country shows apparent aggression first. The best way to do this is to push it into a corner by driving it to economic ruin through sanctions. Basically, it works like in the schoolyard, where the notorious thug is looking for his prey.
Suppose the designated victim does not want to give the first impulse. In that case, an occasion is artificially produced, as with the Gleiwitz transmitter, which started World War II, or the Gulf of Tonkin incident, which the US faked to better intervene in Vietnam. The CIA calls such tactics “false flag operations.” These tactics are planned and executed on a general staff basis. “Operation Northwoods” is a prime example. Fake terrorist attacks can be beneficial to provoke a conflict or push through new laws in one’s own country. For research purposes, I would like to mention in the context the bizarre background of the attack on the USS. Liberty and the bomb terror in Bologna.
Thus in the known history of humanity, enough abstruse communities, religions, and other gatherings of various radical elements were used. All kinds of unholy alliances were knitted clandestinely to manipulate in a much larger social paradigm. One should ignore the propaganda that economic or military interventions in the affairs of any sovereign country are about international law, democracy, or the elimination of weapons of mass destruction. It is always about power and control. The system is primarily concerned with staging a new act on the global stage.
As a self-confessed conspiracy theorist, I could digress endlessly at this point. However, primarily only my observation should be somewhat substantiated that a natural emergence of a movement with revolutionary tendencies rather represents a rarity. This brings me back to the peace vigils in Germany.
This said vigil movement that formed in 2013/14 seemed, as I said, from my perspective to have grown spontaneously from the middle of society. Quasi as a manifestation of collective insecurity. Many people became aware of PRS manipulation by the mass media. This peace formation had formed mainly without the aid of established structures. An ideal state, which unfortunately was quickly sabotaged, infiltrated, and mass media mutilated.
I personally got involved in a group formed in Magdeburg at that time. Later, I also went to a significant event at the Brandenburg Gate. There were almost no guidelines or instructions from the principal organizers in Berlin. In Magdeburg, everything was free-style, as they would say. The people who came together were a colorful mix. A likable bunch of idealists with quite different approaches and convictions. But there was also a particular radical potential in Magdeburg.
In many activists, something burned that demanded a revolution. They were fed up with continuing to be so brazenly manipulated. Frankly, there was also a selective emergence of naiveté, which I could see. It is not meant to be a negative evaluation. I have outgrown many romantic ideas only because of my long past in the German “truth movement.” But some comrades-in-arms mirrored me 1 to 1 the own former attitude before I was disillusioned lastingly. I, too, clung to particular naive views before realizing what intelligence and agenda really hid behind the system.
The issues that were discussed among us had only recently gained significant populism. For me, they were primarily old stories. Some fellows had not too long ago begun to look a bit behind the curtain and were still half in shell-shock and overwhelmed by the micro-cosmos that presented itself to them behind it. The few landmarks they could grasp behind the curtain were irritating enough for them. I recognized in which developmental phases each person was in. I had lived through them myself and knew the phase-related patterns of emotional processing from my own experience.
Other people already recognized that politicians are mostly just puppets who have no real power, much as Seehofer once so aptly admitted:
“Those who were elected have nothing to say, and those who have something to say were not elected.”
That opened up a whole new range of possible villains. There were multinational corporations, for example, with the bankers and the FED at the top of it. Of course, everyone had their own suspicions and projections. Organized religions serve excellently as boogymen like the notion of an international Jewish conspiracy or a Jesuit infiltration of the World’s leadership to manifest a biblical Armageddon. Indeed, some already suspected the Muslim community, but this was to gain momentum only later—they would be given their own movement with the name ISIS, directly controlled from above. Strictly according to the principle: divide and conquer.
All the participants in the peace vigils had their reasons for blaming one group or another. None of them were completely wrong because the system uses every conceivable institution according to my knowledge. The intelligence that controls this power structure has created or infiltrated almost every major group or faith community in history. That was my initial point of view, but only a few of my comrades-in-arms could understand it.
The majority of the concerned citizens who gathered at the bus station in Magdeburg followed somewhat reductionist approaches! It seemed as if the masses were blind, sharing a small prison cell with an elephant. One felt harassed by the trunk, and the next got the tail in the face. Another feared being crushed by a giant foot. Everyone blamed an individual body part for the problems in the World. Only a few individuals had the skills to grasp the animal as a unit. Systemic thinking is unfortunately not sufficiently encouraged in school. Only a handful of individuals remained who had opened their eyes enough to recognize the tamer high up on the elephant’s back.
