The Poor-Man's Guide to Modernity - Independent Media Center

I am sorry to report here that there is no known documentation existing on planet earth in the
annals of public archives which records any such cataclysmic event where that elusive power
could have disappeared. If one exists in secret classified archives, like aliens abducting them
off the face of the planet, I do not possess such powers to access those classified documents,
let alone unlock them of their public relations baggage. We shall just wait for Wikileaks to let
us know if UFO-Abduction is indeed that elusive cause of their sudden vanishing from the face
of the earth. Julian Assange has already hinted: “it is worth noting that in yet-to-be-published
parts of the cablegate archive there are indeed references to UFOs.”
In the meantime, back here on earth outside the Plato's cave, by the sheer force of inevitable
logic, I must rationally conclude that such a power, Foundation-X, still exists right here on
earth. And, since I have also not found, despite vigorous search in libraries and on the web,
any evidence that the Foundation-X ownership surreptitiously changed hands except from
generation to generation within the same DNA cess-pool, and as admitted by the scions now
wielding the baton themselves, then, whomsoever were the owners of Foundation-X in 1946,
and in 1917, are still the owners today.
Casa de Rothschild!
Let me know if this sufficiently constitutes Jeff Blankfort's requirement for evidence: “if you
have any direct evidence with unimpeachable sources that the Rothschilds are running
everything”
Now let me briefly examine the legal requirement for evidence in the United States. The
following definition is excerpted from my Editorial: Some Dare Call it Conspiracy! Are you
among them? April 19, 2009:
Conspiracy: “in law, agreement of two or more persons to commit a criminal or
otherwise unlawful act. At common law, the crime of conspiracy was committed
with the making of the agreement, but present-day statutes require an overt
step by a conspirator to further the conspiracy. Other controversial aspects of
conspiracy laws include the modification of the rules of evidence and the
potential for a dragnet. A statement of a conspirator in furtherance of the
conspiracy is admissible against all conspirators, even if the statement includes
damaging references to another conspirator, and often even if it violates the
rules against hearsay evidence. The conspiracy can be proved by circumstantial
evidence. Any conspirator is guilty of any substantive crime committed by any
The Poor-Man's Guide to Modernity 310 / 334 Zahir Ebrahim