Sunday, February 05, 2012

The Corporate Shell Game of Presidential Politics – Nix on Newt

One by one a long list of GOP 'hopefuls' have appeared, albeit briefly, in the role of 'contender.' One by one they have been shot down by their own fatal flaws, demolishing the carefully constructed 'image' needed to make a base of popular support credible. The focus of enthusiasm, by the media and GOP hacks, for Newt Gingrich for president, is the latest corporate entry in a line up of manufactured candidates.
As we watch the pea pass between the shells of this media game we should consider the unexpressed reality never understood by the public and carefully ignored by the media.
It is a Tail Wagging the Dog Moment, constructed to ensure there is no disruption of the filming, which no longer bears any relationship to the Constitutional, electoral, process by which Americans were intended to govern themselves. The present 'presidential' campaign is a carefully staged disinformation operation intended only to distract us.
Think of the GOP nominating process as a horse race. The 'candidates' are owned by corporate interests with two exceptions, Ron Paul and Gary Johnson. They can be disregarded for purposes of this article.
What you see is an essential component of the business plan of a relatively small number of enormously wealthy multinational corporations operating solely for their own profit and in blatant disregard of the Constitution. The presidency became a corporate sinecure many election cycles ago. The president holds power but the power is exercised from posher offices in locations far less public. Owning the occupant of the office of president is, therefore, very useful to the conglomerate of corporations who 'win the race.' Money spent on 'elections' is money well invested.
Owning the president is worth more than owning a bushel of Senators and Congressmen, though these are also essential to success. Also needed to delude Americans are public relations firms, 'think tanks,' which provide justifications for government control, publishing houses, 'political consultants' (Example, Karl Rove) and political operatives who pretend they are journalists (example, John Fund.) They in come both flavors, GOP and DEM, of course, depending on your needs.
Also indicated are 'strong relationships' with academia, who, paid relatively small amounts of money, provide a wealth of benefits, including producing studies which prove anything you need proved, despite the truth of the matter.
I use the friendly term, Greedville to refer to the constellation of banks, oil companies, chemical companies, pharmaceutical companies, and others who actually own and control our courts and government today. The history of the term originates from my interactions with one such company and the fact the absolute number of such companies involved is barely the size of a small American town, for instance Santa Barbara.
For corporations, determining which candidate to 'buy' and 'run' is a business expense, nothing, more, nothing less. Greedville may grumble at the cost but the corporate coffers open generously and they pay. They are, after all, professionals, ruthlessly sharp operators, who understand you need to pay for what you get.

