Sunday, November 20, 2011

The "Occupy Wall Street" Movement: Here IS The Risk - "Occupy" Ends Up Doing The Bidding Of The Ruling Elite!

From the moment the first "Occupy Wall Street" or OWS, crowds gathered in New York City a few months back, and then slowly spread to other cities in the United States, and now to major cities around the world... I had hoped that the people in these protests would stay the course and actually force exposure of the liars in Government, how the financial system is run by evil and sinister meglomaniacs, and would push for exposure of real truths; such as the truth about who was behind the attacks of 9-11.   But the movement has not gained the desired traction that it should have by now, and there has always been the danger that it may in fact become, or has already been, hijacked by the very forces of evil that the protesters are trying to defeat!

Well, to show again how the OWS movement may in fact already have been hijacked by the very evils that they are protesting against, I want to present the following article written by Patrick Henningsen, who writes for the website: "Global Research" at  and comes here courtesy of my friend Noor at    The article is entitled: "Here's the risk: Occupy ends up doing the bidding of the Global Elite".  I have several of my own comments to follow:


By Patrick Henningsen
November 17, 2011

History shows us it is easy for 'grassroots' campaigns to become co-opted by the very interests they are fighting against.

A 21st-century grassroots movement faces many pitfalls. This was as true back in 1968 as it is today. It could be infiltrated by law enforcement and intelligence agencies, or co-opted by a major party.

As the state continues to creep further into our lives, activists can expect that it will use all its resources ~ not just the violent reaction seen in New York overnight, but also its agents, informants and surveillance packages ~ in its effort to monitor both sides of any serious social debate.

Even bleaker, however, is the possibility that the movement was actually planned and launched by the very establishment activists thought they were waging a battle against in the first place. The larger the movement, the more interested a major party becomes in absorbing it into either the left or the right side of the current two-party paradigm.

The sudden emergence of America's Tea Party movement in 2007 is a good example. Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul, its inventor, used it as a springboard to highlight libertarian and constitutional issues during his 2008 campaign. Soon after, it was co-opted by key political and media influencers from the US right wing, associating itself less with a libertarian manifesto, and more with emerging figures within the Republican establishment. Now it is has morphed into nothing more than a block of voters whom the Republican Party can rely to strike a deal with during an election cycle.

Arguably, the Occupy Wall Street movement has already drifted into the shadow of the Democratic party ~ with a number of Democratic establishment figures from the top down endorsing it.

The Democrats' own media fundraising and media machine, Move On, has visibly adopted the cause.

Like the Tea Party before it, the Occupy block would swing a close election during a national two-party race, functioning as a pressure-release valve for any issue too radical for the traditional platform.

Alongside this is the threat of being infiltrated. Scores of declassified documents, along with accounts from veteran activists, will reveal many stories of members who were actually undercover police, FBI or M15.

In the worst cases of infiltration, undercover agents have acted as provocateurs. Such incidents normally serve to radicalize a movement, thus demonizing it in the eyes of society and effectively lessening its wider political appeal.

Although the global Occupy movement has branched out in an open-source way, many of its participants and spectators might be completely unaware of who actually launched it. Upon investigation, what one finds is a daisy chain of non-profit foundations, all tied together by hundreds of millions per year in operational funding.

The original call for Occupy Wall Street came from non-profit international media foundationAdbusters. Like many non-profits, Adbusters receives its funding and operating capital from other behind-the-scenes organizations.

According to research conducted by watchdog Activistcash, Adbusters takes a significant portion of its money from the Tides Foundation, an organization partnered with one of Wall Street billionaire oligarch George Soros's foundations, the Open Society Institute.

Although mostly hidden from the public eye, all major foundations and professional thinktanks undertake research and host training seminars, which are used to influence certain public and foreign policies, and thus, must have a political agenda. Theirs is the venue of choice for activities that cannot officially be conducted on the government clock.

Freedom House is another of Soros's Open Society partners. It supports the Centre for Applied Nonviolent Action and Strategies (Canvas), an organization started by Serbians Ivan Marovic and Srdja Popovic.

