Hunger Games and the New World Order: A High-Tech Police State Ruled by a Powerful Elite Who Seek to Keep the Masses in Poverty and Subjugation

“The Hunger Games”: A Glimpse at the Future?

April 5, 2012

Vigilant Citizen - The hit movie “The Hunger Games” takes place in a dystopian future where the poor and wretched masses live under the high-tech tyranny of a wealthy elite. Is the movie depicting the kind of society the elite is trying to establish for the New World Order? We’ll look at characteristics of the world presented in “The Hunger Games” and how they relate to plans for a New World Order.

Pushed by a gigantic marketing campaign, The Hunger Games did not take long to become a world-wide sensation, especially among teenagers and young adults. Sometimes referred to as the new Twilight, The Hunger Games has similar components to the previous book-to-movie craze (i.e. a young girl torn between two guys) but takes place in a very different context.

Set in a dystopian future (why is the future always “dystopian”?), The Hunger Games paints a rather grim picture of the world of tomorrow, whether it be from a social, economical or political point of view. In short, it is a big-brotherish nightmare where a rich elite thrives on the backs of a starving population. Meanwhile, the perversity and voyeurism of mass media is taken to absurd levels and is used by the government as a glue to keep its unjust social order intact.

Is The Hunger Games giving teenagers a glimpse of a not-too-distant future? It doesn’t take a crystal ball to see the elite are trying to take the world in that direction. Is the author Suzanne Collins communicating a strong anti-NWO message to the youth by showing its dangers, or is she getting the youth used to the idea?

Let’s look at the fictional, yet possible, future world of The Hunger Games.

Note: This article is about the movie and not the book series. The movie has been formatted in a different way and conveys a slightly different message.

The NWO for Teenagers

The Hunger Games takes place in a context that is strikingly on-par with descriptions of the New World Order (NWO) as planned by today’s global elite. One of the main characteristics of the New World Order is the dissolving of regular nation-states to form a single world government to be ruled by a central power. In The Hunger Games, this concept is fully represented as the action takes place in Panem, a totalitarian nation that encompasses the entire North-American territory. The United States and Canada have therefore merged into a single entity, a step that many predict that will happen before the full-on creation of the NWO.

In Panem, the concepts of democracy and freedom have disappeared from America to be replaced by a high-tech dictatorship based on surveillance, monitoring, mass-media indoctrination, police oppression, and a radical division of social classes.

The vast majority of the citizens of Panem live in third-world country conditions and are constantly subjected to poverty, famine and sickness. These difficult living conditions are apparently the result of a devastating event that engendered the complete economic collapse of North America. In District 12, home of the hero Katniss Everdeen, the locals live in conditions similar to the pre-industrial era where families of coal miners lived in makeshift shacks and eat rodents as meals.

While the masses look as if they are living in the 1800s, they are nevertheless subjugated to the high-tech rule of the Capitol, which uses technology to monitor, control and indoctrinate the masses. Surveillance cameras, RFID chips, and 3D holograms are abundantly used by the government to manipulate the will of a weak and uneducated population (although there are signs of solidarity and rebelliousness among the peasants). To preserve the fragile social order, the Capitol relies on a massive police force that is always ready to repress any kind of uprising. The workers are often rounded up in civilian camps where they are shown state-sponsored propaganda videos.

Panem is therefore a high-tech police state ruled by a powerful elite that seeks to keep the masses in poverty and subjugation.

As we’ve seen in previous articles on this site, all of these concepts are also thoroughly represented in other forms of media, as there appears to be a conscious effort to normalize the ideas of a high-tech police state as the only normal evolution of the current political system.

Living in sharp contrast to the proletariat, the elite in The Hunger Games inhabit the glistening Capitol city and indulge in all sorts of extravagances and fashion trends. This upper-echelon of society perceives the rest of the population as an inferior race to be ridiculed, tamed and controlled. All valuable resources have been vacuumed from the people living in the districts to profit the Capitol, creating a clear and insurmountable divide between Regular People and The Elite.

