The question of when something develops from a coincidence into a conspiracy is more clearly defined than one might imagine.
The dictionary definition of a conspiracy rests upon three required elements:
- 2 or more people must be involved
- It must be a secret
- It must be illegal
In contrast, a coincidence is defined as, ‘an occasion when two or more similar things happen at the same time, especially in a way that is unlikely and surprising‘.
Blurring the line between coincidence and conspiracy is a necessary step in discovering whether or not malevolent forces are at work in trying to deceive and misdirect the population by an act of illegality.
Regular readers of this blog will know that I believe the Bank for International Settlements (BIS) played an instrumental part in the two key events of 2016 – Brexit and the election victory of Donald Trump. But does this theory / belief play more towards coincidence or conspiracy?
Back in February 2016, UK Prime Minister David Cameron announced a referendum on EU membership to take place on June the 23rd. A planned meeting of the BIS – their annual conference – took place on the 24th. The day the result of the referendum became known. What’s important to recognise here is that whilst the meeting took place after the vote, the heads of central banks were gathering in Switzerland in the run up to the referendum.
Initially, you could put this down to coincidence. So the thing to now concentrate on finding out is whether this same banking institution planned to meet again at any time before, during or after a significant public election post Brexit.
It turns out they did. The US Presidential election took place on November the 8th. A planned two day meeting of the BIS – their sixth joint World Bank, Bank of Canada Public Investors Conference – was held on the 7th and 8th of November. The day after they disbanded, Donald Trump was announced as the next President.
One commonality between Brexit and Trump is clear – both represent a rise of Western nationalism / populism at a time when globalist elites (the likes of George Soros and Jacob Rothschild) had been warning of the dangers of such a rise.
The second commonality is that during these events unfolding, the world’s most powerful banking institution was in conference. Remember at this point, however, the definition of a coincidence – ‘an occasion when two or more similar things happen at the same time, especially in a way that is unlikely and surprising.’
Were the bank’s two meetings either unlikely or surprising? The answer is they were neither. They were known about and publicly declared beforehand on the Bank for International Settlements own website.
Which presents the question – are we looking at only coincidence here or is there indeed a conspiracy?
As much as you and I may be tempted to think there is a conspiracy, exercising caution at this stage is critical. The timing of these meetings to coincide with two elections, both of which cemented the rise of nationalism in the West, is undoubtedly suspicious. Whilst I believe there is a conspiracy at play here, it cannot be definitively proved. I would suggest however that the BIS do not help themselves in that their get togethers are not minuted and that no details are ever released on what was discussed and by who.
A lack of definite proof of a conspiracy – as in this case – should not dissuade us from speculating on the facts that are known. As we have seen, a conspiracy must manifest into an illegal act to be classified as such. The main tenets of common law apply to this understanding. Under common law, something is deemed illegal when;
- A person/s is injured or killed
- A person/s is stolen from or swindled
- Items owned / belonging to another are damaged
This criteria has not been met in regards to Brexit and Donald Trump. Whilst one can theorise on the possibility of either vote being manipulated to favour the eventual outcomes, it is still not proof. But this should not stop us from questioning.
Below is an audio of the now deceased author and researcher Antony Sutton, who over the course of his career exposed through numerous books how Wall Street funded both the rise of the Bolsheviks in Russia and Adolph Hitler in Germany. He later went on to expose the first real glimpse into the inner workings and membership of a key secret society in America called Skull and Bones.
To summarise, Sutton outlines the three tiers of information which are essential in understanding our quest for truth and the presentation of concealed facts. Let’s start with the first tier:
- This is information that the establishment is satisfied for you to know – essentially anything found within mainstream media and also documents released by officially recognised institutions e.g. the government. It does not translate into a conspiracy simply because it is known and has been willingly placed within the public domain. The information should, however, remain consistent over an extended period of time. This is sometimes not always the case, either through mistake or incompetence. Such an occurrence presents gaps in the narrative and offers the potential for any researcher to begin investigating.
- Known as the ‘revisionist level’, the second tier openly challenges the first but still relies fully on documents and information released by the media, politicians and associate institutions. Important information can be gleaned from these findings, but it does not fully expose or prove the presence of a conspiracy, simply because the establishment was responsible for its output. Tier two relies on facts that elites are happy to see released. Recent examples of this are the Iraq war inquiry in the UK and the 9/11 28 pages released in the summer of 2016.
- Tier three is where suspicion becomes fact. This is when new documentary evidence is presented to support the assertion of a conspiracy. The establishment will not release this information of their own volition – this is why key documentation is classified by governments under the cover of national security. An example is with the Dunblane inquiry in Scotland. Major portions of evidence relating to it have been neutralised under a non-statutory 100-year closure. This is why when pursuing a line of inquiry, in the belief that a conspiracy does exist, information must be rooted out by the researcher. They have to know where to look and know that it exists. The next action is to push for its declassification. Closures like the one with Dunblane are enacted solely to protect the establishment. It eludes to a conspiracy, but by their own actions prevents us from definitively proving it.
