kidmercury

Project Camelot has a great new interview up with a whistleblower who warns of something known as The Anglo Saxon Mission.

Bill Ryan of Project Camelot put out a video to complement the interview.


When evaluating the credibility of information, we should look for a few things:

1. Do we think the source is credible?
2 .Are there other sources we think are credible that confirm?

I find Project Camelot to be a credible source of information, and much of what they are reporting about The Anglo Saxon Mission can be confirmed by other trusted conspiracists; David Icke, Alex Jones, Richard Hoagland, and Jim Marrs all tell a similar story that runs complementary to what Project Camelot is reporting about The Anglo Saxon Mission. Hence, I am inclined to view it as containing truth.

Here's a breakdown of what the Anglo Saxon Mission is:

1. Basically, the Anglo Saxon Mission is a plot by the Nazi element of the New World Order to drastically reduce the world's population. We've talked about this extensively before; see our eugenics archive.

2. The Anglo Saxon Mission expects a cataclysm that will significantly damage infrastructure and kill many people sometime soon (practically all known cosmological systems in the world are expecting a cataclysm of sorts within the next decade or so.....but many systems also seem to suggest that the use of free will and conscious living can help us avoid a cataclysm -- so it should not necessarily be interpreted as an inescapable fate). They are preparing for the Anglo Saxon faction to be in control after the cataclysm.

3. They view China as the only real threat to their power. The other parts of the world have already been weakened via the military-industrial complex. Native Americans have already been exterminated. Their hatred of Black people is pretty obvious, as evidenced by things like the Tuskegee Experiment, as well as the utlilization of race-specific bioweapons, like the AIDS virus, which is designed to target Black people.

4. A race specific bioweapon will be unleashed to destroy China.

Will they actually succeed? Awareness is, of course, the key. As we become more aware, the Anglo Saxon Mission will lose their power.

Where The Racist Ideology of the Anglo Saxon Mission Comes From

The Anglo Saxon Mission is simply a continuation of Hitler's mission to create a world empire rooted in racial supremacy. Basically, after World War II, was Project Paperclip, which was basically the CIA's operation to recruit Nazi scientists into the US (see our previous discussions on Paperclip, here and here). The Nazi ideology was thus brought into the US and basically took over the US intelligence agencies, which in turn took over the executive branch after the CIA's assassination of the Kennedy brothers. The assassination of the Kennedy's made sure the CIA could continue to get funding for its covert war against "third world" nations. The war against non-Caucasian nations was also greatly advanced through the World Bank and IMF, which were founded largely by the corporate interests that financed World War II (and hence many of the financiers of the Nazi party, link the Bush Family -- and of course Bush Sr was the CIA's Director of Central Intelligence prior to becoming President).

Where things get tricky is when you ask well where did the Nazi ideology of racial supremacy come from? The evidence gets murky at this point, at least from what I have seen thus far. But I do believe the Nazi ideology originates from the extraterrestrials.

Check Jim Marr's book The Rise of the Fourth Reich for a detailed look at all this stuff.

Debunking Darwin

There is a natural tendency of sorts to resort to Darwinian logic to justify the Nazi ideology. I mean, it's survival of the fittest, right? And so, if the Caucasian folks are in charge, as they clearly are, doesn't that mean they're better?

No.

Here's the rebuttal:

1. For starters, "survival of the fittest," Darwininian logic is not always true -- in fact it's not even often true. Darwininian evolution implies slow transformation over time; in reality, there are long periods of little transformation, followed by several centuries where transformation is intense and rapid. The years surrounding 2012 are expected by many to be a time of significant transformation/evolution. For more on this, I recommend the work of David Wilcock. Based on this, I don't think Darwinian logic is always applicable.

2. But for those who cling passionately to Darwinian logic, they may wish to think more about ancient history. Yes, Caucasian people are in power in the world today, that is self-evident. However, it was not always this way; China, the Mayans, Mesopotamians, and probably others have held the claim of "world's ethnic superpower" before.

3. The more you study kookology, particularly ETs and the origin of humans, the more evidence there is to support many of the more idealistic, dreamy notions of humanity: we're all basically equal (men, women, all races, all sexual orientations, etc). A favorite example of mine is past life research, which suggests we have lived very varied lives in the past, all a part of our cosmic experience -- not indicative of whether or not we were better or worse than we have been in previous incarnations.