The concept of an opulent elite ruling over the dumbed-down and impoverished masses (thus making them easily manageable) is an important aspect of the New World Order, and it is clearly depicted in The Hunger Games. The government’s reliance on high-tech surveillance and mass media to keep the population in check is something we are already seeing. If we keep going in that direction, the world of The Hunger Games will soon become reality.

There is another concept important to the occult elite that is at the heart of The Hunger Games: Blood sacrifices to strike fear and gain power.

Blood Sacrifices for the Elite

The government of Panem created The Hunger Games in order to remind the masses of the “great treason” they have committed by engaging in a rebellion. As punishment for their insubordination, the twelve districts of Panem must offer to the Capitol one boy and one girl between the ages of 12 and 18 to be part of The Hunger Games. The teenagers must fight to the death in an outdoor arena in a Roman Gladiator-like event that is televised across the nation.

The rules of the Games reflect the elite’s contempt and total lack of respect for the masses. The name of the Games itself is a reminder of the state of perpetual starvation the lower class is purposely kept in by the rulers in order to better control them.

The boys and girls that are selected to take part in The Hunger Games are called “tributes”, a term that usually describes a payment rendered by a vassal to his lord and, thus, even reflects the servitude of the masses to its rulers. “Tributes” for The Hunger Games become the property of the state and are revoked of all their rights.

Since time immemorial, blood sacrifices were considered to be the highest form of “tribute” to gods and, on an occult level, were said to wield the most potent power to be tapped by rulers and sorcerers. The same way ancient Carthaginians sacrificed infants to the god Moloch, inhabitants of Panem sacrifice their children to the Capitol.  

The Hunger Games are therefore a modern version of these ancient rituals that the masses had to participate in to avoid the wrath of their superiors. The entire nation of Panem is forced to watch the sacrificial ritual that takes place in the Capitol, stirring up fear, anger and blood lust within them, amplifying the power of the ritual. We’ve seen in previous articles that the deaths of specific people (Whitney Houston, Heath Ledger, Amy Winehouse) become such a media event that they are, in fact, mega-rituals that entire nations participate in. The Hunger Games reflect this concept of highly publicized mega-rituals.

In The Hunger Games, the ritualistic death of young people chosen from the masses is sold as a sporting event, a nation-wide celebration that is packaged as a reality show. Not only do the poor people participate in these demeaning events, they even cheer for their favorites. Why do they accept all of this? One of the reasons is that mass media can get people to accept anything … if it is entertaining.

Appealing to the Basest Instincts

The games are broadcast to the nation in the form of a reality-show, complete with TV hosts who analyze the action, interview the tributes and judge their performance. The tributes are so indoctrinated in this culture that they readily accept the rules of the game and, in turn, are fully willing to start killing to win the Games. The masses also actively participate in the event, cheering for their district’s representatives, even though the entire event celebrates the sacrifice of their own.

This reflects a sad but true fact concerning mass media: Any kind of message can reach people if it manages to capture their attention. There are two things that automatically, almost irresistibly, grab our attention: Blood and sex, the remnants of our primal instincts. The sheer violence of the event grabs the attention of the masses, who forget that the Games serve as a reminder of the peoples’ servitude to its elite.

This concept is already well-known and fully exploited in today’s mass media, as elite-sponsored messages are constantly sold to consumers as being “entertainment.” The Hunger Games, therefore, aptly portray the role of media in the manipulation of public opinion. Will the movie help young people realize this fact?

At one point in The Hunger Games, the death of a little girl shocked the people to a point that it brought a brief moment of lucidity and solidarity as the kill highlighted the atrocity of the Games. The live broadcasting of the death lead to a violent uprising in her district as the locals realized that they were willing participants in something terrible. The uprising was quickly quelled, however, by the ever-present police force of the state.

Furthermore, in order to prevent further social trouble, the producers of the show introduced a new element to the show: Love between Katniss Everdeen and Peeta Mellark, the girl and the boy from District 12. By introducing love (and, by extension, sex) into the show, the producers managed to quell the masses and brought them back to their usual state of silent stupor.