The GREEDVILLE Business Model
The Greedville model depends on controlling and limiting the choices available to Americans. first and foremost. Gteedville knows where their profits originate and they use what works to ensure their profits continue to roll in unabated.
Let's look at a simplified, but real-life, scenario.
You are an oil company who really wants to pump the reservoirs in a foreign country which prefers to sell to someone else, say Russia and France. Let's say the country is Iraq. So you manufacture a justification for invading just before Russia and France begin their operations using a Tragic Event which is blamed on people who are not Iraqi but who may have distant cousins who look Arab. In this case the Tragic Event is 9/11. It works.
Ancillary benefits to other Greedville interests are enormous and they have supported you in this endeavor. In fact, nearly everyone from Greedville benefits as the money rolls in. Many of the Greedville folks have been doing exactly the same thing for generations, and have long viewed government as their natural ally and partner in business. The relationship stretched back to mercantilism – and to the Salem Witchcraft Trials, which were really about the use of state power to use asset forfeiture, never about witchcraft.
Making something illegal is nearly as profitable as war.
War is a great source for profits, if you doubt this read, “War is a Racket,” by Major General Smedley Butler. You can read the book online. Butler was the most highly respected military figure in America in the first part of the 20th Century. Yet he came to know he was, in his words, “ a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism.”
War provides government contracts, often cost plus contracts, which enrich the corporate bottom line with heady speed. Therefore, rhetoric which keeps the nation at war is to be heavily subsidized. This is a business expense, first and last. Both large and smaller, ambitious companies are always very pro-war and 'patriotic.' Their children are unlikely to serve in the armed forces.
For our simplified purposes here let's look at the main 'industries' which fall in the Military-Industrial Multi-National category, other words, the happy neighborhoods. of Greedville.
Banking and finance, all related to the simple service of assisting people in making transactions, proved to be too fraught with the potential for theft to be resisted. So today, instead of modest profits for doing something simple you can hear the sound of sucking all the way to the Hawaiian Islands from the center of Wall Street, where the Discount Window at the FED is always busy, handing out money guaranteed by Americans to institutions who 'loan' it to back to us, charging interest while risking nothing.
Big Pharma, which traces its roots to the Opium Wars for its funding, ensures you pay hundreds of times what a 'remedy' is worth while keeping its Congresspersons and government busy at the task of denying you the full range of choices which the market would otherwise offer.
Big Food, Big Med, Big Energy, Big Finance, which includes insurance, which when it was membership based and mutual, used to lower costs, not burnish the Greedville bottom line.
GREEDVILLE = Limit choices to you to optimize profits.
Sounds like conspiracy stuff, doesn't it? Nope, just the logical outcome of the original business plan for Greedville.
But even in Greedville, all is not sweetness and light. The size of the pie is shrinking even as those who want to feed are increasing in number. Realignments are in motion.
Today there are two main factions vying for power and a third.
Faction I is a group we generally know as the New World Order. This is a coalition built on the original business plan, endlessly repeated, originating with the Rothschild Banking. Over time, it came to include all of the corporations of Greedville identified by Eisenhower as the Military-Industrial Complex, many of them newcomers to Greedville, which is still, naturally, growing.
You might not know this – but the original target of the Rothschilds was not ordinary people but the royal houses of Europe, moving out first to drain these concentrations of wealth and power and then to grasp the entire world in a gauntlet of greed. Many of these lines were completely destroyed.
From the remnant of these royal houses, those who resisted, arose Faction II, a player fewer know exists.
It took them time to organize and begin to fight back. The world, as they knew it was gone, and they had much to learn.
By the late 1800s they began to secret their ancient wealth in vaults around the world. After the establishment of the Federal Reserve in 1913 their concerns grew. By 1921 they had come together. The remaining royal houses from across the world came together. Riven by war and continuing attacks over the ensuing decades they dedicated their hidden wealth to rebuilding what had been lost.
The gleaming bars of gold, silver and jewels, a small amount of the wealth accumulated over generations, was dedicated to rebuilding the world. Over and over again they were betrayed by the same people who insinuated their way into trust positions. But a steady progress continued.
A while ago the last traitor had been excised from their ranks. But they were left drained and struggling.
Today a great battle is about to begin. You need to recognize the faces of the individuals who are, today, in command of Greedville. You need to see the face of the sole eminence whose word will launch the full force of Faction II. This will probably surprise you. It did me.
Today Faction I, Greedville, is commanded by three men, George H. W. Bush, whose long association with the CIA, along with his family background, gave him the power to kill with impunity. Tony Blair, whose antecedents are not as they seem, and Bill Clinton, who was brought up to fill the position he occupies today.
But this is an unstable coalition, and in this is their downfall written.
The forces within Greedville, insatiable for more, are turning on each other. Until recently those in control were working together. Last week George H. W. Bush had a meeting in the White House with President Obama. With him was his son, Jeb Bush, former governor of Florida. A deal was cut for a brokered GOP. Newt was always filler, his role to distract for a few weeks or months, with no potential to grab the golden ring of power.
Obama will walk away, wealthy beyond his wildest dreams. Bill and Hillary Clinton, representing the weaker component of Faction I, scripted to take a fall from a great height.
Greedville is a small in numbers, powerful in resources and ruthlessness.
And what of Faction II? What of Faction X, which has been silently in the game but invisible to most eyes?

Soon, Grasshopper, you will know.

All you need to know about the Newt
Newt Gingrich has lived a life of lies. He is personally irresponsible to the point one can reasonably wonder if he is a psychopath.

Time Line:
  • Married his geometry teacher, Jacqueline Battley, to escape his bipolar mother.
  • Demanded a divorce from Battley while she was recovering from cancer surgery. Battley had put Newt through college, paying all of their expenses. Jacqueline, according to Gail Sheehy. "The Inner Quest of Newt Gingrich." Vanity Fair. 9/1995 supported and, “finished raising him,” Newt, she goes on to say, could not balance a check book.
  • According to Newt, published in the New York Times in an article by Katharine Q. Seelye,November, 24 1994. "Gingrich's Life: The Complications and Ideals. " She's not young enough or pretty enough to be the wife of a President. And besides, she has cancer."
  • Newt also found it inconvenient to support his wife and children. Private people at the family church stepped in to ensure they survived.
  • Newt's Contract with (on) America catapults him to fame and wealth beyond any expectation along with the entire Congressional Class of '94.(The Contract was NOT Newt's idea, he stole it.)
  • Newt had already met and asked his next wife, Marianne Ginther, to marry him before asking his wife for a divorce. The Ginther marriage would break down when, as the world now knows, Newt demanded he be allowed to carry on a relationship with his present wife, Callista Bisek, who is 23 years younger than he. The two carried on a six year affair before he demanded an open marriage from Marianne and then pursued a divorce and an annulment after 18 years of marriage.
  • The time line on Newt's marriages is available on

Thursday, February 02, 2012

Alexander, 13th Duke of Manchester – Making Sense of the Totally Bizarre

In the past several weeks public interest has again been piqued regarding several items published on the web either by Alex, Duke of Manchester, his wife, Laura, and more mainstream journalists.. These varied offerings are fleshing out a picture of this unusual peer of the realm, adding to the barrage of articles published last summer around an unusual trial held in the High Court of Justice, Chancery Division on July 19, 2011.
The trial took place due to a report by the Duke himself, admitting he was not divorced from his first wife at the time of his 1993 wedding to Wendy Buford, the mother of his children. Thus his children were illegitimate by law in England. The Chancery Court however found the children could continue to receive monies from the Manchester Trust, much to the Duke's displeasure. 

