Thoughts and Observations Following
The Cataclysm of Sept 11th 2001Terry Boardman
13th Sept. 2001
As for "the karmic implications", I think back to the 1890s when
the
world's superpower was then facing a major threat to its interests
in
Egypt and *the Sudan* i.e. the rising of the Islamist leader Mahdi
whose
forces had killed Britain's hero General Gordon in Khartoum 1885. That
was a great psychic shock to the British.
I also think back approx 700 years ago to the activities of the
Assassins, very active and powerful at the peak of the Crusades(they
were founded in the early 11th century)their drug-controlled fanatics
were utterly ruthless in doing their master's will; the Assassins
apparently had dealings with the Templars, and their power was finally
broken only by a Mongol siege of their Alamut stronghold, though they
continued to be active in small groups as late as the 19th cent.
Recall that the World Trade Centre consisted of TWIN towers which were
simply SQUARES, extended skywards. Is this masonic symbolism ? Are
not
other skyscrapers in the area also essentially extended cubes surmounted
with pyramids ? Consider:
"The influence of the new form of organization and training, as well
as
initiatory techniques, of the Assassins upon later societies has been
remarked by a number of students. That the Crusaders knew a good deal
about the Ismailis is shown from the detailed descriptions of them
which
survive. S. Ameer Ali, an Orientalist of considerable repute, goes
further in
his assessment: "From the Ismailis the Crusaders
borrowed the conception which led to the formation
of all the secret societies, religious and secular, of Europe. The
institutions of Templars and Hospitallers; the Society
of Jesus, founded by Ignatius Loyola, composed by a body of men whose
devotion to their cause can hardly be surpassed in our time;
the ferocious
Dominicans, the milder Franciscans - may all be traced either to Cairo
or to
Alamut. The Knights Templar especially, with their system of grand
masters, grand priors and religious devotees,
and their degrees of initiation, bear the strongest analogy to the
Eastern Ismailis." from http://www.sci.fi/~phinnweb/neuro/assassins2.html
Today's "Independent" newspaper reported that the command centre for
the Twin Towers building was on the 23rd floor. Is that not
remarkable, considering the fact that the building had so many floors
to
choose from ? In fact there were 220 floors in both buildings - a
Cabalistic number in itself. Certainly, the Office of Emergency Management
of the City of New York was also on the 23rd floor - of the 47-storey
WTC 7
building, the one which also collapsed in the last afternoon of 11
th Sept.
Mayor Rudolph Giuliani set this office up there in 1998.
Secret Service offices were in the same building as a matter of interest
- on the 9th and 10th
floors. Why the 23rd floor of a 47 storey building ? Maybe just the
only one available ??
Canary Wharf, London: the projected "pyramid of skyscrapers"
You may also be interested to know that in Canary Wharf, London's
mini-Manhattan financial centre, much of which was built by the very
Orthodox Jewish Reichmann Brothers of Olympia and York in the 80s,
two
other towers are now under construction alongside the present 800 m
high
tower. The plan is for the present tower to form the apex of a ground
plan pyramid, while the other two towers will be the other two points
of
the pyramid. So, if the Twin Towers in New York had not been destroyed,
in a year
or two, at this beginning of the 21st century, you would have had the
Jachin-and-Boaz-like Twin Towers in NYC (extended cubes) and a triangle
of extended cubes topped by their own pyramids in London on the other
side of the Atlantic: 23 spanning the Atlantic and symbolising the
union
of Anglo-American financial/commercial powers. The 2 have been
destroyed, which will leave the 3... (Opposite the pyramid
of towers
on the other side of the River Thames at Greenwich of course, almost
due
south of the towers, stands the circular Millenium Dome with its 12
protruding star-like pylons : the pyramid of the Anglo-American 23
standing over the European circle of stars ? Too far-fetched ?
Perhaps.....
We are gratified to know that H.M.the Queen today ordered the
Buckingham Palace guards band to play the US national anthem and the
US
flag to be flown at half mast over Buckingham Palace. Truly the earth
has moved... Meanwhile, apparently governments all over the EU are
apparently synchronising a 3 minute silence to be observed throughout
the Union. Even the dead of both world wars only get 2 minutes once
a
year in Britain.
There are various sites detailing relations between Templars and
Assassins; just key in 'Templars and Assassins'. Could this US vs bin
Laden scenario be some bizarre 13th century drama being revisited ?
I
know the Ismailis were Shia and that bin Laden is a Sunni, but stranger
things can happen in karma.
See:
http://ismaili.net/~heritage/mirrors/history.html
http://msanews.mynet.net/Scholars/Sardar/alamut.html
http://www.worldtrek.org/odyssey/mideast/040500kids/040500kidsbrimardis.html
*************************************************************************
13th Sept 2001
Western leaders are claiming that this was an attack against the
civilised world, against democracy itself, against freedom, against
humanity (because, for instance, people of many countries worked in
the
WTC) by people who believed the ends justified the most appalling means.
With such words, they seek to mobilise their people to support the
aggressive action they are about to take. Weighing up these claims
calmly, let us be under no illusion that these empty words of today's
liberal imperial Western leaders are anything other than hypocritical
TRASH.
Hypocrisy and cant - from the people whose governments brought you the
starvation blockade of central Europe 1917-19, the terror bombing of
Germany and Japan, the world's only A-bomb drops against civilians,
the
ruination of Vietnam, the carpet bombing of Cambodia, the devastation
of
parts of Iraq, the blasting of Serbia.
What missiles or airliner-bombs have been sent by Islamic terrorists
against Helsinki, against Rio de Janeiro,
Dublin, Bucharest, Dar-es-Salaam, Johannesburg, Seoul, Singapore,
Toronto, even London ? - I could go on and on with this list. The fact
is, this was an attack on *the USA*, not on the world, and it was an
attack on the USA because of what the USA has come to mean for many
in
the Islamic world.
Do we think that if the West, notably the USA, but before them,
Britain
and France, were NOT seeking to dominate the Islamic world, from Morocco
(1904) to Iraq and Indonesia (2001), because of the West's insatiable
demand for a degenerate oil-based technology, then so many in the
Islamic world would still be consumed with hatred against the West
? Do
we think that if the Western elites were NOT insisting - as they
have
been insisting since the time of Napoleon - on their right to dominate
the Islamic world simply because western "civilisation" was superior,
then so many in the Islamic world would still be consumed with hatred
against the West ? Do we think that if the West, notably, but not
exclusively, the USA, was NOT supporting in multifarious ways, not
least
with billions of dollars, the continued existence of a state
- formerly
the Palestine Mandate, now Israel - that had been artificially
injected
by the West into the Islamic cultural region with the express purpose
of
serving western interests in that region, then so many in the Islamic
world would still be consumed with hatred against the West ? Actually,
even the term "the West" is a misnomer; it is in fact 3 powers: the
USA,
Britain, and France, which just happen to have constantly been the
three
leading Freemasonic Powers. A great deal that has to do with this
knotted enigma may well lie in the Masonry relations of Templar, Solomon
and
Omar.
When you arrive in New York harbour, you first meet the Statue of
Liberty - that statue of Isis in disguise who was a gift from the
Freemasons of France to the Freemasons of America, designed by a French
freemason from Alsace Lorraine who had the "liberty" of those provinces
in mind as much as he had the USA. Until 11th Sept 2001, after passing
the Statue, you would approach the Twin Towers dominating Manhattan.
The
building of such constructions as the Statue of Liberty, the Twin
Towers, the Pentagon (and, one might add, the Titanic) were mighty
historical statements, and all judgment of good and evil aside, we
have
just witnessed such a mighty historical statement in the destruction
of
the Twin Towers and of part of the Pentagon (and in the sinking of
the
Titanic in 1912). When one considers what Jachin and Boaz mean, what
the
Kabbalistic Tree or the Gemini principle of parallel structure in the
human form represents, what the Pentagon/gram truly stands for, then
it
is perhaps in THIS archetypal symbolic sense, and not in the
manipulative and hypocritical sense of the politicians, that one can
indeed speak of "an attack on humanity itself" - an attack not by
Islamic fundamentalists, but by spiritual forces of darkness as humanity
reaches its 21st year. Suicide bombers are being used in the
first
mighty act of the effort to force the Ego of humanity to commit suicide
and jump from the temple.
