Free iPhones, Drowning in Debt, and Human Husbandry

by Mary W Maxwell

About 10 days ago there appeared on my laptop screen a small box that said “Want to get e free iPhone?” I knew better than to say Yes, but there was no way to delete it. I even tried turning the computer off, and put the power point off and on, but the little pop-up box survived!

So, to get rid of it, I tapped “OK.”

Since then, my Inbox is deluged with emails that seem, from the subject line, to be aimed at folks who gamble or are in debt.  For instance, there is often an offer of a free credit card, or a ‘gift’ from Myers. (I don’t mean Myers is to blame. I have not opened the emails — perhaps somebody else puts Myers in the subject line).

Why Put People in Debt?

Yesterday a very savvy business lady told me the same thing happened on her iPhone – an ad appeared which she couldn’t get rid of, and had to say ‘OK.’ That suggests that “they” are sending it to everyone – but this would defeat the purpose of targeting only the type of person who is vulnerable to debt.

Who is vulnerable? And what is the point of drowning folks in debt? I hereby make the unsubstantiated guess that “they” want to harm as many of us as possible and debt is just one more way of doing it (other ways being to feed us bad food, or give our kids a lousy education).

College admissions offices in America are overly ‘generous’ to the incoming student, lining her up for some amazing loans to pay the four-year tuition. As soon as she finishes her degree she has more than $100,000 debt staring her in the face.

And what is her solution?  If she can’t get a job with which to pay it, she is offered the chance to get an official deferment of the payment – by becoming a postgraduate student. For this, she will have to sign up for further loans!

In Oz, it is not so bad (yet) as the HECS debt does not come due UNTIL the person gets a job. And not just any job, but one that shows up on his income tax return as a salary of more than $52,000.

What Did Dr Day Foretell about Debt?

It’s usually instructive to go back to the 1969 predictions of Dr Richard Day. He said (speaking as a Rockefeller Insider):

“People would be encouraged to use credit to borrow and then also be encouraged to renege on their debt so they would destroy their own credit. People would have credit cards with the electronic strip on it and once they got used to that then it would be pointed out the advantage of having all of that combined into a single credit card, serving a single monetary system….”

(Of course that prediction came true very soon after 1969. Before that, most people had credit cards for particular department stores, rather than a ‘mastercard.’)

Day also mentioned:

“The next step would be to replace the single card with a skin implant in a place that would be convenient to the skin; for example your right hand or your forehead.”

The next thing you know all the debt-burdened people will be physically recognizable by their ‘chip.’ Will being a debtor render him more likely, or less likely, to be ‘bumped off?’ There is a plan to disappear certain people. I quote again from Dr Day’s lecture, as reported by Lawrence Dunegan, MD, in 1988:

“When the new system takes over, people will be expected to sign allegiance to it, indicating that they don’t have any reservations or holding back to the old system. ‘There just won’t be any room,’ he said, ‘for people who won’t go along.

We can’t have such people cluttering up the place’ so such people would be taken to special places, and here I don’t remember the exact words, but the inference I drew was that at these special places where they were taken, then they would not live very long. He may have said something like, ‘disposed of humanely.’”

Maybe instead of bumping off the debtors, the plan will be to selectively spare them. Once the overlords know who has the self-confidence to stay out of debt, they may wish to get rid of those ones, and keep the more docile ones around as servants.

Human Husbandry

Funny, isn’t it, to think of our overlords (the cabal) having to face the task of deciding what kind of people they want as their co-inhabitants of this Earth. Do they want simpletons? Do they want adults who cannot tie their own shoelaces?

I have often thought that for all their brilliance, the master planners seem to have skipped class the day the biology teacher explained the evolution of talent. It goes something like this:

In the farmer’s method of animal husbandry, you can artificially select some traits by keeping a record of individual traits. You want long-haired alpacas? Breed from the ones with long hair.

But this does not work for humans. Many talents appear randomly in the population. You can’t tell who is going to be a fabulous dancer or a whiz in mathematics.

You may try to bump off all who have a certain trait — or just prevent them from reproducing — but you’d still find some of that trait in later generations. You could bump off all the fabulous musicians and yet new ones would crop up. You could bump off all the debt-prone individuals but fail to weed out that trait.

Ee-yew-genics

This dilemma caused me to try to picture some decision-makers in the eugenics department (if that’s what they call it) actually specifying the kind of humans there should be in the middle of the 21^st century. Just imagine it.

As Australian philosopher John Passmore once said, when confronted with the notion that cloning meant there could be 98 exact copies of one person, it makes you want to go behind a tree and give up your dinner.

Imagine people like David Rockefeller (100 years old), Henry Kissinger (92), and Rupert Murdoch (84) having the power today to decide what a human should be.

Now see, boys, you shouldn’t have sent me that gambler’s message on my computer.  It has made me think more carefully about what you are getting up to….

–– Mary W Maxwell can be found at her website, maryWmaxwell.com