Not sure about a North American Union posited as a problem. Folks like Alexander Dugin and Daniel Estulin (whose books exposed Bilderberg and Tavistock) have spoken about the coming blocs of nations which would be necessary for undermining and dissolving the unipolar agenda (for one global government) into the now arising multipolar one that is being signalied by the BRICS alliance, which indicates a turning away from the old system to a new one of independence. The USMCA had already been signed in 2020, which was a positive overthrow of the terrible NAFTA.
I’ve liked Matt Ehret in the past, especially his expositions on the roots of the New World Order, but have since come to take a lot of his other pronouncements as tainted by too much paranoia and jaded misjudgement, some of it juvenile in its preference for an all too easy cynicism much seen today. His views have become more dogmatic in following his own historical narrative that he’s generated, since connecting certain dots (e.g, about secret societies) then allows him to pull in many more players and agents into his web of intrigue (like placing Jung in the same mix as Blavatsky).
For what it’s worth, another Canadian whose intelligence I’ve come to respect rather more, is Michael Millerman, whose readings of geopolitical affairs are as much on point as his philosophical ones. He gets who Trump is, though I’m less sure thet Ehret does. (That said, it might be interesting to hear a Millerman-Ehret discussion on Plato, who they both revere.)
For more astute observers, who early on made it a point of including not just “conspiracy theorists” but also the various MAGA, Patriot and ex-military/intel-oriented commentators, as well as Q-related sources (but not QAnon) to obtain a bigger more complex picture — it’s not even clear who Trudeau has been controlled by, nor whether it’s even been the real Trudeau, since doubles and actors have been used more often than the public has known. If the original Trudeau is still on view, then a Privy Council hunch via Ehret seems possible, but if it’s been a double or actor for some time — like many others out there — then… what of a “white hat” associated direction of the performance? What to do? It’s clear that bringing up the matter of pegging someone’s “handlers” already begs a question of whether one has fallen for some available optics.
It’s not a WYSIWYG world. There’s little that can be taken at face value, especially in wartime, when everything is a psy-op of one kind or another — and unfortunately, needs to be, in order for that war to be won. Hopefully by those serving the Good, those whom I believe are “Trump’s handlers.”
I remain hopeful, since I’ve seen far too much to know that there is no way that they — if the “they” that many out here have come to trust are bad in the end — would be able to get away with it. Not this time. Happily, the totality of indicators do not point in that direction.
To me, the evidence is strong that these multinational blocs like the EU and the potential NA Union and BRICS and whatever they come up with next is just a step on the way to one world government. Folding nations into big bureaucratic blocs is a great way to undermine national sovereignty, and makes centralized control easier, not more difficult. Fracturing nations and localism make top-down control much more challenging, but small polities are vulnerable to big ones, hence the race to consolidation before modern Nation states break down along ethnic and ideological lines.
Klaus Schwab et all are big fans of the multipolar world. It's a euphemism for the collapse of the current US empire allowing a new global empire that is not centered on a nation to rise. Forming these supranational blocs is very useful because they'll hand the keys to the kingdom over much quicker and easier than individual nations, which have proven to be somewhat resistant to global governance
What evidence? A good part of BRICS is to create prosperity and win-win situations for all members. It is not about top-down control, otherwise why call it multipolar? BRICS offers an alternative governance model to Western-led institutions, such as the World Bank and International Monetary Fund (IMF). By establishing its own financial institutions, like the New Development Bank, BRICS offers more inclusive and representative governance model that better reflects the interests of the so-called Global South. In short, it’s all about breaking up the grip of the entire central banking system, especially by the Fed. After all, why would Trump announce, at the UN no less, that the globalist agenda is dead?