The signature visible to me in this is that Ahriman, with almost
overwhelming power, coldly and syetmatically forces Lucifer against
a
wall; Lucifer strikes back in fanatical and ruthless desperation; Sorath
makes use of the conflict between the two to strike at the Ego of Man
to
destroy it. Such are the times in which we live.
Is this not the Trial by Air ?
******************************************************************
14th Sept 2001
Frankly, while feeling inwardly very moved by so much human misery,
especially that of the poor people on the planes, I find myself looking
at this event with somewhat more distance. I simply cannot forget all
the horrors of the 20th century, notably those
visited by the USA on other peoples, and by comparison, this event
was
small in terms of deaths, though the act itself was staggeringly
dramatic, and it is that dramatic element that has caught people's
minds. Furthermore, if the USA is a democracy as they often
boast, that
actually means the ordinary people share responsibility for their govt's
actions, but as we know, most people show little interest in foreign
affairs; they tend to give their govts carte blanche. But ignorance
of foreign
affairs is a very great foolishness for citizens, because foreign affairs
are
often matters of life or death. Joe Citizen's son is suddenly called
off to die,
or is suddenly killed in his own country by a lunatic plan launched
by a satanic
operative 1000s of miles away.
I'm afraid I find myself looking at the whole thing with something of
a
soldierly eye. I wish to stay as detached as possible, observing what
the enemies of Michael on all fronts are doing amidst this sea of
emotion in which people are swimming who only live in the present,
people who are not interested in history and who have forgotten what
happened in the world last week already - emotions which lead either
to
depression or furious hatred.
**************************************************************
14 Sept 2001
I see the overall scenario like this: the Islamic and the Sinic
cultures (China, Japan, Korea, Mongolia) represent the only two
residual
cultural obstacles to global Anglo-American power. Of these two, the
Atlantean
Sinic world is the more formidable. If it ever happened, and it is
still not impossible,
some kind of union or link-up between China, Japan and Korea, Mongolia,
Tibet later this century would represent a very great force. Pure Mars
-
despite seeming westernisation - is stronger than a Mars-Moon mix.
Let
us bear in mind the resonances between "Christened" humanity's 14th
and
21st years = the 14th and 21st centuries and never forget that the
Islamic world, then a great civilisation, wilted before the initial
onslaughts of the Mongols. It was only after the Mongols had divided
their forces and lost their original impetus that they suffered their
first major losses to Islamic forces - the Egyptian Mamelukes, and
even
that was touch and go. I therefore see the Anglo-American power leaving
this greater cultural power of the Sinic (i.e. Atlantean) world as
the
last to deal with.
What I see happening now, indeed since Bush's father initiated the
process with his call to New World Order over the Kuwait/Iraq crisis,
is
stage 2 in the drive to get on top of the Islamic cultural realm and
bring it to heel.
Just as during the Cold War there were hostile socialists (Communists)
and, for the most part, friendly pliant western socialists (e.g. the
British Labour party), now there are "moderate" non-hostile Muslims
and
nasty hostile radical Muslims. The aim is to increase the former,
ultimately to coopt them all, and to destroy the latter. bin Laden
and
friends will be used to achieve their own destruction, the end of Islam
as any kind of potent cultural force. The end of this "new crusade
against evil", this first war of the 21st century, will be the final
subjugation of the Islamic world. Islam is currently
going through its own 15th century; recall what the 15th century brought
to the West - destruction of the mediaeval world of "Christendom" and
the end of the real power of Christian Churchianity as a potent force
(despite the Vatican's long and slow retreat thereafter). The occult
forces of the West certainly are aware of this, I would say. The past
is
now; history does not so much repeat itself as resonate with its former
spiralling forms. When Islam has thus been brought to heel, the new
Rome
will turn its attention to the greater challenge, indeed the ultimate
challenge, of the Sinic world, with the aim of bring this too to heel
before the arrival of Ahriman, sometime c.2033. What the
world saw from 1868-1945 in Japan and from 1949-76 in China was only
a
prologue of the kind of dynamic energies that can be expected from
the
Sinic world, for, pace Napoleon, the sleeping giant has now awoken.
I therefore do not think that we are about to see some kind of imminent
oligarchical turmoil of multipolar global power centres. On the
contrary, I consider that the US-led western empire of the New Rome
will
become ever more powerful and aggressive and will continue its
single-minded drive to global dominion. The impetus seemed lost after
Vietnam and Watergate, it recovered under Reagan, but seemed lost again
in the late 80s when Japan was riding high; then it returned under
Clinton. There seems to be an economic downturn now, but I believe
that
too is being managed. In fact, external power will grow and grow
- Bush
will put together the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA) for example
- BUT real inner force will continuously deplete. American civil
liberties will be eroded more and more; the American economy will as
the
century goes on, become ever more virtual and shell-like.
Hollywood blockbusters, though sometimes crass, do I believe, somehow
tell it like it is: Titanic, Gladiator, Hidden Tiger Crouching Dragon
(not really a Hollywood movie, but taken to Hollywood's heart), Pearl
Harbour. Yes, Tuesday was a colossal symbol, but not necessarily of
what
will happen in the near future; rather of what this century has in
store
in terms of the 2, the 3, and 5.
The USA is likely to go the way of Rome in its
fall (and that was some Fall we witnessed last week) but before Rome
fell, it grew bigger and bigger; the same was true of the Eastern Rome,
Byzantium, before the Arab onslaught of the 7th century, and the same
was true of the "Pax" Britannica.
Pride comes before a fall, as they say. Tuesday's fall showed
that the
writing is on the wall, but the actual fall is not yet, not for some
time. I venture to guess that it will occur within 33-40 years of the
passing of Ahriman's vehicle whenever that is, perhaps c.2066. From
James I to the Treaty of Versailles was roughly 300 years: 1776-2076
?
Britain had about a century of unipolar power following its victory
in
1815. Despite Communist rivalry, real US hegemony, I'd say, began in
1945. Perhaps the US will make it to 2045 ? Perhaps after that,
it will
fragment.
When people, and especially Americans, look back at our era, I think
they'll recognise something special about the
Clinton-hiding-between-the-Bushes years 1988-2004 (?)
*******************************************************************
15 Sept 2001
I mean, what is going on ? Are we losing the plot ? Is this some kind
of
subconscious recognition by everyone that we have stepped over a
threshold and that something profound is about to begin ? Is it the
further unfolding of what some have called the Diana effect in the
western world - a bizarre and profound stirring of the subconscious,
and
perhaps even the conscience, which can have both unsettling and positive
aspects ? Is it rather a mammoth efficient operation by our elites
to
coordinate public sentiment to direct that sentiment in support
of what
they are about to unleash ? I must say, I was struck by the speed with
which European govts invoked Article 5 of the NATO Treaty and declared
a
3 min silence *Europe-wide* *for all their citizens*.
Is it just the reflection of the power of the media - the fact that
as
countless people said, it was like watching a movie - and hey, we've
all
been to the glossy and glitzy movies - they are part of "our
experience", whereas, dingy apartment buildings in
Yaroslavl are not. Is it just a matter of numbers? Little of this,
over-the-top international breast-beating happened in sympathy with
the
Americans who suffered after the Oklahoma disaster, but then not much
of
it happened at the time of the Rwanda genocide either, where the numbers
were far greater. I don't recall Her Majesty singing the Rwandan national
anthem
in public in '94. Is it because we in the "developed" West can identify
so much with those desperate airline victims or office workers, as
so
many of us are familiar with airliners and high rise office buildings
?