Sutton then went on to state the next hurdle facing any man or woman in search of the truth. Even with declassified documents which prove the existence of a conspiracy, it then becomes a matter of how the public perceive such information. The population is accustomed largely to only tiers one and two. If presented with information which is not certified by official channels e.g. an independent researcher, there is a real and likely danger that the public at large will not believe it. Details which are perpetuated through the media in particular exists to validate the establishment’s position. The voice of a lone researcher against a globalist tribe of disinformationists stands little chance of being heard, let alone seen. That is unless you possess an inquiring mind and go in search of the information.
So where does that leave us? As researchers, I believe we have two responsibilities. The first is to speculate on the facts as we have discovered them. This can be through the mainstream or through the work of independent journalists. By doing so we start to build a picture of where the globalist elites of today are planning to direct us towards. As long as we present our theories / possibilities as speculative, and not as unverified fact, we can maintain credibility given that the information we present is largely bound by the first and second tiers. Seeing through the words and rhetoric of the elites is central to understanding what their game plan may be.
Our second responsibility is to try and communicate what we have discovered and what we believe could happen to as many people as possible. If you’re confronted with disdain, or people who refuse to countenance your theories, it is to be expected given the hold the establishment has over information. All you can do is carry on trying to inform. But we also have a responsibility to prevent globalist elites from achieving their goals. As individuals we can have an impact through our own journalistic work, but activity on a local level, in individual communities, is an antidote to the schemes of the elite. If people do begin to entertain alternative theories, supported by evidence, then that has the potential of challenging the establishment and ultimately exposing their agenda.
To conclude, I feel it would be fitting to present a theory that has been developing in my head for the past week. Remember, it is not proof of a conspiracy. But what it does do is stretch the bounds of coincidence, hopefully to the point where people look at it and see the possibility of something untoward at hand.
Today, Donald Trump officially became America’s 45th President. As I believe that he and the conservative movements supporting him are going to be held responsible for a major economic decline – in the near future or beyond – here is an interesting tidbit of discovery which may prove to support that assumption.
A day to keep an eye on is March the 16th, the day when the US debt limit will be reinstated. This limit has been on hold ever since the latter part of 2015. On the 16th, US national debt will exceed the limit of $20 trillion, meaning that the US ‘debt ceiling’ will have to be raised in 2017 to prevent the US government from defaulting on its debt.
On the day before America reinstates the debt limit, the 15th, the federal reserve will decide on whether to put interest rates up for the month of March. The rate of inflation for the month of February will also be released on the 15th. Inflation is an important part of the current economic narrative, as it is a leading indicator of the outward health of the economy. Fed chairwoman Janet Yellen and her central bank counterparts all have a similar target in mind for inflation – at around 2% or just lower. Right now, inflation in the US stands at 2.1%, in line with all expectations. If it rises further in the wake of a Trump presidency, the likelihood is the fed will raise interest rates.
So imagine the fed putting up rates just as Donald Trump is faced with the reinstatement of the debt limit. You are then looking at a scenario whereby pressure could be applied to markets just as a fed rate hike was supposed to have signaled an ever improving economy. But how many people would be concentrating on the timing of the rate rise over the debt limit? To me it provides ideal cover to increase rates further.
Tying in with all this is something else I wrote about recently, the current Basel III accord:
In brief, the accord is – in name – designed to tighten regulation within the banking sector to prevent a further economic crisis, and in particular a run on banks.
A key meeting that should have led to the accord’s implementation was abruptly cancelled at the start of January. The Basel Committee is due to meet again at the beginning of March for further talks, but according to Bloomberg, the committee’s oversight body – the GHOS (Group of Governors and Heads of Supervision) – must approve the final standards of the accord before it becomes law. That could happen in mid March, around the same time as the federal reserve rate decision and the reinstatement of the US debt limit.
Also bare in mind that the Basel III accord works directly through the Bank for International Settlements.
A coincidence? Most definitely. But that is all it is at present. But through coincidence you begin to see the potential makings of a conspiracy unfolding.
Important to keep in mind is how the mainstream media has very carefully cultivated the impression that Donald Trump is inheriting an improved and sustainable economy. Independent verification of the facts prove this to be a nonsense (visit Shadow Stats for statistics suppressed by the mainstream), but vast swathes of people throughout the world believe without question that under Barack Obama America improved economically. The fact that under his Presidency national debt more than doubled is seldom discussed.
If the global economy suffers a collapse under Trump, he will of course receive the blame, as will his supporters and conservatives in general. Which is why I think we now have this sudden spike in nationalism (with potentially more to come in Europe with the Dutch, French and German elections). In my view it is a fake strawman to disguise the real perpetrators of a coming economic decline – one of them being the Bank for International Settlements.
Whilst that cannot be proved, it can nevertheless be sounded out as a possibility. And should the theory I have just outlined square with anything of what actually happens, then it will show how piecing information together, largely through the establishment’s own outlets, can be a source for working out the intentions of the globalists in 2017.
If the theory proves incorrect, then I was wrong. The quest for trying to work out what vehicles the globalists plan to utilise to achieve their goals will carry on regardless. Questioning our surroundings will not mean we are accurate every time. But to keep on questioning can only aide our understanding.
Thank you for reading. If you found this information interesting, please share it around.