In Conclusion

Lastly since I'm an Indian person by race I don't want anyone to think this is me whining about race, the way I see it I'm cooler than everyone so I got nothing to whine about. I got one Anglo-Saxon dude in my family (and like a real Anglo....blonde hair, blue eyes, the works....he won't be getting hit by a race-specific bioweapon anytime soon ), he married in, I got no beef with him, he's a cool guy, wicked smart. So don't try and accuse me of any that stuff or I'll have to put you in your place, possibly in song format distributed to major mp3 music retailers. No joke!!!!

Unregistered

First of all, the Kennedy family was very sympathetic toward Adolf Hitler's goals. Ever heard of Joe Kennedy; the patriarch of the Kennedy Clan? He was virulently anti-Semitic and repeatedly warned England to avoid war with Nazi Germany. He was even expelled as ambassador to Britain for being a Nazi-sympathizer. When the Kennedy boys went to war, namely Joe Jr. and John, they claimed that they did not agree with the basis of the war against Germany but would fight for their country. They believed that they should be fighting communism, which is what Hitler was doing in his war against Soviet Russia. Joe Jr. was killed in the war, but John carried this belief with him into the presidency, as evidenced by his "containment" policy, and numerous showdowns with the Soviet Union. A known communist, Lee Harvey Oswald, killed JFK, which is easy to explain given Kennedy's fanatical anti-communist policies.

Secondly, while it's true that white Europeans weren't always a "superpower", the cultures you cited, namely China, ancient Mesopotamians and the Mayans weren't either. They never expanded their power beyond their relative spheres of influence. Conversely, the Greeks, Romans, English, Spanish (who were largely ruled by the Germanic Hapsburg dynasty), Russians, and even the Vikings did; meaning they imposed themselves on peoples who shared no cultural link with them. There were non-whites who did this as well, but they were civilizations like the Persians (who, by the way, fall under the Indo-European sub-group of humanity), the Phoenicians, the Arabs, the Mongols, and to some degree, the Indians (who were likewise Indo-Europeans). While relatively advanced for their time, the Chinese never applied their knowledge to conquer alien peoples outside of China. There is evidence that the Mayans expanded as far as central Mexico, but this expansion could have simply been influence, due to the fact that there weren't any comparable tribes of indigenous peoples in the Americas at that point (i.e. roughly 2600 BC). Aztec civilization wouldn't rise in Mexico until thousands of years after the fall of the Mayans.

Thirdly, Darwinism doesn't suppose that all evolution must take place over long periods of time. Quite the opposite. Darwinism supposes that animals must adapt to their environment or perish, which means, in times of rapid change, such as climate-change, the animals that are ill-equipped to adapt, such as polar bears in modern times, will perish. Polar bears are obviously pretty "fit" animals, given that they are the apex predators in their habitat, but "fittest" in this respect does not have the same meaning. When environmental changes are taken into account, polar bears are no longer the "fittest", because they lack the ability to adapt to a warmer climate. However, there is evidence polar bears have been interbreeding with grizzly bears as their climate has been warming and the two bears' habitats have begun to overlap. In this way, they are adapting to their environment, which also fuels a rapid evolution into an entirely new sub-group of bears. Assuming that evolution can only take place over extended periods of time is a fallacy. Evolution simply means adapting to one's environment. If the environment is changing rapidly, the organism must change rapidly with it or go extinct. If the environment changes gradually over time, the organism must change gradually over time or go extinct. That's how evolution works.