Is it all of these things ?
You don't need to claim with the conspiracy nuts that the US govt itself
arranged the whole thing in order to beat up on Islam and take the
NWO
project a stage further, or that somehow mind control was used by the
US
govt to get people to become suicide bombers. However, we should
"remember Pearl Harbour!", as they say. Roosevelt didn't plan and
arrange the Japanese attack; they did that, desperately feeling it
was
the only course available to them. But Roosevelt *had* arranged the
conditions for some kind of Japanese response. It now seems clear that
he expected this, that US intelligence knew of the attack beforehand,
but did nothing to forestall it or to protect their servicemen *and
citizens* (however, they *did* protect their carrier fleet by
ensuring
it was out of Hawaii at that time) because Roosevelt wanted to use
the
Japanese action for ulterior purposes. The British authorities did
the
same with the Lusitania in 1915; an attack on it could well have been
supposed; the Germans announced in New York their intention to attack
such ships, but it was given no protection by the Royal Navy and left
at
the mercy of the U-boats. The sinking was then milked for all
it was
worth - a propaganda coup.
Would it be too much to suggest that we may in the months or years ahead
discover that in fact the US authorities also knew or at least suspected
ahead of time that this attack on the US was planned, and deliberately
did nothing to forestall it, because they too have ulterior motives?
We
have seen that Western govts have been prepared to sacrifice their
own
civilians to achieve certain aims: the Tuskegee experiments in the
US in
the 1930s, the A-bomb tests using British and US soldiers, the Vietnam
War, the CIA seeding of LSD in the 60s, the 30 year "Troubles" in
N.Ireland, which have been so useful to the British authorities as
a
practice ground for social control techniques, Waco...the list goes
on.
Once again, foolish and fanatical Lucifer runs into Ahriman's trap.
This "war against the evil of global terrorism" will be long and unremitting;
it
too will be milked for all it is worth, and if it ever ends, we shall
probably look back ruefully to the ever narrowing circle of civil
liberties we are currently allowed to enjoy.
*******************************************************************
15 Sept 2001
These pix were originally found at
http://dailynews.philly.com/content/daily%5Fnews/2001/09/13/local/DEVI13C.htm
They were said in the website to come from Associated Press -
a "bona
fide" mainstream news agency, similar to Reuters, who syndicate their
material around the world. They assured us it wasn't a hoax. If it
WAS a
hoax, what are AP intending by pushing this into mass consciousness
?
(Rhetorical question, folks ! don't answer it). If proved to be an
AP
hoax, it would be a very good example of how blatantly and how immorally
the mainstream media try to manipulate mass consciousness. It will
be
instructive to see how far among the mainstream media this image gets.
If it was NOT a hoax, was it merely then a chance face in the
smoke
such as children imagine they see in clouds ? And yet, the context
would
suggest that precisely THIS image as a chance event was unlikely. One
can therefore think (irrationally, according to conventional science)
that the demonic found a way to manifest its "face" in this catastrophe,
or else that this is a touched up artifically produced picture made
by
someone in the media either as a very sick joke, or else as an attempt
to influence the subconscious of religiously inclined gullible people
who would, as a result of seeing this image, then feel more inclined
to
support "a crusade against evil." Whatever the answer, it certainly
bears a strong resemblance to Rudolf Steiner's sculptures of Ahriman's
head.
******************************************************************
15 Sept 2001
I have heard from someone here whose relative is involved that 23,000
(that number AGAIN !) British and American troops went out "for
manoeuvres" to Oman *a few weeks ago* (!)
"Two tankers were ordered to take 235,000 barrels of marine diesel
fuel
to Diego Garcia, the US Air Force base in the Indian Ocean. A number
of
B52 bombers capable of launching cruise missiles are believed to have
been deployed there." Oman, right opposite Diego Garcia, is the
perfect
jumping off point for an attack on southern and central Afghanistan.
235,000 barrels - 23 again.
FYI the service of remembrance in St Paul's cathedral, at which the
Queen sang the US national anthem, centred on the 23rd Psalm. The BBC
report of the event used the Psalm as a backdrop with the US ambassador
and Archbishop of Canterbury speaking over the top of it. The service
finished with the Battle Hymn of the Republic.
If they strike this weekend the US will have to put up some kind of
"evidence" to justify the strike very fast, even simultaneously perhaps,
or possibly even after the event. That seems more likely. The more
time
they give between evidence and strike, obviously the more time bin
Laden
- if it is him - will have to escape, perhaps to another country. If,
on
the other hand, they wait another month till the next New Moon, it
seems
likely they will not be making a night attack, but building a big
coalition for a much bigger assault. A night attack this weekend would
probably be described just a warm-up - for public opinion, which might
not be able to wait for a month. In 1990-1, the public were kept waiting
6 months for their action, but that time only Kuwaitis had been killed;
this time it's nearly 5,000 Americans. Bush will have to make some
military gesture soon; it would also be to test the international water.
" The US Air Force has 2,300 combat aircraft [ 23 AGAIN] and the
US
Navy more than 200 ships, including 12 aircraft carriers. [more than
?
how many? 230 ?]
**********************************************************************
15 Sept 2001
The Pentagon (pentagram) may be related not only
to the human etheric body but to the movements of the planet Venus,
whose inferior conjunctions with the Sun against the 12 constellations
of the Zodiac form such a harmonious revolving pentagram pattern
in
space every 1200 years. It is a kind of cosmic clock. A complete
revolution of "the Venus Pentagram" through the 12 from 1940
would take
us back to the year 740. From 2001 would take us back to 801, the year
after Charlemagne was crowned Holy Roman Emperor. FYI, Harun al Rashid
came to power in 786 and was ruling in 801, while in 795 (=1995) the
Vikings sacked Iona and plundered Ireland for the first time.
Venus has of course also been traditionally associated with Lucifer.
I think one would need to know about the astrosophical context of the
period in which the Pentagon was built, and also something about this
Brig. General Somervell
http://www.arlingtonhistory.org/historic1932.htm
"Construction of the Pentagon began on Sept. 11, 1941. It was built
in
five sections. Its five-sided architecture was an innovation to fit
the
building to the space on which it was located. The land had been a
wasteland of swamps and dumps and home to a dangerous slum known as
Hell’s Bottom [ !!! - TMB]. The Pentagon was built with 5.5 million
cubic yards of earth, and 41,492 concrete piles holding up the
building’s foundation"
NB the building is 5 x 5 x 5 : 5 sided, 5 corridors deep, 5 floors high
- TMB
http://www.lanl.gov/worldview/welcome/history/04_groves-command.html
Enter Col. Leslie Groves. [actual overseer of the Pentagon building
project and of the Manhattan Project - TMB]
"In the summer of 1942, Groves was deputy to the chief of construction
for the Army Corps of Engineers and had overseen construction of the
Pentagon, the world's largest office building. Hoping for an overseas
command, Groves objected when Somervell appointed him to take charge
of
the weapons project. His objections were overruled and
Groves resigned himself to leading a project he thought had little
chance of succeeding.
After Groves met with Bush to tell him that he had been assigned to
oversee the project, Bush complained that Groves did not have sufficient
rank or tact to get the job done. "I fear we are in the soup!" wrote
Bush. [this was Vannevar Bush, the head of the civilian Office
of
Scientific Research and Development (OSRD), - TMB]
Groves took on his new assignment with a determination to make it work.
The first thing he did was rechristen the project "The Manhattan
District." The name evolved from the Corps of Engineers practice of
naming districts after its headquarters' city (Marshall's headquarters
were in New York City)."
[It gets more interesting - TMB]
http://www.lanl.gov/worldview/welcome/history/05_choosing-director.html
A central weapons laboratory was needed.