This part of the movie reflects how mass media is used by the powers that be today. The worldwide reach of The Hunger Games series itself proves that stories which cleverly feature the ingredients of sex and violence are bound to get people hooked. And even though The Hunger Games seems to be denouncing the perversity of violence in mass media, it sure brings more of it into movie theaters.

Desensitizing to a New Type of Violence

While there is no shortage of violence in Hollywood, The Hunger Games movie crosses a boundary that is rarely seen in movies: Violence by minors and towards minors. In this PG-13 movie we see kids aged between 12 and 18 violently stabbing, slashing, strangling, shooting and breaking the necks of other children – scenes that are seldom seen in Hollywood movies. While it is surely a way for the movie to grab the attention of the movie’s target audience (which happens to be teenagers aged 12 to 18), The Hunger Games brings to the forefront a new form of violence that was previously deemed too disturbing to portray in movies. But in the particular kill-or-be-killed scenario of The Hunger Games, the viewers easily go beyond this psychological barrier and find themselves yelling stuff at the movie, like “Come on, Katniss, take your bow and shoot that vicious little f**cker in the head!”

In Conclusion

The Hunger Games is set in world that is exactly what is described to be the New World Order: A rich and powerful elite, an exploited and dumbed-down mass of people, the dissolving of democracies into police state entities, high-tech surveillance, mass media used for propaganda, and a whole lot of blood rituals.

There is indeed nothing optimistic in the dystopian future described in The Hunger Games. Even human dignity is revoked as the masses are forced to watch their own children killing each other as if they were caged animals. That being said, there is little to no difference between movie goers who watch the movie The Hunger Games and the masses in the movie who witness the cruelty of the Games. Both are willing participants in an event that portrays the sacrifice of their own under the amused eye of the elite. Furthermore, one can argue that the movie accomplishes the same functions as the Games in the movie: Distracting the masses with blood and sex while reminding them of the elite’s power.

Is The Hunger Games attempting to warn an apathetic youth of the danger of allowing the current system to devolve into a totalitarian nightmare? Or is it simply programming them to perceive the coming of a New World Order as an inevitability? That question is up for debate. But reading what is being said in the mass media about The Hunger Games, it seems there is an even more important question up for debate: Are you Team Peeta or Team Gale?

Comments:

"If you were to read the books you would see that The Hunger Games are a brilliant piece of rebelious and revolutionary narrative. Far from desensitizing kids and teens to the horrors of elitism and violence, the books actually raise extremely important issues about power, voyeurism, mind control, and thinking for yourself. I wish you could have mentioned how desperately needed the type of dialogue this movie inspires is in this day and age. For real - the themes dealt with here are leagues deeper than most of Hollywood's drivel. If a viewer honestly can't see any deeper meaning behind the narrative here, chances are they probably have trouble finding deeper meaning in any place in life. Seriously - the type of person who could sit in a theater for two hours WATCHING AN ALLEGORICAL MOVIE ABOUT ELITISM AND THE POWER TO DEFINE REALITY and somehow never engage in critical thought or examination (yes, teenagers are capable of this) probably is conditioned by all kinds of things in life. Anyone could read 1984 and never get much of a deeper meaning out of it - it's all about individual culpability to think." - Jacob, April 2012, “The Hunger Games”: A Glimpse at the Future?

"I think it's an uplifting story about how to overcome the NWO. If you haven't read the other two books than the first movie is certainly a bleak, dystopian, violent world. But that's just setting the stage for the revolution that takes place later. It doesn't contain blatant symbolism like some other pop culture media. It's just a story that should serve as a warning much like 1984 or Animal Farm. I though the movie, and the books especially, we're a brilliant statement against the NWO. The studio that produced it doesn't care what message it contains because it's gonna make them a boat load of cash and most people who see it don't get the message because they are too stupid or blind. If anything they are blatantly shoving the answer and key to destroying the NWO right into our faces and laughing at us." - Sledgehammer, April 2012, “The Hunger Games”: A Glimpse at the Future?