Under the first Trump admin, his appointed Treasury Sec. Steve Mnuchin reversed things and actually brought the Fed back UNDER the control of the US Treasury. This was barely registered in the mainstream media, and few outside of Zero Hedge even touched it. (Wonder why?) The old petrodollar system represented and protected by the Fed has to be destroyed (which is what all the recent theater featuring Powell and Yellen has been all about for public optics), with a new monetary system then emerging: one with gold and other precious metals/assets backing national currency. There have even been designed — and printed — brand new US Treasury notes ready to replace the Federal Reserve Notes, confirmed by word of mouth from a few who’ve seen palettes of the new “rainbow” bills waiting to be rolled out sitting on the side in some safety deposit vaults. I’ve seen the designs myself: stunning, and worthy of the American historical celebration DJT has planned beginning in the summer of this year. Real money with real value, ready to go into circulation, and which contradicts the doomsters who are predicting the eradication of paper money and the imposition of digital CBDCs.
The fate of the EU is becoming more clear by the day, and its supporting players crumbling — as in recent votes of no confidence in France and Germany, and with the UK not far behind. Brexit happened for a reason, providing the necessary signal for other member states going forward. The Euro is doomed, guaranteed by the return to national currencies among all the nations as well as freer, more expanding trade and settlements in those local currencies and developing alternative payment mechanisms.
BRICS signifies a move towards a more balanced and multipolar world order, where power and influence are more dispersed. This shift does not mean the end of global cooperation but rather a redefinition of how global issues are addressed, with a greater emphasis on inclusivity and shared prosperity. Ever hear of win-win? Yes, it will face internal challenges, such as varying economic interests and political systems, and such complexities will always require deeper cooperation and skillful diplomacy and continuous dialogue to align diverse agendas, rather than cycnicism and distrust that something totally other is actually afoot.
A diversification of power centers with the rise of BRICS means growth of these countries in terms of economic power, population, and geopolitical influence, where global decision-making is increasingly less dominated by a few Western nations, leading to a more balanced but complex international system. It totally contradicts the POV that BRICS somehow displays a one-world government concept.
I don’t know who your sources are, but if you were to follow the efforts from those like Alexander Mercouris at the Duran, or folks like Tom Luongo, their points of analysis would eliminate a lot of cynical nonsense. And granted, while it’s true that each side in this war has gotten the public to carry out its own portion of the psyop forward for a chosen side, the battlefield is dirty and cloudy enough from the fog of war to make absolute clarity impossible. But facts are never enough, since they only feed WYSIWYG. Another reason why intuition and knowing how to read people and optics on many levels can often produce a different sense of things.
Just look at a few simple things to see the connections and I think you'll understand. What nation DOESN'T have a central bank? Every single BRICS nation does, so it's not like it's separate from the IMF/BIS. No nation on Earth has a non-fiat currency and all the vague plans to move away from this mysteriously stall out or have very limited impact. Putting us in larger, more centralized blocs is going to be the end of the nation-state as a functional unit.
Klaus and all the WEF people are on (both) all sides politically in most nations. Justin Trudeau is a "Young Global Leader", yet so is Tulsi Gabbard who has strongly aligned with the right-wing, to the point of joining Trump's cabinet. Many leaders that opposed COVID nonsense were assassinated in 2020-2022, including Haiti's president and John Magufuli of Tanzania. Check this source - 6-fold increase in African Presidents assassinated since COVID https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/political-science/articles/10.3389/fpos.2023.1077945/full
Also simply look at the EU. Has the erosion of national sovereignty to become a larger bloc made them stronger? No, under the EU absolutely absurd mass-migration has occurred across the region and, in fact, was facilitated by the existence of the EU. With no Schengen zone and no EU, it couldn't have happened the way it did, nor continue the way it is. and almost all EU members are cracking down on 'far-right' resistance to their suicidal governments that all answer to the same bankers. Only one central bank for all Eurozone countries, by the way. Easier or harder to control? You decide, but your BRICS narrative is not supported by reality. It's a cudgel against the dollar to erode American hegemony, not a true competitor. It's all owned by the same people.
