One more nail in the coffinThe Common Purpose inspired assault on heritage, including and especially archives, continues unabated. SQA has watched and reported on this process for seven years now.
The latest victim (with question marks still hanging over several local government record offices) is West Sussex County Record Office. This office has been stripped of staff despite its increasing stock and the record office's potential to contribute to learning for all ages and sections of the community but is now set to lose the post of County Archivist. It is undergoing a merger with the West Sussex Coroner and County Council's Registration Service, both of which teams will be co-located with the record office.
Retiring: County Archivist Richard Childs
The effect of this is not only to curtail the activities and functions of the record office but to blur the function of archives in the public mind and of course ultimately in the social engineers' plan to divert those intellectually curious, investigative and analytical members of the public away from their documentary heritage. This is because documentary heritage constitutes evidence of how our ancestors arrived at the democratic systems of our immediate past. By detaching the public from their heritage, in the broadest sense of the term, it becomes possible to mould a new mentality more accepting of the European Union and the New World Order (NWO).
While to those unititiated in the dark arts of the NWO this may seem far-fetched, the evidence is available on the Internet (at least until it becomes subject to fully-fledged censorship), * in abundance. SQA has previously noted this very same process at work in Iraq and elsewhere.
The strategy was first revealed to the popular English speaking audience by Dr. Richard Drayton, senior lecturer in history at Cambridge University, writing in The Guardian of 28 December 2005, in an article entitled "Shock, awe and Hobbes have backfired on America's neocons". We quote Drayton from our earlier blog: "it has been usual to explain the chaos and looting in Baghdad, the destruction of infrastructure, ministries, museums and the national library and archives, as caused by a failure of Rumsfeld's planning." But the German newspaper [Suddeutsche Zeitungquotes] quotes US soldiers as saying to looters "go in Ali Baba, it's all yours!" and Drayton explains this was a deliberate part of the US strategy which he says was "at least in part a mask for the destruction of the collective memory and modern state of a key Arab nation....to create a hunger for the occupier's supervision." Thus regime change is only a small part of the changes being enforced on Iraq, Afghanistan, Egypt and Libya. The end game is total subservience to the NWO.
The contributor of a valedictory letter in the Chichester Observer, Kim Leslie, West Sussex Record Office Education Officer 1970-2007, suggests West Sussex County Council is making these changes "so the grading and level of the [County Archivist] post fits neatly into new management structures being implemented throughout West Sussex County Council". Clearly he hasn't been reading SQA's previous reports. When yet another county council downgrades the post of chief archivist, reduces staff and blurs the boundaries between different services and in doing so simply repeats a process that has now cut a swathe across England, it doesn't take a genius to work out there is a national or even an international force at work.
This is not just a local internal reorganisation. This is made abundantly clear by virtue of the similarities between changes made in widely geographically separated authorities and can be glimpsed by even a cursory reference to Archon, the National Archives' online directory of record offices which includes job titles. Examples of such far flung offices are Kent, Suffolk and Cambridgeshire.
It would also appear the office's reliance on or appreciation of its worthy volunteers is not understood in the same context as the deliberate erosion of heritage. While West Sussex Record Office's volunteers no doubt significantly pre-date the so-called Big Society, it needs to be understood that the Big Society which many archivists now invoke to their advantage, is part and parcel of localism and progression towards the dismantlement of democratric society.
In their introductory notes to the policy document Building a Big Society, the Conservatives state:
"The new policies announced as part of the Big Society plan include: Neighbourhood army of 5,000 full-time, professional community organisers who will be trained with the skills they need to identify local community leaders, bring communities together, help people start their own neighbourhood groups, and give communities the help they need to take control and tackle their problems. This plan is directly based on the successful community organising movement established by Saul Alinsky in the United States and has successfully trained generations of community organisers, including President Obama." The policy document itself states: "In the US, the community organising endowment established by Saul Alinsky has trained generations of community organisers, including President Obama" (p.2) and again "In the US, generations of community organisers have been trained by Saul Alinsky’s Industrial Areas Foundation, which trained Barack Obama as a community organiser in Chicago" (p.6)
As if the words organisers, army, community, communities, leaders and control and the name President Obama don't give the game away, the mere mention of the name Saul Alinsky which is given such prominence as the inspiration of the policy, should do, although SQA supposes the great majority of the Conservative rank and file are clueless as to who he is. Well, SQA can guide them.
Writing in The Daily Telegraph of 1 April 2010 (and no, it's not an April Fool's joke) Gerald Warner blows the cover of Cameron's policy and exposes his inspiration as a paganistic, amoral revolutionary. He states: "What is going on here? Who is running the Cameronian Party – Common Purpose? How is it conceivable that even the most bland, politically correct, centre-right “conservative” party could derive its flagship policy from the thinking of Alinsky, whose seminal work Rules for Radicals was dedicated to Lucifer? If, as one suspects, this is the brainchild of Oliver Letwin, he needs to be escorted expeditiously to the seclusion of a padded boudoir."
And you thought local government was now operating in a difficult and dangerous financial climate and that county record offices need to contribute their share towards savings? (Even though local authorities still recruit politically correct jobsworths? Even though public sector spending is increasing and set to increase further?) Well think again. In fact, we have come full circle: the present financial situation is known to have been engineered by the global financial elite so as to bring forward their plans for world government. The argument that the need to make savings is the reason behind reorganisation is bogus. The object of the debt crisis is to provide a pretext for reorganisation, for political ends.
* For uncensored video of the common law arrest by the UK Independence Party of a judge acting outside his oath of office, see here and here
There never did, there never will, and there never can, exist a Parliament, or any description of men, or any generation of men, in any country, possessed of the right or the power of binding and controlling posterity to the "end of time," or of commanding for ever how the world shall be governed, or who shall govern it; and therefore all such clauses, acts or declarations by which the makers of them attempt to do what they have neither the right nor the power to do, nor the power to execute, are in themselves null and void.
Every age and generation must be as free to act for itself in all cases as the age and generations which preceded it. The vanity and presumption of governing beyond the grave is the most ridiculous and insolent of all tyrannies. Man has no property in man; neither has any generation a property in the generations which are to follow. The Parliament or the people of 1688, or of any other period, had no more right to dispose of the people of the present day, or to bind or to control them in any shape whatever, than the parliament or the people of the present day have to dispose of, bind or control those who are to live a hundred or a thousand years hence. Every generation is, and must be, competent to all the purposes which its occasions require.
It is the living, and not the dead, that are to be accommodated. When man ceases to be, his power and his wants cease with him; and having no longer any participation in the concerns of this world, he has no longer any authority in directing who shall be its governors, or how its government shall be organised, or how administered.
Thomas Paine, The Rights of Man, 1791-1792