"The books are strongly AGAINST the elite (the capitol) and they make this VERY clear. The movie, on the other hand, did not, so I can see where you are coming from. Perhaps Hollywood took out some of those important points to fit their agenda or maybe it was just because it was viewed and not written, but who knows. But please, read the books, and not just the first one because they are better understood when read as a whole. They are, again, completely opposed to the NWO/elite and are brilliantly written." - Jackie, April 2012, “The Hunger Games”: A Glimpse at the Future?

"I am very glad this article came up. VC hit the nail on the head with this one. Those that are making comments about the movie not reflecting the book are missing the point of this article, and I feel are choosing to ignore the elements/agenda this movie is displaying because they've read the books and feel so connected to the story and characters. If VC did an article on Twilight it would be the same type of reaction. Are you really going to eat a piece of candy that has been dropped in the gutter because it was washed off and placed back in its wrapper? I saw commercials for the movie, I saw this big campaign for the movie well before it came it out, and I decided let me check this out for myself, so I read the synopsis (with major spoilers) for all three books and I came to the same conclusion this article came to. Now, how is that? The elite are counting on using peoples' emotions to get them so wrapped up in a small part of the puzzle that they don't notice the bigger picture. For those of you who have the read books and are so wrapped up in them, how it's such a good story, how you love the characters, how this is supposed to be about hope in the end, let me ask you: Who ended being the 'real' bad guys in the story in the end, in the third book? You don't have to answer that because its a rhetorical question, but think about that, and then ask yourself, 'Isn't that disturbing?' I'm not going to ignore the dystopian setting and the child sacrifice just because in the end there's some semblance of hope. Wake up." - secret ninja, April 2012, “The Hunger Games”: A Glimpse at the Future?

Former Hitler Youth Whistleblower Warns Americans

You must never forget the warning recorded for posterity by Martin Niemoeller, the Lutheran minister who lived in Hitler's Germany during the 1930s and 1940s. His words echo down to us over succeeding decades:

"In Germany they came first for the Communists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist. Then they came for the Catholics, and I didn't speak up because I was a Protestant. Then they came for me, and by that time no one was left to speak up."

'America's Nazi Future': Former Hitler Youth Whistleblower Warns Americans

December 28, 2011

2012sprint - In this shocking interview, former Hitler Youth member and World War Two veteran Hilmar Von Campe warns that America's collective turn away from God is greasing the skids for the state to take over as the ultimate authority, threatening a repeat of the rise of National Socialism, as he warns that the Obama White House and the United States government in general now more closely embrace the political doctrines of the Nazis than they do those of the founding fathers.

Von Campe explains how when he returned from the war he was determined to find out how the Germans, a relatively cultured and civil people before the rise of the Nazis, could have allowed a monster like Hitler to implement the Third Reich. Von Campe attributes the fall of Germany to the Nazis partly to "Godlessness," a collapse in moral standards, and the German people acting contrary to God's desires.

Based on this revelation, he has created a formula to try and prevent countries from succumbing to tyranny in future.

Von Campe explains how children were indoctrinated by the state and the education system to uphold Nazi beliefs and then spy on and inform on their parents if they didn't follow suit, as a way of breaking up families and enforcing a single ideology. He also reveals how the Nazis insisted upon discussion about religion and God being kept out of society, in the interests of ensuring that the people could not call on a higher authority than the state and therefore were less inclined to resist the Nazi takeover.

Von Campe warns that the process of taking God out of society and education, and the accelerating erosion of America's Christian foundations bears startling similarities to how National Socialism established itself in 1930's Germany, while chillingly pointing out that the US Senate, House and the Obama White House now more closely resembles the Nazis than it does the founding fathers.

"I cannot understand how the American people can tolerate a thing like this," says Von Campe, making reference to the over 50 million babies that have been killed through abortion in the United States, while drawing other parallels to how the US is beginning to mirror totalitarian states. The only way to change the direction America is heading, warns Von Campe, is to reject immorality and embrace "absolute moral standards, absolute honesty, absolute purity, absolute unselfishness and absolute love."

We urge all our subscribers to watch this chilling interview right now. Not a member? Please click here to subscribe and get instant access to this interview, along with thousands of hours of material, including daily access to the live video stream and video archives of The Alex Jones Show.