I don’t want to judge my brothers and sisters in spirit negatively. Quite the opposite! I was glad that other people were involved. Primarily it was about peace. Whether tail or trunk is the most significant war profiteer, in the end, should be irrelevant. At least, compared to the average sheeple, many participants recognized that there was the elephant in the room at all. I mean the famous “Elephant in the Livingroom,” which describes an apparent disharmony that no one wants to acknowledge. The elephant in the living room stands for a state of affairs that is, in principle, completely obvious but which all the inhabitants of the house either ignore or pathologically block out. This is the elephant that virtually everyone filters out of their visual perception.
The emergence of a global conflict, catalyzed by dark forces in the background, was that blind spot in society that we as a peace movement wanted to point out. The intention of all peace activists was good-hearted, and I was a part of this effort, even if I lost faith in success quite soon. However, other comrades-in-arms continued to fight, and perhaps they were a major reason we do not live in a post-apocalyptic world today.
It was difficult to unite the broad masses under a common ideology, as I indicated earlier. Any efforts were, in any case, massively torpedoed by the establishment and the mass media. A conspiracy of the mainstream press was running against us. All kinds of dirty tricks that the propaganda toolbox offered were instrumentalized. First, the movement was ignored, then the principle of “divide and rule” was applied.
That was relatively simple! Of course, there were also a few apparent “nationalists” among the participants. I would not have been surprised if the brown boys had been ordered there directly by the Verfassungsschutz (equivalent to the FBI). It is a long tradition that secret machinations have always steered radical right-wing sentiment in Germany—just think of those, as mentioned earlier, “V-Mann scandals” that came to public attention.
I am primarily convinced that the truth about the NSU will also come out at some point. The factual background behind the “terrorist organization” probably shows that this whole display, including the Paulchen Panther video, was an operation of German intelligence services. They probably wanted to kill several birds with one stone. The entire story was used to argue for data retention and various other restrictions on freedom. This is the well-known PRS formula. But I can only speculate about that.
We will have to wait and see what surfaces. But the mere fact that an ominous trio marauded undetected through the country for years, surgically eliminating lone individuals often linked to international drug trafficking, should give us pause for thought. If trivial xenophobia had been the motive for the murders, a rudimentary nail bomb in a Turkish nightclub would have achieved much more effective results. Something was fishy about the whole thing. Too many witnesses died in the aftermath. Even among the investigators, sudden deaths or critical individuals in essential positions disqualified themselves by having child pornography on their computers. All this bore the signature of secret services.
But back to the Nazis in the peace movement. Whatever their motivation was to appear there, it was perfectly instrumentalized. Already “quite” soon, the mass of peace activists was exclusively sorted into the drawer “neo-right.” A classic example of “Orwellian newspeak.” The neuronal-linguistic programming of the German population is exceptionally and profoundly anchored when it comes to the association with “right-wing” or “nationalism.” No average citizen welcomes being tossed into such a pigeonhole. Accordingly, this so-called “Nazi cudgel” is also insidiously used by the system to defame a movement and make it unattractive to the average Joe.
Accordingly, the “new right” label was destructive for germinating a critical mass that could have been dangerous to the system. The immune system of the matrix works mercilessly efficiently, and many of the white blood cells were not even aware of what they were propagating. The mainstream press kept the peace movement in check. The news controlled public perception, and the sheeple aligned themselves accordingly.
If I had been the chief of the unofficial system defense – subdivision Germany – I too would have sent every brown agent available there. This move would immediately give the movement the necessary coat of paint to make the peace vigil less desirable to the masses as possible. At the same time, I would have called over every agent of the left spectrum and all Antifa associations to troll on these meetings. They must draw attention to the new brown danger in the most media-effective way possible.
Everybody must be there! Punks, Antifa, and various left-wing groups should be shipped there. They all qualify if they are as extreme, passionate, and unreflective as their polar antagonists, or should I say “mirror images?” If I have already come up with such apparent ideas – why shouldn’t the system’s guardians should proceed less cleverly? Willing assets are available in abundance.
The principle is called divide and rule – “divide et impera” – a tool for mass control, which Lenin aptly put thus:
“Only a polarized society can be governed.”
Having to watch the system take the young seedling “peace vigil” through the wringer to ultimately crush it was one reason I removed myself from the process. I had lost faith that I could do anything about the collective fate in the form of a 3rd World War. I became fatalistic. Let the system do what it wanted. I closed my eyes and hoped that reason would prevail. But I wouldn’t have been surprised if the big bang had come in 2014.
Admittedly, I undoubtedly represented the archetype of a “paranoid conspiracy theorist during this period. However, the origin of this assessment, which was extremely real and present for me, could not be determined solely by the current situation. The cause for this clear perception was, meanwhile, quite far back. I guess it was about ten years ago. However, when I think about it more intensively, it all began much earlier.