After playing a pivotal role in the CIA-backed deposing of Serbia's Slobodan Milosevic, the western media hailed Marovic as a democratic genius, but it came out later that his programme came out of an elite Boston thinktank's "regime change" manual, From Dictatorship to Democracy, written by Harvard professor Gene Sharp.

Sharp's book is a bible of the colour revolutions ~ a "regime change for dummies". His Albert Einstein Institution has received funds from the National Endowment for Democracy and the Open Society Foundations, and his work serves as a template for western-backed opposition leaders in soft coups all around the world.

There are also reports of Canvas activity during the early days of Occupy Wall Streetincluding a video of Marovic himself addressing the general assembly. Currently, Canvas are touting their recent role in working with Egyptian and Tunisian protesters from as early as 2009, teaching skills that helped bring down their presidents and spark regional revolt.

When the dust settles and it's all said and done, millions of Occupy participants may very well be given a sober lesson under the heading of "controlled opposition". In the end, the Occupy movement could easily end up doing the bidding of the very elite globalist powers that they were demonstrating against to begin with.

To avoid such an outcome, it's important for a movement to have a good knowledge of history and the levers of power in the 21st century.

Patrick Henningsen is speaking on Deep Politics and the Revolutions Business at Tent City University at St Paul's on Sunday, 20 November at 4pm

NTS Notes:  As I have already posted many times in this blog about this Occupy Wall Street movement, there has always been something not right about the movement in the first place.  

My first "red flag" warning that something was terribly wrong with the entire OWS movement came when there was evidence that the person who I do consider the ultimate evil in the world today, George Soros, was actually bankrolling the protest movement!   The evidence is again reflected in this Global Research article....

Readers, there is absolutely nothing wrong with the concept of standing up against evil and even taking to the streets to protest against the criminals who are out to destroy our freedoms. The trouble arises when these very protests are hijacked by the evil people that they are supposedly against, and then turned into a "movement" towards more sinister goals!   

It is again important that the people who are out there protesting for the right causes make sure that they stay focused on their goals and not be led astray to suddenly make changes that are not for the better but for more of our enslavement. 

More to come



Same old same old said...

Thanks for this article, NTS.

Couple of observations:

". . . the current two-party paradigm."

The current "two-party/one-hidden-dictatorship" paradigm, more likely. Which is the political system of the West, for at least the past one hundred years.

--- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---

". . . it's important for a movement to have a good knowledge of history."

So true (but they never do). Start here:

This short book, The Nameless War by Archibald Maule Ramsay, outlines the real story behind earlier "Occupy" movements, which were instigated by the usual suspects to boost their strangle hold on the world, and led to the slaughter of tens of millions . . . The English Revolution, the French Revolution and the Russian Revolution.

--- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---

Political researcher Adrian Salbuchi provides a good overview of the main plot behind all these and much more, here:

-- --

Franklin Ryckaert said...

For such movements to succeed "spontaniety" alone is not enough.You must have a clear ideology,a clear leadership and also a service to maintain order and to detect and remove infiltrators.If you don't have that, either the movement will peter out, achieving nothing,or it will be coopted, achieving the wrong objective.Since Soros is present in the background,the latter threatens to happen.
If these people cannot even pronounce the name "Rothschild",what can we expect from them?

Anonymous said...

Another legitimate concern is that faked videos with staged acting are apparently being uploaded to Youtube claiming to be "live" reports on OWS. Because they seem real, they are being posted as "real news" on alt news websites and probably MSM TV news, too. No discernment is being made on their validity as long as the videos represent whatever message the pro-OWS protesters and media sources want. Since the MSM and alt news are both giving total attention to the OWS movement, that is a real red flag. Since when does the Zionist run MSM news media and alleged truth revealing alt news media agree on reality? Much credibiltiy for news stories being carefully scripted and acted out through the years can be found at Not all posted there is believable, but more is than isn't. Controlled opposition experts have been at work for years making the public into pliable, useful idiots to support destructive agendas.