Ex-Hitler Youth's Warning to America

'Every day brings this nation closer to Nazi-style totalitarian abyss'

The fuel that fired the Nazi's actions was a a herd mentality.

November 13, 2008

WorldNetDaily - Because it has abandoned moral absolutes and its historic Christian faith, the U.S. is moving closer to a Nazi-style totalitarianism, warns a former German member of the Hitler Youth in a new book.

"Every day brings this nation closer to a Nazi-style totalitarian abyss," writes Hilmar von Campe, now a U.S. citizen, and author of "Defeating the Totalitarian Lie: A Former Hitler Youth Warns America."

Von Campe has founded the national Institute for Truth and Freedom to fight for a return to constitutional government in the U.S. – a key, he believes, to keeping America free.

"I lived the Nazi nightmare, and, as the old saying goes, 'A man with an experience is never at the mercy of a man with an argument,'" writes von Campe. "Everything I write is based on my personal experience in Nazi Germany. There is nothing theoretical about my description of what happens when a nation throws God out of government and society, and Christians become religious bystanders. I don't want to see a repetition. The role of God in human society is the decisive issue for this generation. My writing is part of my life of restitution for the crimes of a godless government, of the evil of which I was a part."

Von Campe grew up under the Nazis, served in the Hitler Youth and fought against the Red Army in the Yugoslavian theater as a tank gunner in the German army. He was captured at the end of the war and escaped five months later from a prisoner of war camp in Communist Yugoslavia.

"It took me a long time to understand and define the nature of National Socialism," says von Campe. "And, unfortunately, their philosophy continues to flourish under different labels remaining a menace to America and free human society."

He writes:

"The most painful part of defining National Socialism was to recognize my own moral responsibility for the Nazi disaster and their crimes against humanity. It boiled down to accepting the truth that 'as I am, so is my nation,' and realizing that if every German was like me, it was no wonder that the nation became a cesspool of gangsters. This realization is as valid today for any person in any nation as it was then, and it is true for America and every American now."

Von Campe's message is that political freedom and democratic rules alone are not sufficient to govern humanity justly.

"Democratic procedures can be subverted and dishonest politicians are like sand in the gearbox, abundant, everywhere and destructive," he writes. "What I see in America today is people painting their cabins while the ship goes down. Today in America we are witnessing a repeat performance of the tragedy of 1933 when an entire nation let itself be led like a lamb to the Socialist slaughterhouse. This time, the end of freedom is inevitable unless America rises to her mission and destiny."

Von Campe says he sees spiritual parallels among Americans and his childhood Germany.

"The silence from our pulpits regarding the moral collapse of American society from within is not very different from the silence that echoed from the pulpits in Germany toward Nazi policies," he explains. "Our family lived through the Nazi years in Germany, an experience typical of millions of Europeans regardless of what side they were on. We paid a high price for the moral perversions of a German government, which excluded God and His Commandments from their policies. America must not continue following the same path to destruction, but instead heed the lessons of history and the warning I am giving."

Specifically, von Campe warns Americans their political leaders are on the wrong footing, "denying our cultural and traditional roots based on our unique Constitution and Christian orientation as a nation. Christians don't understand their mission."

Read More...

How Humans Have Genetically Programmed Incentives to Get into a Herd Mentality

“Of course the people don’t want war. But after all, it’s the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it’s always a simple matter to drag the people along whether it’s a democracy, a fascist dictatorship, a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders.” - German, Hermann Goering, a Nazi leader and high-ranking general during World War II, stated at the Nuremberg War Crimes Trials