Gen. Leslie Groves and the Manhattan Engineer District had taken
charge of the construction of production plants, but no provision had
been made for a laboratory for bomb design.
J. Robert Oppenheimer and John Manley took the problem to the Office
of Scientific Research and Development (OSRD [Vannevar Bush]). The
occasion was a meeting of its section charged with the development
of
nuclear weapons, the S-1 Committee, at Bohemian Grove [ ! - TMB] in
northern California. The host was Ernest Lawrence, director of the
University of California Radiation Laboratory.
It was the rightwing Groves who insisted on the leftwing Oppenheimer
to
head the Manhattan project. For Vannevar Bush (seemingly no relation
to
W23), see
http://www.cs.brown.edu/research/graphics/html/info/timeline.html
********************************************************************
16 Sept 2001
Poring over the media in Britain this weekend, there seems to be little
evidence of much thinking going on - the odd article here and
there by
such as Robert Fisk. Mostly, it is a lemming-like drive to WAR!WAR!WAR!
("America At War", "The West at War", "WE ARE AT WAR" etc) Once again,
so many in the media seem to be exulting in the prospect. Europe is
now
said to be "at war".
What comes out more clearly from "more considered" articles like those
of Henry Kissinger syndicated from the LA Times this weekend or from
Paul Kennedy (today's Independent on Sunday) is the view that this
is
the beginning of something that will inexorably lead to something like
world government, because of the constant and very long struggle that
will have to be maintained by all the world led by the USA against
the
many-headed monster of terrorism. As hope sprang for a brief moment
in
1989, the counterforces responded with the Gulf Crisis and War, and
the
NWO declaration by Bush Snr. As we enter the 21st century of
"christened" humanity's existence, the age of the supposed Ego
incarnation of Man, we step across that threshold through the twin
towers of initiation aiming for the pentagramic archetype of etheric
Man. Unfortunately, the 3 flying bombs of the counterforces get there
before us.
1912 - the Titanic, symbol of 19th British power, culture, society (and
hubris?) sank on the way to America, struck by the force of deathly
ice
in the water. Britain had raised its power on water - on the
seas and
in the force of steam. In that same year the First Balkan War broke
out,
curtain-raiser to the catastrophe of 1914.
2001 - the Twin Towers, more than the Pentagon (which stems from
the
classical heritage of Platonic Greece), a real symbol of American power,
culture, society (and hubris?), struck by the force of hellfire in
the
air, demonically delivered by America's own planes - American Airlines
and United Airlines jets. The USA had raised its power on minerality
and
the energy source - electricity - associated with it. The skyscraper
-
scraping is something you do with minerals - was made possible by the
electric elevator. Towers of international Babel pushing upwards from
the ground. The shining elongated cubes struck by the meteoric force
of
the black Ka'aba cube of Mecca. The American historian Barbara Tuchman
wrote a famous book about the fall of the European culture in 1914-18
called "The Proud Tower". In 1903 the Wright Brothers took to the air;
America has already flown its satellites past Pluto. The air
and flying
are as much associated with America as are the minerals and
electromagnetism of the ground.
This NYC catastrophe, of air, fire, and ground is to be followed by
a
war - of fire in air and on ground. Let us pray that our own
generation's armageddon too is not just round the corner.
There can be no healing until the West rethinks its foreign policy,
its
economic system, its sources of energy, its spiritual values. Until
it
does this, it will never have the respect of the East.
I feel ever more that this has been another Titanic experience. Time
will tell if it turns out to be a Titanic experience for the US Empire
or for the whole of mankind.
*******************************************************************
16 Sept 2001
from this week's Economist:
"September 11th 1922 was the day when a British mandate came into force
in Palestine, over the heads of unyielding Arab opposition."
********************************************************************
19 Sept 2001
"BACKGROUND: Recent reports from German intelligence, foreign
journalists, and the publicly announced preparations and exercises
of
Russia and the Central Asian states all display the expectation of
renewed conflict triggered by the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan (IMU)
in Central Asia. If the IMU or other forces trigger a third straight
year of war, they might create an enduring basis for long-term
small-scale war or worse. There is already enormous destabilizing potential
in Central Asia, and prolonged warfare would only add to it."
Again here the focus on Uzbekistan. This country was highlighted by
"The
Economist" throughout the 90s as the place from which some kind of
"islamic superpower" (supposed fantasyland talk in 1990) might emerge
in
the future, which would then create trouble for Russia. Uzbekistan
seems
definitely a place to watch in Central Asia, not least because it also
appears to be the most *pro-western* of the Central Asian republics
(perhaps like the Shah's Iran, which was also pro-western yet turned
into anto a revolutionary Islamic Republic).
*******************************************************************
.jpg)
The coming weeks will show whether this is true; so far, it would seem
like it. But one does need a certain amount of intelligence to follow
a
script correctly.....
*****************************************************************
21st Sept 2001
This year is 2001 and this Sept crisis has happened in 2001 i.e. in
the
number 21; 21 in the the 21st century !!! Keep in mind the concept
of
(since the birth of the Jesus children) 100
years of history = 1 year of human life. This 21st century therefore
means
the incarnation of the Ego of "christened" Man. The "millennium" year
2000 = 20, not 21. The events in NYC and Washington DC did not happen
last year, though there is no reason why they could not have, from
an outer
point of view, but from an esoteric viewpoint, there is every reason,
namely,
because precisely THIS year 2001 (=21) resonates with the 21st century.
But that means nothing to Muslims, one might say. Yes, but it must
mean
a lot to Ahriman and his master Sorath, whose ultimate instruments
those
suicide bombers were - agents of annihilation.
Consider also the breaking of the occult symbol
of the Pentagon from this point of view. A pentagon, unlike the
Pentagram, is surely a symbol of outer, physical Man, while the
Pentagram is a symbol of inner etheric Man.
Consider further the number 2001: not only is it the number of the movie
"2001" with all that implied for the threshold crossing of Man - have
we
not heard countless times since Sept 11th that the world has now changed
?
- not least the black monolith in the film "2001", but it is also 2
zeroes between the 2
and the 1. Those two towers were reduced to zeroes in the "2--1 year"
of
the 21st century. 2000 has 3 zeroes, but 2001 has 2. You may say, "but
so have 2003, 2004, 2005 etc. So what ?" But in the year 2001, those
two
zeroes are surrounded by the number 21.
The significance of the two zeroes *between* the 2 and the 1 of 21:
For years, I pondered on my attraction to the
chord sequences C-D-G and C-F-G: prime, second, fifth; and prime,
fourth, fifth. Here we have 2-0-0-1 and 1-0-0-2, where 2 = 2 notes
and 1
= 1 note. E and F, and D and E respectively, are silent. Two notes
silent in both cases. The interval of the 3rd is hidden, not sounding,
within the two intervals of the 2nd and the 5th. I suspect that the
5th
is "Pentagonal" rather than "Pentagrammic" Man in Eurythmic terms;
The Twin Towers are the material inversions (perversions ?) of the
two
etheric trees of Eden. According to Rudolf Steiner, the
5th is the interval of Man at the boundary between the inner and outer
worlds; the 2nd is the interval of his etheric body. In the 5th
Post-Atlantean epoch, having worked for centuries on the interval of
the
3rd, the Christic interval of Major and Minor 3rd in which the astral
body
can be purified, and soul balance found, we are to press on gradually
towards the experience of the 2nd, which by the end of the 5th epoch
will become "normal experience for us" as the 3rd is now. Interestingly,
this interval of the 2nd includes the minor 2nd, which is not only
a
sound that conjures up darkness, tension, almost unbearable constriction
and friction for us, and is often used in artistic contexts to conjure
an image of evil, but it is also of essential importance both
in
western (intellectual) atonal serial music (following Schoenberg, Webern
and the 2nd Viennese School) AND in traditional music of the
Middle
East.