As for the Anglo-Saxon conspiracy, the English have always been one of the most liberalized societies in the world. Compare English liberalism with traditional German conservatism, and the differences couldn't be any more stark. Liberalism was an aspect of British culture that the Nazis despised. Ask yourself this; if the Anglo-Saxons are in control, which I would agree that they are, but are trying to kill off the rest of the world, why are minorities so prevalent in their societies? While the Holocaust may have been kept secret to some extent, Hitler never hid his utter contempt for minorities within the German Empire, and outlined his belief in extermination in Mein Kampf. He gave numerous speeches on the need to exterminate Jews, and did exactly that. If the English have such unlimited power and really want to dispose of other peoples, why would they feel a need to keep it such a secret? They are all-powerful, right? So why invite minorities to live within their societies? The reason? Because the English don't want to exterminate their trading partners. It comes down to capitalism, and the last people the Anglo-Americans want to exterminate are the Chinese, who basically fund their wasteful lifestyles. The English have always been capitalists (Napoleon called them a "nation of shopkeepers") and have based their society around global trade. Conversely, the Nazis loathed capitalism and based their society around self-sufficiency. The difference was the Anglo-Americans had the ability to be self-sufficient, given the vast amount of resources in America, but chose not to be. The Nazis didn't have that option, and were forced to war in the East to try to obtain the resources they needed to fuel their desired self-sufficiency. If the Anglo-Americans covertly wiped out the population of Asia, they'd suddenly lack the billions of people it takes to fuel their exorbitant lifestyles, which is not something they want. They want the opposite; the more financiers the better. They want billions of people to sell their pop-culture to, and billions of people to do the dirty work in cultivating, and harvesting the resources that they waste in such massive amounts. England once did fight a series of wars with China, which were called the Opium Wars, but they were fought to procure trade relations with the isolationist country and balance the massive trade deficit they had incurred by pushing a highly addictive substance on a population that otherwise had no need for their goods. The conspiracy is capitalism, and it's not a conspiracy, it's right out there in plain sight for everyone to see.

kidmercury

this is true, but after joe kennedy passed away in 1961, jfk truly came into his own, and started being a president of the people. put another way, nazi ties did help put kennedy in office, but once his father died, kennedy began to betray those nazi ties, which is why he got killed.

e. howard hunt is a former CIA agent on record stating that the CIA killed kennedy. jfk's death also should not be viewed in isolation, but rather as a part of the trilogy of murders: jfk, rfk, mlk. there is a remarkable amount of evidence supporting the notion that the CIA was largely responsible for killing kennedy (with assistance from other governmental agencies, private corporations in the military-industrial complex, and the international banking cartel). you can see our jfk assassination archive as a start. that is, of course, less than 1% of the evidence available.

perhaps i mis-spoke. by "superpower," i did not mean imperial conquests (though in hindsight i can see how that is a good definition of superpower); rather i meant leading economic force, or most advanced civilization.

right, but this type of evolution ignores that changes in the magnetic fields around the earth and in the solar system at large *cause* changes in DNA. this type of evolution is not based on any type of behavior changes the organism engages in; it is the solar system directly affecting the DNA of the organism.

as i noted in the original post the anglo-saxon conspiracy is not about all white people trying to kill others. it's about a very small group of anglo-saxons. as for why minorities are so present, (1) someone needs to do the work, (2) the modern imperial/eugenics strategy is far more subtle and gradual to avoid detection (though is rapidly accelerating as we approach 2012), and (3) the agenda is to kill them off in due time. black people are the biggest target; AIDS is a race-specific bioweapon, and abortion clinics specifically target blacks. visit blackgenocide.org for lots of info on this subject.

there are two types of "capitalism."

1. the first type is where the bankers get to print as much money as they want and give it to themselves and their friends. this is the current world we live in. technically speaking it is fascism, as it requires the government giving banks a monopoly on monetary policy (i.e. the money creation process). i agree this is the real conspiracy, the conspiracy that drives everything else.

2. the second type of capitalism is where there is responsible government that has a sound money policy -- meaning the money supply is not manipulated to give certain factions a huge advantage. when there is sound money, competition flourishes in all sectors, which drives an immense amount of innovation. there is also significantly less poverty in a world with sound money, as things tend to cost less and investors can more accurately understand the cost of capital, resulting in fewer malinvestments. societies that have sound money have repeatedly flourished. in the united states, bankers have repeatedly tried to gain control of monetary policy, having some limited success throughout history. their big victory came in 1913 via the federal reserve act, which gave the federal reserve -- a privately owned central bank -- exclusive right to create money in the US economy (you can learn more about the federal reserve in our federal reserve archive). the federal reserve is in violation of article I, sections 8 and 10 of the US constitution, though that is not really mentioned much in the mainstream media (owned by the same people that own the banks). the second big victory came in 1971 when the gold standard was fully abolished. since 1971 the US has gone from an economy with one income households and positive savings rate to two income households with negative savings rate (and a maxed out credit card). so, we live in a fascist economy, and that is the conspiracy. real capitalism, i.e. capitalism rooted in sound money, is the solution. once sound money is restored a renaissance that improves the lives of everyone in the world will emerge.