Almost every day, police in Charlotte are getting ready for the Democratic National Convention. Almost every one of Charlotte-Mecklenburg's 1,700 officers are going through three days of intensive riot training. “It's a very controlled, measured response with a lot of practice,” Deputy Chief Harold Medlock said.Medlock is overseeing the training, which also includes hundreds of officers from nearby police and sheriff's departments. It’s all very carefully choreographed. There's a reason, for example, why they would move half a step at a time toward a group of protesters. “The point of some of the tactics and the maneuvers that we use is to allow folks to have the time to do what we're asking them to do,” Medlock said.Chanting is part of the plan, too.“We want them to hear us as we move and do the things that we need to do, so you'll hear a lot of verbalization from our officers and one of the things you'll hear is, ‘Move back!’” Medlock said. - Local Police Receive Federal Funding for Riot Training, WSOC-TV/TV6, October 19, 2011

June 16, 2009

New Scientist - Hitler and Mussolini both had the ability to bend millions of people to their fascist will. Now evidence from psychology and neurology is emerging to explain how tactics like organised marching and propaganda can work to exert mass mind control.

Scott Wiltermuth of Stanford University in California and colleagues have found that activities performed in unison, such as marching or dancing, increase loyalty to the group.

“It makes us feel as though we’re part of a larger entity, so we see the group’s welfare as being as important as our own,” he says.

Wiltermuth’s team separated 96 people into four groups who performed these tasks together: listening to a song while silently mouthing the words, singing along, singing and dancing, or listening to different versions of the song so that they sang and danced out of sync. In a later game, when asked to decide whether to stick with the group or strive for personal gain, those in the non-synchronised group behaved less loyally than the rest (Psychological Science, vol 20, p 1).

Psychologist Jonathan Haidt at the University of Virginia in Charlottesville thinks this research helps explain why fascist leaders, amongst others, use organised marching and chanting to whip crowds into a frenzy of devotion to their cause, though these tactics can be used just as well for peace, he stresses. Community dances and group singing can ease local tension, for example – a theory he plans to test experimentally (Journal of Legal Studies, DOI: 10.1086/529447).

Meanwhile, the powerful unifying effects of propaganda images are being explored by Charles Seger at Indiana University at Bloomington. His team primed students with pictures of their university – college sweatshirts or the buildings themselves – then asked how highly they scored on different emotions, such as pride or happiness. The primed students gave a strikingly similar emotional profile, in contrast with non-primed students (Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, DOI: 10.1016/j.jesp.2008.12.004).

Interest in the idea of a herd mentality has been renewed by work into mirror neurons – cells that fire when we perform an action or watch someone perform a similar action. It suggests that our brains are geared to mimic our peers.

“We are set up for ‘auto-copy’,” says Haidt.

Neurological evidence seems to back this idea. Vasily Klucharev, at the Donders Centre for Cognitive Neuroimaging in Nijmegen, the Netherlands, found that the brain releases more of the reward chemical dopamine when we fall in line with the group consensus (Neuron, vol 61, p 140). His team asked 24 women to rate more than 200 women for attractiveness. If a participant discovered their ratings did not tally with that of the others, they tended to readjust their scores. When a woman realised her differing opinion, fMRI scans revealed that her brain generated what the team dubbed an “error signal”. This has a conditioning effect, says Klucharev: it’s how we learn to follow the crowd.

Read More...

The Mind-numbing Coverage of the Royal Wedding Played into Our Collective Serf Mentality

The Mind-numbing Stupidity of the Royal Wedding

The crowds who gathered outside Buckingham Palace on Friday to watch the newlyweds kiss on a balcony were good-natured. But London has also seen large protests recently against the Conservative-led government's austerity plans, which aim to cut 310,000 government jobs and raise university tuition fees. Some of the anger at the plans have been directed at the royals — Prince Charles and his wife Camilla were shaken up when their Rolls-Royce was attacked in December when a student protest turned violent. - William, Kate praised for being serious, Associated Press, May 1, 2011

April 29, 2011

Salon.com - So Prince William and Kate Middleton, now Duchess of Cambridge, are married. They exchanged vows before the Archbishop of Canterbury at Westminster Abbey on the morning of April 29, 2011, with planes roaring overhead and Union Jacks waving and hundreds of thousands of people in the London streets and millions upon millions upon millions of people watching on international television.

"It really is something special," anchor Diane Sawyer said on ABC a few minutes after their first public kiss. Then she added a few minutes later, in a rundown of factoids, "He knows how to line dance!"