Even the correct information is always pointing figures in every direction. Who's who is nearly impossible to determine besides the bankers and their friends, but it's become my rule of thumb that, "whoever is in power long-term and not deposed is bad." It's universally applicable, but its correctness becomes much greater with the more power and money involved. It's sadly very applicable to churches and all religious 501c3's, though once again you need to look at what's at stake. A mega church is a much likelier venue of corrupting Zionist influence than a small, family-run community church of 50 people. There's virtually no exceptions to that rule in the last 100+ years on the large scale.
MUST READ! WORTH YOUR TIME. MOST IMPORTANT READ. SERIOUSLY.
"The hardest truth isn't just recognizing deception - it's accepting that we might never know the full story while still needing to act on what we can verify. What began as research into specific deceptions revealed something far more profound: While devastating physical wars rage in multiple regions, a deeper conflict unfolds silently across the planet - a war for the freedom of human consciousness itself. This is what World War III looks like - not just bombs and bullets, but the systematic engineering of human perception.
This pattern of building trust before redirection reflects a deeper system of control, operating on the ancient alchemical principle of Solve et Coagula - first dissolve (break apart), then coagulate (reform under control). The process is precise: When people begin recognizing institutional deception, natural coalitions form across traditional divides. Workers unite against central bank policies. Parents organize against pharmaceutical mandates. Communities resist corporate land grabs.
But watch what happens next - these unified movements get systematically dissolved. Consider how quickly unified resistance fractured after October 7th, how the trucker protests dissolved into partisan narratives. Each fragment splinters further - from questioning authority to competing theories, from united action to tribal infighting."
....
"The most dangerous aspect of managed opposition isn't the information it shares, but how it teaches learned helplessness disguised as hope."
I noticed that M'self... Glad I don't consent to that mess!
People in power are manipulated by their entourage, whether they are aware or not.
Well, the Ones who plan demics are the hidden hand. The Ones We see being blamed for the mess… Yes, They have handlers.
Not sure about a North American Union posited as a problem. Folks like Alexander Dugin and Daniel Estulin (whose books exposed Bilderberg and Tavistock) have spoken about the coming blocs of nations which would be necessary for undermining and dissolving the unipolar agenda (for one global government) into the now arising multipolar one that is being signalied by the BRICS alliance, which indicates a turning away from the old system to a new one of independence. The USMCA had already been signed in 2020, which was a positive overthrow of the terrible NAFTA.
I’ve liked Matt Ehret in the past, especially his expositions on the roots of the New World Order, but have since come to take a lot of his other pronouncements as tainted by too much paranoia and jaded misjudgement, some of it juvenile in its preference for an all too easy cynicism much seen today. His views have become more dogmatic in following his own historical narrative that he’s generated, since connecting certain dots (e.g, about secret societies) then allows him to pull in many more players and agents into his web of intrigue (like placing Jung in the same mix as Blavatsky).
For what it’s worth, another Canadian whose intelligence I’ve come to respect rather more, is Michael Millerman, whose readings of geopolitical affairs are as much on point as his philosophical ones. He gets who Trump is, though I’m less sure thet Ehret does. (That said, it might be interesting to hear a Millerman-Ehret discussion on Plato, who they both revere.)
For more astute observers, who early on made it a point of including not just “conspiracy theorists” but also the various MAGA, Patriot and ex-military/intel-oriented commentators, as well as Q-related sources (but not QAnon) to obtain a bigger more complex picture — it’s not even clear who Trudeau has been controlled by, nor whether it’s even been the real Trudeau, since doubles and actors have been used more often than the public has known. If the original Trudeau is still on view, then a Privy Council hunch via Ehret seems possible, but if it’s been a double or actor for some time — like many others out there — then… what of a “white hat” associated direction of the performance? What to do? It’s clear that bringing up the matter of pegging someone’s “handlers” already begs a question of whether one has fallen for some available optics.