What will help Man (5) meet the 2 safely will be the experience of the
3
hidden within him and internalised. Is this not Man's approach to the
threshold of the Lesser Guardian ?
Might that not be what this colossal image of the destruction of the
World Trade Centre represents ?
I heard a phrase on the radio tonight:
"....the destruction of the World Trade Centre...." It reverberates:
the destruction of the World Trade Centre
destruction of the Centre..........of World Trade
destruction of...World Trade
By the way, in passing, the pentagrammic star is
made up of 5 triangles around a pentagon and that the sides of those
triangles are in relation of 2:3:3, where 2 is the base. Further,
2:3 = 0.666r....?
Within the welter of facts relating to the events of last week, we
should try and maintain our calm, our reflective capacity, imagination
and search for meaning.
*****************************************************
21st Sept 2001
First point: as an individual member of the community of mankind, who
considers the attacks on the USA to vile and deeply wicked, I also
consider it outrageous that the ersatz President of the USA, elected
in
a farce by fraudulent means, after the arrogant unilateral policies
he
has followed throughout this year, should now presume to throw down
a
gauntlet to the whole world and say: "if you're not with us, you're
against us": if you're not with the USA, you're for the terrorists.
This
is sheer madness, or rather machiavellianism, calculated to drive the
situation to war, just as the terrorists surely intended to do.
Both Ahriman and Lucifer are now baring their faces in the most
bare-faced
manner. I understand from this morning's news that PC-ism has gone
mad
in Germany with the banning of the music of Karlheinz Stockhausen
from
a Hamburg festival because he was reported to have said that
the
attacks on the USA were "a great work of art" whereas apparently,
Stockhausen said that the attacks were "Lucifer's greatest
work of art",
which may well be precisely the truth. Lucifer acts in glamour, in
full
view of all, onstage. All eyes turn to him and are bedazzled, whereas
they do not notice the work of Ahriman, proceeding steadily,
secretively, behind the scenes, day by, day, week after week, year
after
year - witness the sudden revelation of the A-bomb, or the stealth
fighter, or even Dolly the sheep.
I have just heard on BBC radio news a feature about the stock market
manipulations before Sept 11th. The assumption throughout was that
the
manipulations were by people connected to the terrorists. An American
spokesman even said that if it turns out that the dealings were by
institutional investors (of the West) then that would be OK, of no
significance, but that if they were from "further afield, from the
Middle East" then that would point to the terrorists and those who
were
connected to the attacks. !?!
**********************************************************
22nd Sept 2001
During the period 1966-1969, in October 1967 to be exact, the yippies
under Abbie Hoffman led 50,000 people in trying to levitate the Pentagon
(i.e. from below upwards). This was an imaginary act in the realm of
thought - an etheric act. Did that action have a Luciferic
signature ? Now in the period 1999-2002, 33 years on (the period not
the
year), the Pentagon is physically attacked from the air (i.e. from
above
downwards). Note that the WTC was attacked from underground in 1993,
and from above, from the air, in 2001.
I feel increasingly that this interminable "Cold War 2" which the
brothers seem keen to force us all into - in addition to having the
threshold 21 aspect I wrote about earlier - also has the
aim of putting a giant lid on the impulses stemming from the 2nd
repetition of the Etheric Christ wave: 1933-1966-1999.
1999 saw the emergence of the "anti-globalisation" movement (a misnomer;
actually an anti-global fascist state movement with all that that
implies for the environment and human rights, economic disease). This
included many aspects of the movement of 1966-69 + some new ones
(e.g.Internet use).
The idealistic movement of 66-69 was subverted by drugs and political
violence, seeded by the Establishment; this has now been documented.
My question was, how would the Establishment seek to subvert, or derail
the present 1999-2002 movement. This derailment was all the more
necessary, given the criticisms of the arrogant Bush's policies in
Jan-Aug this year and the worsening state of the world economy which
might also have led to calls for - dare we say it ? - new economic
thinking to replace "cutthroat Darwinian capitalism" (to quote a phrase
from the New York Times, used NOT disparagingly by them a few days
ago).
Well, they have now produced their rabbit out of the bag, their
derailment strategy. It stretches interminably into the future; it
is
the new Cold War, and is being called so by their spokesmen.
1945-7: after the horrors of WW2, a window of idealistic opportunity
opened; calls for a new non-capitalist, non-communist society in the
air. Response of the western brothers: Cold War I
1966-69: with the Etheric Christ impulse, a massive window of idealistic
opportunity opened. Response of the Brotherhood (aided by Luciferic
puppets Timothy Leary, Ken Kesey, and many others) : intensification
of
Vietnam War, seeding of drug culture and political violence.
Nov 1989 - June 1990: after the Berlin Wall went down, a window of
idealistic opportunity opened. Response of the Brotherhood (aided by
Luciferic puppet Saddam Hussein): The Gulf Crisis and War
1999-2001: 2nd repetition of Etheric Christ Impulse - a window of
opportunity opens in the global questioning of global neoliberal
capitalism. Response of the western elite (aided by Luciferic
puppet Osama
bin Laden & allies): Cold War 2 vs "global terrorism".
************************************************************
22nd Sept 2001
I have just watched the Bush speech to Congress on 20th Sept (founding
of First Goetheanum Day, I note).
Remarkable were:
1) the Bush smirk - especially during the first 5 minutes
2) the immediate reference to an individual and to an individual woman,
Mrs Todd Beamer
3) the lack of reference to notes or other aids. How long had he spent
memorising this, or did he have an earpiece receiver ?
4) the same intonation pattern for almost every clause and sentence.
5) the high profile reference to Britain (given Blair's presence) and
the parallel absence of reference to Japan and Germany, supposedly
the
other main allies. The greater reference to Korea will be noted in
Japan.
6) Blair was sat next to Bush's wife
7) astonishingly, the amount of standing applause he received after
almost every section; it reminded one of communist party assemblies.
What is happening to individuality and the capacity to think and judge
for oneself - the supposed values of America and the West, about which
Bush says so much ? He even mentioned in his speech that the terrorists
hate the democratic way of assembling and disagreeing with each other.
8) "covert operations secret even in success" (SS)
8) the lapse into a gauche Bushism after all this grave and portentous
rhetoric: "And you know what ? We are not gonna allow it."
9) the gauntlet to the world: "either you are with us, or you are with
the terrorists."
10) The Office of Homeland Security announced - what will this mean
for
US civil liberties ?
An American spokesman on BBC Radio yesterday called it "the greatest
speech made by a US President on foreign policy in the history of the
American Republic." What has happened to Bush ? This is not the same
man
we saw in the first days after the incident. He seemed to be on
autopilot in this speech.
It is instructive to compare Bush's speech with the text of the fatwas
by bin Laden in 1996(9.4.1417 A.H. = 23.8.1996 AD)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A4342-2001Sep21.html,
which is very long, and 23.2.1998 (quite short) but if read through
to
the end helps to contextualise what forces are in conflict here. Note
that 23 occurs in the dates of both fatwas.
Finally, please note also that this year 2001, corresponds to the
Islamic year 1421 ! 14 + 21
**********************************************************
22nd Sept 2001
Bush, in his Congress speech, immediately after using the Nietzschean
phrase "Will to power", he referred to Nazism and totalitarianism,
in seeking to assert the connection between the Islamic terrorists
and
the post-Romantic extremism (Germany, Russia) against which the
western "Enlightenment" allies (i.e. US-UK) have been fighting.
***********************************************************
22nd Sept 2001
Bush's Congress speech: twin black marble pillars Jakin and Boaz
behind Bush,
and the Pentagram star on top of the columns, the mended WTC
towers and the
the inner form of the Pentagon. Bush speaking between them.
The capitals are Ionian (flowing water - etheric world), not Doric (physical)
or
Corinthian (astral). The colours of the pillars are black and white
- Templar/Masonic
colours. The black and white chequerboard pattern goes back to the
Academy of Gondishapur
6th-11th century Iran, from where the game of chess was apparently
first introduced to the West.