The moment capped hours of continuous coverage on every major broadcast network and cable news channel. The news organizations never cut away except for commercials. And they managed to forgo those breaks when it seemed as if something exciting, or "exciting," was about to happen -- such as the newly-hitched royal couple's first kiss, which was so brief that the TV organizations played it back in slow motion, and their second kiss, which presumably was an attempt to improve on the first one.

"I'm a hard-hearted old cynic, but I must admit I did shed a tear," said ABC's Buckingham Palace correspondent Nick Watt, who then stopped just short of taking credit for the chant in the crowd that pushed William and Kate to kiss a second time. "I'd like to think I played a small part in that," Watt said, beaming.

I wish the royal couple the very best. They seem like nice people, truly. Fellow human beings, at the very least. And that's why I hope that when in the unlikely event that they ever read this, that they won't take it personally when I say that the coverage of this whole ceremony and its run-up was revoltingly obsequious and almost entirely devoid of news value, and so altogether bubble-brained that it makes me think that if there is such a thing as karmic payback for wrong priorities, we're due for some major trauma.

As you read this, the big three morning shows -- "Good Morning America," "Today" and "The CBS Morning News" -- are continuing to re-hash, analyze and replay the ceremony on tape while going live to various correspondents and experts in England and elsewhere. The morning shows usually run two hours -- more if an affiliate takes their built-in spillover, but for the sake of argument let's just say they did two hours' worth, and add that to the overnight coverage, which ran four hours in some cases, bringing the total to six. And then let's ask ourselves this question: When's the last time the top guns of the American electronic media covered an event, any event, for six hours straight without any significant interruption, at any hour of the day or night?

It's been so long I can't remember offhand. The countdown to the invasion of Iraq in 2003, maybe....though I was a TV critic then, too, and I don't recall the medium's biggest and most important outlets spending so much time on that one gravely important topic to the exclusion of other news. They certainly don't do that kind of thing for the State of the Union Address, or for the president's meeting with any significant head of state, or for Congressional debates about urgent issues of foreign or domestic policy, even for the funerals of our most significant and beloved (or despised) leaders. American presidential inaugurations don't rate that many nonstop, laser-focused hours. Even the run-up to our own annual homegrown orgies of celebrity worship, the SuperBowl and the Oscars, don't go on for four to six hours on every major broadcast network and cable news outlet simultaneously, to the exclusion of everything else. This sort of thing is mostly just not done -- except when the royal family of the United Kingdom, our onetime estranged national parent, adds a new member via nuptials.

This, apparently, is what it takes to get the media's undivided attention: the marriage between two people who are politically powerless, and who spend their waking lives as designated fetish objects for the United Kingdom's interested citizenry, for Anglophiles the world over, and for the celebrity-fixated media. Our collective Ken and Barbie dolls.

We love looking at their clothes and shoes and cars and security details and following tabloid reports of their social events and private miseries and misadventures. We comb newsstands and Google for photos of the latest royal baby.

This, according to TV news, is what we really, really, really, really, really care about.

"Maybe this is the year of the commoner," Walters said, sometime around 6 AM Eastern, as the Bentleys were pulling up to Westminster Abbey and the wedding party was filing in.

The remark capped a list of royals from different countries who had married non-royals, but it seemed like an apt designation any way you parsed it. The royal wedding appeals to romantics, to fans of all things English, to people-watchers and to aficionados of fine clothes and uniforms, yes.

But there's something deeper at play, and it's a bit frightening: a marrow-deep urge to put down the plow, wash the muck from under our fingernails and go worship our designated social superiors; to queue up on the streets or gather in our living rooms in the wee, small hours for a glimpse of a passing motorcade or a flash of a white gown or a white glove or a red uniform tunic, then breathlessly tell others,

"I saw them! I saw the prince and duchess! I, a humble serf, saw them and was ennobled by their presence, by the grace of almighty God!"