It’s not a WYSIWYG world. There’s little that can be taken at face value, especially in wartime, when everything is a psy-op of one kind or another — and unfortunately, needs to be, in order for that war to be won. Hopefully by those serving the Good, those whom I believe are “Trump’s handlers.”
I remain hopeful, since I’ve seen far too much to know that there is no way that they — if the “they” that many out here have come to trust are bad in the end — would be able to get away with it. Not this time. Happily, the totality of indicators do not point in that direction.
To me, the evidence is strong that these multinational blocs like the EU and the potential NA Union and BRICS and whatever they come up with next is just a step on the way to one world government. Folding nations into big bureaucratic blocs is a great way to undermine national sovereignty, and makes centralized control easier, not more difficult. Fracturing nations and localism make top-down control much more challenging, but small polities are vulnerable to big ones, hence the race to consolidation before modern Nation states break down along ethnic and ideological lines.
Klaus Schwab et all are big fans of the multipolar world. It's a euphemism for the collapse of the current US empire allowing a new global empire that is not centered on a nation to rise. Forming these supranational blocs is very useful because they'll hand the keys to the kingdom over much quicker and easier than individual nations, which have proven to be somewhat resistant to global governance
What evidence? A good part of BRICS is to create prosperity and win-win situations for all members. It is not about top-down control, otherwise why call it multipolar? BRICS offers an alternative governance model to Western-led institutions, such as the World Bank and International Monetary Fund (IMF). By establishing its own financial institutions, like the New Development Bank, BRICS offers more inclusive and representative governance model that better reflects the interests of the so-called Global South. In short, it’s all about breaking up the grip of the entire central banking system, especially by the Fed. After all, why would Trump announce, at the UN no less, that the globalist agenda is dead?
Under the first Trump admin, his appointed Treasury Sec. Steve Mnuchin reversed things and actually brought the Fed back UNDER the control of the US Treasury. This was barely registered in the mainstream media, and few outside of Zero Hedge even touched it. (Wonder why?) The old petrodollar system represented and protected by the Fed has to be destroyed (which is what all the recent theater featuring Powell and Yellen has been all about for public optics), with a new monetary system then emerging: one with gold and other precious metals/assets backing national currency. There have even been designed — and printed — brand new US Treasury notes ready to replace the Federal Reserve Notes, confirmed by word of mouth from a few who’ve seen palettes of the new “rainbow” bills waiting to be rolled out sitting on the side in some safety deposit vaults. I’ve seen the designs myself: stunning, and worthy of the American historical celebration DJT has planned beginning in the summer of this year. Real money with real value, ready to go into circulation, and which contradicts the doomsters who are predicting the eradication of paper money and the imposition of digital CBDCs.
The fate of the EU is becoming more clear by the day, and its supporting players crumbling — as in recent votes of no confidence in France and Germany, and with the UK not far behind. Brexit happened for a reason, providing the necessary signal for other member states going forward. The Euro is doomed, guaranteed by the return to national currencies among all the nations as well as freer, more expanding trade and settlements in those local currencies and developing alternative payment mechanisms.
BRICS signifies a move towards a more balanced and multipolar world order, where power and influence are more dispersed. This shift does not mean the end of global cooperation but rather a redefinition of how global issues are addressed, with a greater emphasis on inclusivity and shared prosperity. Ever hear of win-win? Yes, it will face internal challenges, such as varying economic interests and political systems, and such complexities will always require deeper cooperation and skillful diplomacy and continuous dialogue to align diverse agendas, rather than cycnicism and distrust that something totally other is actually afoot.
A diversification of power centers with the rise of BRICS means growth of these countries in terms of economic power, population, and geopolitical influence, where global decision-making is increasingly less dominated by a few Western nations, leading to a more balanced but complex international system. It totally contradicts the POV that BRICS somehow displays a one-world government concept.