This callousness and lack of empathy shown by the Duke bears striking similarity to one characteristic of a sociopath. But there is more to come. 

An affidavit by second wife, Wendy Buford Montagu, given under penalty of perjury, revealed a time line suggesting motives, on the part of the Duke, which were simply appalling. The Duke seems to have believed he would benefit by $3,000 a month if the two children's support, which he refused to pay, and was being made up by the Manchester Trust, became unpayable by the Trust according to his former wife and the mother of the two children, Wendy Buford Montagu. 

Wendy also believes the Duke married her because he needed a regular source of support and planned all along to eventually leave her, alienating the children to his own advantage. This view is supported by psychological reports in the divorce court documents and also conforms to sociopathic behavior

The deluge of articles appearing in the wake of the July 2011 trial were typified by such language as this, appearing in the Telegraph by Philip Sherwell , "His scandal-ridden life has thus far seen him married three times, imprisoned twice in Australia, deported from Canada and exposed as a bigamist. But, even now, in his 50th year, the 13th Duke of Manchester shows no sign of tempering his famously erratic behaviour.”
In the wake of the trial the Duke's expressed concerns were to 'clear his name,' in regards the charges of bigamy, though an examination of the evidence leaves no doubt as to the sequent of events. Duke Alex blames everyone else, refusing to acknowledge or accept his own acts. He is glib, using his superficial charm to manipulate his listeners and readily changes his story, again the behavior of a sociopath. 

On January 8th this low in human decency was challenged by yet another appearance by Duke Alex, this time in a comment appearing on the Huffington Post website. The Duke intimated the Royal Family might be involved in the murder of a girl whose body was found on their Sandringham Estate while the Queen was staying there. 

An article, written by journalist Richard Kay, writing for the, soon followed, appearing on January 16th. titled, Duke in sick attack on the Royal Family.”
Duke Alex's first comment, now removed from the site, is quoted below without correction was, This is not a Joke my name is Alexander Montagu the 13th Duke of Manchester I have been accused of bigimie and it is all a lie I have documented proof that my trust and lawyers and mother has set me up for something I have never done the Royal family has a lot of power and will do what ever they can to cover up any sort of embaraseme­nt even if the victim is 100% in the write and has the legeal documentat­ion to proove this you should look up the duchess of manchester under google and you will see the documentat­ion to see how the royal family will do what ever they can to cover any thing they can stop look investigat­e I can also let people know maybe people should look into the cameras around Sandringha­m around the Queens property.” It is all about him, no one else matters and he cannot even see how his inconsistency impacts those around him. Sociopathic. 

The case of murder has no apparent connection to the Royal family except for the disposal of the victim's body, according to authorities. Alex, who must embarrass any member of the aristocracy, was, as of last November, living in Las Vegas and receiving his mail at “8414 Farm Rd. # 180, Las Vegas, Nevada, 89131” He has been using “220 Newport Center Drive Suit (sic)# 11, Newport Beach, California 92660” for years – but, according to his own statements, is afraid to return to California because, “the police want to kill him.”

However, the ducal removal from California was arguably more likely related to the evasion of debt collectors than these more lurid causes. Based on information from several sources, the first of these being the former wife of Duke Alex, and the mother of his two children and his present, or nearly present, wife, Laura. 

It became known to Wendy in 2008 that Alex was buying cars with bad checks when a Detective Anderson from Redondo Beach contacted her in an attempt to locate one of these vehicles for repossession. At the time the newly estranged Duchess Laura was living with Wendy, having exhausted her other options for housing. Wendy assisted Detective Anderson in the repossession attempt. The vehicle in question was a red P. T. Cruiser. In late September of 2011 Laura, then reunited with the Duke for some time, told this reporter, “Alex always writes bad checks for cars.” The Duke lurches through life without any long range plan.
Laura lived with Wendy from mid-October 2008 until the end of the year when she returned to Alex because she was without funds to keep her cherished cell phone number, which she has had for twenty years, active. The number is 213-926-0952. While Laura was living with Wendy and the two children the youngest child moved in to her mother's room so Laura, their guest, could have her room. Wendy gave Laura regular cash so she would not be without funds. 