************************************************************
22nd Sept 2001
Perhaps we should remind ourselves of the words spoken by Rudolf Steiner
at the laying of the Foundation Stone of the First Goetheanum on 20th
Sept 1913 - the same day that Bush (W23) gave his "great" speech
to Congress 88
years later.
AUM, Amen !
Evils prevail,
Evidence of Egohood struggling free,
Debt for selfhood at others' expense,
Experienced in daily bread,
In which heaven's will does not prevail,
Since Mankind severed themselves from Your Kingdom,
And forgot Your Names,
You Fathers in the heavens
*************************************************************
23rd Sept 2001
You may know the name of Alastair Cook. He is a veteran BBC reporter
(now in his late 80s) who has lived in the US since the Depression
of
the 30s and has been sending back a weekly "Letter From America"
(broadcast twice a week) since 1946. These broadcasts have done
a
great deal to form what is politely called "received opinion" in Britain
about
all things American among the middle and upper classes. Cook is
something of a British institution. His letters are often deeply insightful
and artistically formed, but they can also be deeply insidious and
suggestionist,
in a word, jesuitical.
Alistair Cook
Cook reminds me a lot of that other "aristocratic" liberal American
mediaman Walter
Lippmann, and like, Lippmann, he is a paid-up member of the NWO media
apparatus. His Letter's structure this week was something like
this:
Sigmund Freud - power of childhood unconscious - childhood newsreels
- First World War
- scenes of devastation - New York - Battle of Mons 1914 - Angel of
Mons
appears to (British) soldiers - Mons recaptured on last day of war
1918
- St George dragon-slayer - Rudolf Giuliani - his remarkable
dragon-slaying achievements - Giuliani the gentle, compassionate,
epiphany, "superhuman being" - contrast with Bush - William Safire
reveals
that Cheney was in charge - the bad blame culture - origins in Watergate
-
unhealthy obsession with "investigative" reporting - censorship inevitable
in coming war - worthy power of Cheney-Powell-Rumsfeld triumvirate
round Bush - their connection to current FBI activities - how
to act in
this new age - Giuliani's advice: just go on living your normal life
- hymn of 17th
cent poet and priest George Herbert about the simple life.
Now I think what Cook was subliminally trying to get across was
this :
1) the coming war will be sanctified by the spiritual world as WW1
was;
"we" are on the side of "good" as we were in 1914-18.
2) myths about WW1 are being recycled yet again. The angel of Mons
was
shown long ago to be a British propaganda trick, and is now recognised
by historians to be such. Cook studiously avoided saying which soldiers
the angel appeared to, British or German, but the implication is
obvious, given his other remarks.
2) military operations will be timed to coincide with Michaelmas -
to
make the most of the unconscious memory of St Michael and St George
living in western souls.
3) William Safire can be trusted (acc to Cook) for good "hard reporting"
(to use Cook's phrase)
4) a powerful, knowedgeable, and experienced elite trio are running
things and can be trusted.
5) don't blame the President; don't rush to judgment.
6) the job of reporters is to report "facts", not to search for "the
truth".
7) don't enquire too deeply and don't think too much; just get on with
your life and leave things to those in the know, specifically, the
triumvirate.
Cook quoted from a poem by Herbert, which was made into a hymn, and
sung
by countless generations of British schoolchildren at morning
assemblies, including me ! It goes: "A servant makes drudgery divine.
Who sweeps a room, as by thy laws, makes that and the action fine."
So,
you plebs, just keep working, don't think, don't blame, and simply
trust
that we the aristocracy will sort out this war.
Note that, of all the poets Cook COULD have chosen, he chose the one
with the two names, George Herbert, borne by President Bush's
father,
George Herbert Walker Bush.
*****************************************************************
23rd Sept 2001
"son of one of the five great oil families of Houston,Texas,
US ambassdor to the UK William Farish is fascinated by
the "black gold"
that lies in large quantities in the countries around the Caspian Sea.
He sees America's relationship with Russia and its leader, Vladimir
Putin, as vital to its future influence in the area.
>From http://www.sunday-times.co.uk/
*****************************************************************
25th Sept 2001
I found the following sections of Bernard Lewis' article on "The
Roots of
Muslim Rage" (http://www.theatlantic.com/issues/90sep/images/ragehd.gif"
\* )
of much interest:
ULTIMATELY, the struggle of the fundamentalists is against two enemies,
secularism and modernism. The war against secularism is conscious and
explicit, and there is by now a whole literature denouncing secularism
as an evil neo-pagan force in the modern world and attributing it
variously to the Jews, the West, and the United States. ......The
instinct of the masses is not false in locating the ultimate source
of
these cataclysmic changes in the West and in attributing the disruption
of their old way of life to the impact of Western domination, Western
influence, or Western precept and example. And since the United States
is the legitimate heir of European civilization and the recognized
and
unchallenged leader of the West, the United States has inherited the
resulting grievances and become the focus for the pent-up hate and
anger. ............It should by now be clear that we are facing a mood
and a movement far transcending the level of issues and policies and
the
governments that pursue them. This is no less than a *clash of
civilizations* -- the perhaps irrational but
surely historic reaction of an ancient rival against our Judeo-Christian
heritage, our secular present, and the worldwide expansion of both.
It
is crucially important that we on our side should not be provoked into
an equally historic but also equally irrational reaction against that
rival..........
At the same time, we may hope that they will try to achieve a better
understanding of ours, and especially that they will understand and
respect, even if they do not choose to adopt for themselves, our
Western perception of the proper relationship between religion
and
politics. [my emphasis - TMB]
The following passage from the beginning of the article was especially
interesting to me:
".....If the idea that religion and politics should be separated is
relatively new, dating back a mere three hundred years, the idea that
they are distinct dates back almost to the beginnings of Christianity.
Christians are enjoined in their Scriptures to "render ... unto Caesar
the things which are Caesar's and unto God the things which are God's."
While opinions have differed as to the real meaning of this phrase,
it
has generally been interpreted as legitimizing a situation in which
two
institutions exist side by side, each with its own laws and chain of
authority -- one concerned with religion, called the Church, the other
concerned with politics, called the State. And since they are two,
they
may be joined or separated, subordinate or independent, and conflicts
may arise between them over questions of demarcation and jurisdiction.
This formulation of the problems posed by the relations between religion
and politics, and the possible solutions to those problems, arise from
Christian, not universal, principles and experience. There are other
religious traditions in which religion and politics are differently
perceived, and in which, therefore, the problems and the possible
solutions are radically different from those we know in the West. Most
of these traditions, despite their often very high level of
sophistication and achievement, remained or became local -- limited
to
one region or one culture or one people. There is one, however, that
in
its worldwide distribution, its continuing vitality, its universalist
aspirations, can be compared to Christianity, and that is Islam."
This reminded me of anthroposophical lectures I attended in Japan in
1992-4 when it was said by one leading figure there that the thoroughgoing
dualism of
Christianity, as evidenced amongst other things by this saying of
Christ. It contrasted, he said, with the monism of Asia, the focus
on
*oneness* (in the socio-religious polity sense) that lives in Asia
from
Hebrew tradition in western Asia to Japan in East Asia. (Asia - land
of
morning, of spirit, of Lucifer) Recall the suicidal frontal attacks
of Celtic and
Germanic tribesmen (i.e."Atlantean" heritage - don't forget the Germans
moved west from "Asia") on the massed ranks of Roman "organisation",
the attacks of Japanese kamikaze on US aircraft carriers etc.
Consider
also the fanaticism of Jewish Zealots in their struggle against Rome.
In all
these "Asian" struggles against "the West", we see indeed a "clash
of civilisations".