I don’t know who your sources are, but if you were to follow the efforts from those like Alexander Mercouris at the Duran, or folks like Tom Luongo, their points of analysis would eliminate a lot of cynical nonsense. And granted, while it’s true that each side in this war has gotten the public to carry out its own portion of the psyop forward for a chosen side, the battlefield is dirty and cloudy enough from the fog of war to make absolute clarity impossible. But facts are never enough, since they only feed WYSIWYG. Another reason why intuition and knowing how to read people and optics on many levels can often produce a different sense of things.
Just look at a few simple things to see the connections and I think you'll understand. What nation DOESN'T have a central bank? Every single BRICS nation does, so it's not like it's separate from the IMF/BIS. No nation on Earth has a non-fiat currency and all the vague plans to move away from this mysteriously stall out or have very limited impact. Putting us in larger, more centralized blocs is going to be the end of the nation-state as a functional unit.
Klaus and all the WEF people are on (both) all sides politically in most nations. Justin Trudeau is a "Young Global Leader", yet so is Tulsi Gabbard who has strongly aligned with the right-wing, to the point of joining Trump's cabinet. Many leaders that opposed COVID nonsense were assassinated in 2020-2022, including Haiti's president and John Magufuli of Tanzania. Check this source - 6-fold increase in African Presidents assassinated since COVID https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/political-science/articles/10.3389/fpos.2023.1077945/full
Also simply look at the EU. Has the erosion of national sovereignty to become a larger bloc made them stronger? No, under the EU absolutely absurd mass-migration has occurred across the region and, in fact, was facilitated by the existence of the EU. With no Schengen zone and no EU, it couldn't have happened the way it did, nor continue the way it is. and almost all EU members are cracking down on 'far-right' resistance to their suicidal governments that all answer to the same bankers. Only one central bank for all Eurozone countries, by the way. Easier or harder to control? You decide, but your BRICS narrative is not supported by reality. It's a cudgel against the dollar to erode American hegemony, not a true competitor. It's all owned by the same people.
Good data reveal. Lots of unanswered questions. Who is who in the zoo is difficult to figure out when we lack the correct information
Even the correct information is always pointing figures in every direction. Who's who is nearly impossible to determine besides the bankers and their friends, but it's become my rule of thumb that, "whoever is in power long-term and not deposed is bad." It's universally applicable, but its correctness becomes much greater with the more power and money involved. It's sadly very applicable to churches and all religious 501c3's, though once again you need to look at what's at stake. A mega church is a much likelier venue of corrupting Zionist influence than a small, family-run community church of 50 people. There's virtually no exceptions to that rule in the last 100+ years on the large scale.
MUST READ! WORTH YOUR TIME. MOST IMPORTANT READ. SERIOUSLY.
"The hardest truth isn't just recognizing deception - it's accepting that we might never know the full story while still needing to act on what we can verify. What began as research into specific deceptions revealed something far more profound: While devastating physical wars rage in multiple regions, a deeper conflict unfolds silently across the planet - a war for the freedom of human consciousness itself. This is what World War III looks like - not just bombs and bullets, but the systematic engineering of human perception.
This pattern of building trust before redirection reflects a deeper system of control, operating on the ancient alchemical principle of Solve et Coagula - first dissolve (break apart), then coagulate (reform under control). The process is precise: When people begin recognizing institutional deception, natural coalitions form across traditional divides. Workers unite against central bank policies. Parents organize against pharmaceutical mandates. Communities resist corporate land grabs.
But watch what happens next - these unified movements get systematically dissolved. Consider how quickly unified resistance fractured after October 7th, how the trucker protests dissolved into partisan narratives. Each fragment splinters further - from questioning authority to competing theories, from united action to tribal infighting."
....
"The most dangerous aspect of managed opposition isn't the information it shares, but how it teaches learned helplessness disguised as hope."
Link:
https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/second-matrix-propaganda-programming