Queen Elizabeth II, the Largest Individual Landowner on Earth

Originally Published on February 27, 2007

Who Owns the World - Queen Elizabeth II, head of state of the United Kingdom and of 31 other states and territories, is the legal owner of about 6,600 million acres of land, one sixth of the earth’s non ocean surface. She is the only person on earth who owns whole countries, and who owns countries that are not her own domestic territory.

This land ownership is separate from her role as head of state and is different from other monarchies where no such claim is made – Norway, Belgium, Denmark etc...

Her main holdings are 2,467 million acres in Canada (the 2nd largest country on earth), 1,900 million acres in Australia (the 7th largest country on earth), 114 million acres in the Papua New Guinea, 66 million acres in New Zealand, and 60 million acres in the UK. She is the world’s largest landowner by a significant margin.

Largest Five Personal Landowners on Earth:
Queen Elizabeth II (6,600 million acres)
King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia (553 million acres)
King Bhumibol of Thailand (126 million acres)
King Mohammed IV of Morocco (113 million acres)
Sultan Quaboos of Oman (76 million acres)

The next largest landowner is the Russian state, with an overall ownership of 4,219 million acres, and a direct ownership comparable with the Queen’s land holding of 2,447 million acres. The 3rd largest landowner is the Chinese state, which claims all of Chinese land, about 2,365 million acres. The 4th largest landowner on earth is the Federal Government of the United States, which owns about one third of the land of the USA, 760 million acres. The fifth largest landowner on earth is the King of Saudi Arabia with 553 million acres.

Largest Government Landowners on Earth:
Russian State (4,219 million acres)
Chinese State (2,365 million acres)
U.S. Federal Government (760 million acres)

The Royal Wedding Farce

April 30, 2011

levi-tarot.co.uk - Come on people! Did you really think I would pass this opportunity up?

Tomorrow, is a day of national embarrassment for the UK as the rest of the world looks on and laughs at the many British flag waving Idiots and Morons who think they are being Patriotic.

I don't know whether to laugh or cry for the flag wavers. I am torn between pity and scorn for them.

Queen of England and her dysfunctional brood of weirdos should be tried for treason and betrayal of the British People.

Here we are in a state of hardship. Governments screwing families into the ground with Austerity Measures yet can conjure up billions to drop "Bombs" on Libya [maybe a hidden clue there].

Then along comes the so called Royal Family who make the Addams Family and the Munsters look normal.

There they will be, ramming their absolute wealth down the throats of the poor and downtrodden. Many of which will be flag waving and cheering the Royal Brats. Dumb is not the word. Imbeciles maybe?

Have you seen the unwashed camping out already? They have their little toy crowns on their heads too! Must be dole day on Friday. Lazy bastards. Get a life!

The public are paying for it. Not one penny will come out of skinflint Queen Lizzies bottomless pockets because she has very short arms. Richest female entity on the planet too!

Yet the very public who she has betrayed on many occasions will be out in their droves.

Poor dumb little feckers is what they are. If they only knew about this brood of Satanic spawn of freeloaders.

Patriotic? What a bleeding joke. Even tradition is being broken because the Royal parasites have moved the goal posts. Apparently, if the first born is a girl, she is entitled to the throne. Something going on there then. Maybe its because the male Windsors are all mental cases like old Dumbo ears Prince Charles who preaches eco values while traveling by private jet and train to spread his message and polluting the world in the progress.

Let's not forget the darling Queen Mother. The nation's favourite horse-gambling junkie who kept her vast properties heated all year round even though she was not in residence. At the expense of the taxpayer of course. May she rot in Hell! Amen!

Queen Liz is just as frugal. As I reminded recently, she applied to the poor fund for help with the electricity bill for the Palace. Cheeky tight-fisted cow! "Poor Fund" set up for the section of the public who struggle to pay utility bills like old age pensioners and such. The biggest land owner in the world with vast riches! Penny pinching bitch is what she is.

Let's face it folks. I am only writing the truth here, not making it up. There are many things I am not allowed to say in public but, trust me, those in the PB or those who have done their own research will know what the Royals really are.

Furthermore I can guarantee that they and myself will not be flag-waving like demented morons.

The United States and Britain in Bible Prophecy

Read More...