Lewis covers it over by calling the Islamic protest one of opposition
to
"secularism and modernism". What it actually is, is a refutation of
western MATERIALISM, by cultures for whom the spiritual world is still
somehow (obviously, in varying ways, some of them even
"decadent") a
reality.
What all this represents, I believe, is the struggle - the ultimately
hopeless losing struggle - of Lucifer (who affirms spirituality - HIS
spirituality) against Ahriman, who denies it. And that is why
Stockhausen, I believe, was right when he spoke about Lucifer, and
that
in spiritual scientific terms, it is not correct to see in the recent
attacks on America something essentially Sorathic, or something which
has to do with the desire to annihilate and kill people for perhaps
occult reasons (black magic etc). Sorath may seek to use this present
conflict between his minions Lucifer and Ahriman for his own purposes,
but *the conflict itself* does not bear his signature, I would say.
Sorath's signature came out more clearly in WW2 with Hitler's
"Nero-Befehl" of 1945 ("destroy everything!"), with the extermination
camps and with Stalin's murderous assaults on his own people. The Battle
of Stalingrad was itself a Sorathic murder-fest by both Hitler and
Stalin. So many Americans have already forgotten about Hiroshima and
Nagasaki: were there not civilians in those cities too - people who
were
reduced further even than "body parts" - people who were reduced to
mere
shadows ? The Americans calculated that it was worth killing all those
civilians in those two cities for the sake of a larger strategic aim;
the terrorists who attacked New York and Washington made a similar
calculation. Now Americans are talking a lot about Pearl Harbour,
but
they have forgotten who began terror bombing and killing on a
massive
scale; it was the Americans and the British over the
cities of Germany
and Japan; there was NOTHING "proportionate" about that (everyone is
talking about "proportionate" retaliation now). It was done at a time
-
from 1942 onwards - when the Allies were supposedly ignorant
of the
Holocaust, by a people - the Anglo-Americans - who considered
themselves the fount of civilisation and democracy; a people who
considered themselves to have surpassed the Hebrew notion of an eye
for
an eye, yet instead took 100 eyes for one eye, 100 teeth for one tooth.
The Sorathic signature came out 33 years after 1942-45 with the
annihilatory crimes of Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge 1975-78. It will
probably reappear in 2008-2011.
Many in America at the moment are "hot", burning with the passion to
hit
back: on the surface - heat, but the means of operation (military
systems and systematic operations of all kinds) are cold. The
terrorists' mode of operation is hot and passionate attack, but on
the
surface they are cold, callous, and deceptive. Lucifer and Ahriman
are
interweaving in souls here in both cases.
**********************************************************
26th Sept 2001
[British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw's recent visit to Iran ended in failure]
So, now the Iranians have refused to play ball. They raise the stakes
and call the western bluff. It may be that, despite their seeming moves
in the direction of the West in recent years, they are made of sterner
stuff than the West gave them credit for. We shall probably now be
told
that the entire young generation are just dying to wear blue jeans
and
listen to trance music but that, after all, the mad mullahs are refusing
to let them. OK, Tony and George, Donald and Dick, Richard and Henry,
let's add Iran to the list of enemies. "If you're not with America,
you're with the terrorists" - just like Afghanistan. Now we can make
war
on Afghanistan, Iraq and Iran. Hey, this is really beginning to look
like the good old Cold War again. Then we had Russia, China, North
Vietnam, North Korea, and the whole Warsaw Pact to fight. Now we've
got
3 new enemies to make war on. Anyone else for tennis ? Libya ? Sudan
?
Syria ? Damn it, let's do the whole lot of them !
I remember the alleged Bush-Iran deal in 1980, but what exactly did
the
Iranians stand to gain from it if it happened ? Time perhaps. Maybe
Bush
promised to leave their new extremist Revolution alone - a bit like
Russia in 1919-22. IF there is some kind of Bush family connection
(via
the oil industry perhaps ?) does Iran's refusal to cooperate have
anything to do with Powell's hoping they would join the coalition ?
Anything to do with the so-called "struggle" between the Washington
hawks and Powell.
In any case, the Iranians have good cause to remember how much the
British and the Americans have sought to manipulate the destiny of
their
country since the beginning of the 20th century, first as part of the
Great Game with Russia, then in connection with the Berlin-Baghdad
Railway, then over the discovery of oil, the Mossadegh era etc etc.
As for the British effort to butter up the Iranians (at the US' request
?), well, Straw has had his face slapped. The British establishment
has
always been divided on the question of Israel and the Arabs, just as
they have on the question of homosexuality. The latter goes back to
their days in elite public schools: there were those who delighted
in
buggery, and later became the Establishment homosexual lobby, but there
were also those (usually younger boys) who were buggered against their
will, and who developed a fierce hatred of homosexuality. A kind of
civil war has raged within the Establishment on this issue for well
over
a century.
The same is true of their attitudes towards the Semitic race.
There are those, usually somewhat left of centre with either socialist
or Romantic leanings, who incline to the Arabs. T.E.Lawrence of course
was one. They are sometimes overtly anti-Jewish, but sometimes not,
simply temperamentally pro-Arab. There are others, sometimes from
evangelical or High Church religious reasons, who support the Jews
instinctively, as the people of the Bible, feeling obliged almost by
religious duty to do so. On their religious right are those who, since
the time of Cromwell, have believed it was Britain's duty to
bring on
the Second Coming by helping the Jews to return to the Holy Land. There
were not a few of them in the Establishment 100 years ago. Close to
the
religious lobby have been the imperialists, who have always seen Israel
as the western bulwark or even Trojan horse within the Muslim world.
Others, less religious, perhaps more military, admire the Joshua element
in Israel, the "pluck" of a small embattled nation, rather as they
admired Japan's fight against Russia almost 100 years ago. Then there
were the leftwingers who admired the socialist kibbutz element within
Zionism. I'm not sure it's really possible to speak of a "British
sympathy for the Arabs" or a British "anti-Israeli" policy. Ultimately,
the Brits will always follow the US anyway - attitudes towards Israel
are determined by attitudes towards US foreign policy in general -
and
the US policy towards Israel is......? In Suez in '56, the British
and
French joined with the Israelis against the Egyptians, though certainly,
that was not done out of any particular desire to assist Israel, but
rather to seize the Canal. Very generally, one can say that the Right
in
Britain are pro-Israel, whereas the Left are pro-Arab, but to say that
IS very general and not worth much.
**********************************************************
30th Sept 2001
As far as I am concerned, the (real) world has NOT changed at all.
Sun, moon, and stars have not changed their meaning, neither have human
love nor human stupidity changed. What HAS changed, or rather, what
has
entered its next phase, is the agenda of certain supernatural beings
and
their human agents and instruments. There are powerful forces at work
trying to make us THINK that the world changed on Sept 11th in ways
that
they can then use to suit their purposes, namely, Cold War II and New
World Order Phase 2. They began to claim that this was so almost as
soon
as the event happened. They make use of people's ignorance of and lack
of interest in history, foreign policy and lack of interest in other
countries and peoples.
We are encouraged to think that only America has suffered, whereas the
whole world has been suffering since at least 1945 when the A-bombs
were
dropped and 1947 when the US elite chose, yes chose -
study the
details - to plunge the world into Cold War I. The point is the rich
world has been struck a blow and has suffered a powerful psychic shock
as a result. Why suffered ? Because the rich world was (except for
a
tiny minority) asleep to what its rulers have been doing these last
50
years. Vietnam was so long ago, Congo and Colombia so far away....at
least 12 countries have been bombed by the USA in the last 15 years,
almost all of them very poor. We have lost all sense of perspective
and
proportion, but because of US financial and military muscle which
dominates all governments and global media, we are almost ordered to
sympathise with the sufferings of America.
In Europe there were 3 minutes of silence ordered by ALL the governments
of the EU. In Britain where Tony Blair also ordered these 3 minutes,
not
even the dead of 2 world wars (over 40 million people) receive 3 minutes
of memorial at national services on 11th November every year; they
get 2
minutes.