Wendy Buford married Alexander on 7th May 1993. The couple had met, according to an affidavit filed before the High Court of Justice, Chancery Division by Wendy Buford Montagu on 17th April 1992 while she, “attended a country music night club,” located in Orange County, California. According to the affidavit she was then, as now, employed at a law firm in the same county. 

The same affidavit states he asked her to marry him soon afterward, making claims of an income of around $150,000 a month. She was, she says, to find his claims were heavily larded with lies in the years to come, which statement is validated by court documents. 

After giving birth to their first child, a son named Alexander Michael Charles David Francis George Edward William Kimble Drogo Montagu (Alexander),Wendy continued to work, bringing in their only regular income. Although the then Viscount claimed to always be on the brink of making money, usually by selling German Bonds left to him by his grandfather, these long and arduous negotiations always fell through. This writer has learned from dealers these bonds are deemed to be nearly impossible to cash. This source of income never materialized yet Duke Alex, still today, continues to scheme and depend on obtaining the money.
In 1999 a second child, a daughter named Ashley, was born to the couple. Wendy continued to work. Alex assumed the role of stay-at-home mother, according to Wendy, who has been employed continuously at the same firm since the time of the marriage. 

Duke Alex, according to Wendy, occasionally found a job but these were of short duration, generally ending in his being fired for a similar reason on each occasion. This was Alex's assumption he knew better how to run the company than did his employer, in this exhibiting a Grandiose Sense of Self.
Alex went upstairs to his room the moment I came in the door. I was responsible for shopping, cooking, cleaning, and other domestic needs,” Wendy said, when interviewed for this article.
Although he had assumed the role of care-taker Wendy also reports the Duke would take off at a moment's notice. Finding alternative care was then her responsibility. The Duke demonstrated the train of emotional shallowness and self-serving.
After the birth of a daughter and 13 years of marriage the two divorced, at which time Duke Alex demanded custody of the children and alimony, this affirmed by records from the Orange County Family Law Court. The divorce was long, drawn-out, and acrimonious by all reports. 

After many attempts to keep his financial affairs secret Duke Alexander was questioned on the stand from the records obtained through subpoena from his bank. The court took note of an amount amounting to around a million dollars then in his possession, this, according to Wendy Montagu, obtained from the sale of Manchester family heirlooms. 

The Duke asked for, and was denied, alimony and lost temporary custody. At a hearing in August of 2007 Duke Alex asked the issues to the divorce be bifurcated. This was granted, the remainder of the issues being finalized in 2008. But the judge cautioned him not to, “run out and get married again.” Less than a month after the divorce from Wendy was final, Duke Alexander married his present wife, Laura Ann Smith, and relocated, rarely seeing the children thereafter. He did, however, leave in his wake thousands in debts, which his former wife is now being forced to pay. 

According to documents from the court record and recent witnesses, the Duke's finances have been severely reduced since the end of his marriage to Wendy. From a capital base of around a million in 2007 the Duke, last summer and autumn, was reduced to asking for money to pay for ongoing projects from the people he had retained to work for him. Reluctant to assist, the people involved found themselves conned into helping, later realizing they had been skillfully manipulated. Money 'loaned' to the Duke they believed were used to pay for his gas, food and medicine, which includes psychotropic prescription drugs. 

These funds were transferred to him through services supplied by Walmart in Las Vegas, where he had noisily broken up with his wife, Duchess Laura, reporting her to police for stealing the only remaining copies videos he had taken of Michael Jackson while married to Wendy Buford Montagu, who also appears in the photos. As these were community property it is not clear Alex was in legal possession of these materials. They had been stolen from the family home at the time of the divorce. 

The same people found themselves paying for the Duke to file a divorce action against his wife. They then asked a contract be signed, something he had asked them to 'put off, as they could trust him.” When they pressed their request he blew up and began attacking them verbally and then threatening to kill them. These ended when these threats were reported to both their local police and to the FBI. 

The most perfunctory of glances at posts, emails, and letters written by Alex prove he can neither punctuate or spell. Comments from others note he also finds logical thinking somewhat challenging. 

Probably no one posting subsequent comments on the Huffington site believed Alex was, in fact, the Duke of Manchester. But Alex, no matter how unlikely, given his educational deficiencies, is without a doubt the present holder of the title and was raised with the full attention of his mother and grandfather. 

The education accorded to Duke Alex included highly respected and expensive schools on at least three continents.
While this lack of proficiency would be viewed as tragic, if exhibited by a person with a disadvantaged background, having it appear in  a peer of the realm is far more shocking and difficult to explain without further thought. 

A quick perusal of the Profile of a Sociopath reveal many of the characteristics associated with the condition as being present in the ducal behavior. 

If the Duke of Manchester is, indeed a sociopath his behavior is perfectly understandable.