We are told the whole world was attacked because people from so many
countries died in the WTC. Nobody asks why the WTC was in New York
in
the first place.
We are told the people were innocent and that this was an attack on
democracy itself. But in a democracy, the people elect the government
which then conducts a foreign policy. The electors are therefore
responsible for that foreign policy (notwithstanding the fact that
most
of them couldn't care less about it). Who then - apart from the children
killed - is innocent ?
We are told that this was not an attack on America only, or else that
this was pure evil, seeking only to kill people, but how many Islamist
terrorist flying bombs have we seen flying into Helsinki, Brasilia,
Wellington NZ, Bangkok, Lisbon, Accra etc etc etc. We have not seen
them, because the peoples of those cities do not presume to rule the
world and interfere with the destinies of other nations. They do not
therefore suffer from any retribution from abroad. They live peaceably.
They create peace. The US does neither. It is a force for turbulence
in
the world. With all their talk of interminable WAR, it is the leaders
of
the USA and their global puppets in other states who are creating an
atmosphere of terror and frightening little children all over the world.
Watch the first 15 minutes of the film "Gladiator" again. If you wish
to
play world policeman like the Romans, you must expect to lose some
footsoldiers, whether military or economic, as well as their families.
The families of British imperial soldiers and civil servants were
massacred in the Indian Mutiny in 1857; they were killed by the Japanese
in 1941-2 in Malaya and Singapore. But what were they doing in Malaya,
and India in the first place ? Why were their troops and bases there
?
What are US bases doing in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Kosovo ?
We have been told for years that it is almost a crime to be sentimental
in the modern world, and yet now, after Sept 11th, one is almost accused
of treachery if one does not indulge in sentimentality.
Hollywood "tells it like it is": Towering Inferno (1974), Independence
Day (1997) Titanic (1998) and Pearl Harbour (2001). Hollywood has been
conditioning the world to such scenes of devastation and mass murder
for
decades - as a form of ENTERTAINMENT - and now we are expected
to be
shocked !!!!???? What did the ancient Chinese say ? A country that
indulges in bad music ( i.e. bad "entertainment") will become a bad
country. That is why the Department of Music and Rites was the most
important Department at the Imperial Court. Perhaps this catastrophe
will enable us finally to realise the difference between REAL reality
and VIRTUAL reality.
The world HAS changed in the sense that humanity has become 21, but
that
is not a result of Sept 11th; it has become "of age": 2001 in the 21st
century. The spiritual forces of opposition seek to prevent the Ego
of
humanity from becoming self-conscious. This "war" on terrorism (as
if
the USA has only just discovered terrorism !) is a massive distraction
from the wave of global idealism and resistance that has been surging
up
in the last few years. 1966-69 - wave: suppressed by drugs and political
violence, both seeded by the US Establishment (CIA acid and student
movement infiltration).
33 years later we get:
1999-2002 - wave : suppressed by the "endless" War On Terrorism (Cold
War II)
We also had : 1989-90 - wave : suppressed by the Gulf Crisis
and War
In these waves, millions wake up, but are quickly put back to sleep.
Are
we going to stay awake this time, or, in the words of The Who, are
we
gonna get fooled again ?
*******************************************************
3rd October 2001
Please see Blair's Labour Party conference speech
This was a remarkable and masterly speech in which, amongst other
things, a kind of blueprint for a New World Order Phase II was outlined.
A moralising speech in essence that was rooted in religiosity.
Here was Woodrow Wilson in modern guise.
He even used almost the very words of Sir Edward Grey to parliament
on 3rd August 1914: "whatever the dangers of the action we take, the
dangers of inaction are
far far greater" . Let us remember those words.
********************************************************
3rd October 2001
As I see it, there will be no mass bombing nor great killings of
civilians, who are more likely to die from the effects (such as
starvation) of social dislocation caused by the fighting. The Western
warmongers are too alive to the dangers of mass bombing and what
negative consequences it would create. Rather, I expect much aid will
be
given to the Northern Alliance to fight the main battles on the ground
but aided in very specific ways by American and British (n.b. Gurkhas
-
our trusted mercenaries) special forces, especially elite air cavalry
units. It is also possible that most of the military work will be done
by elite commando units of US and British forces operating with
tremendous but very focused firepower striking Taliban command units,
leaving the anti-Taliban forces to round up/finish off local units.
The
Central Asian post-Soviet republics, the "Stans" will be
all-important
in this as jump-off points, a) because Pakistan is too problematic
(unless the US set up bases in unpopulated inaccessible parts of
Pakistan, which is not impossible for US forces supplied from the Navy,
Oman and Diego Garcia) and b) because one of the long-term aims of
this
campaign is to finish up with (semi-)permanent Central Asian bases
for
US forces which will enable the US to dominate the rich energy resources
of the region. In the same way, the Kosovo War ended up with a 99 year
lease to the US for Camp Bondsteel in Kosovo. This will be used to
facilitate the transport of oil and gas from the Caspian region to
the
West via the Balkans.
For an incisive grasp of how the US elite see the long-term scenario
for
the whole Eurasian region in general and Central Asia in particular,
may
I suggest the book, "The Grand Chessboard" by Zbigniew Brzezinski
(1997).
As for what one can DO - apart from pray, take a look at Rudolf
Steiner's advice in The Karma of Untruthfulness Vol 2 lec 20 - the
most
important thing is to keep awake and really try to *understand* what
is
going on. The Internet can help a lot with info that comes from
non-conventional non-mainstream sources (i.e. sources which are in
effect little more than propaganda trumpets). Having understood more
than the mainstream media wish us to understand, one can then
COMMUNICATE, both to those around one and also to any groups or
individuals within the media and socio-political world whom you think
may at least be prepared to listen.
We must WATCH as well as PRAY - Christ's injunction included both.
An important task will be to understand which forces of evil are running
this
situation - how and when Luciferic, Ahrimanic, and even Sorathic forces
are
operative: Know your enemy - and trust that Michael is helping in ways
that he can.
************************************************************
4th October 2001
I think that these stories of chemical & bio-attacks are just what
the
ahrimanic forces that stand behind the western establishment WANT us
all
to think so that we become like frightened rabbits, possessed by fear,
and more determined to fight against the wicked foreigners who don't
subscribe to our wonderful democratic values. I recall the ruthlessness
of
the decision to drop the A-bombs in 1945 on civilians - AFTER the
horrors of the Nazi exterminations of Jews had been revealed to the
world !!! and the ruthlessness with which Vietnam and Cambodia were
bombed. Look, if we take the researches of Rudolf Steiner seriously
in
these and related matters on the nature of the society and age in which
we are living, then we surely ought to be able to look things in the
face and not
assume that conventional values are still in place with some of these
people. (Please don't assume that I'm saying like David Icke that every
member
of the US govt is a reptilian alien) The world of US entertainment
has been
revealing the amorality and utter ruthlessness of those in power in
the
West (and elsewhere of course) for over 40 years. Do we think that
if a
gas attack were to be launched in Chicago, a David Rockefeller would
be
driving around in a taxi within 100 miles ?
The "war of all against all" surely, results from a culture where all
individuals are consumed by egoism. A clash of civilisations hardly
qualifies for that, I would have thought. I continue to think that
"clash of civilisations", not war of all against all (we are already
slowly preparing the latter WITHIN our western culture) is in fact
the
model: this may well be the opportunity western circles have decided
on
to "take Islam out" so to speak - to co-opt and gradually condition
the
moderate Muslims and annihilate the radicals, as was done during the
Cold War with socialists and communists respectively. Islam and Sinic
blood-based nationalism are the two remaining cultural obstacles to
western materialism and must be dealt with before the arrival of
Ahriman in his incarnation. Having dealt with Islam, and probably India
(co-option already well under way there), the Sinics will be next.
That
will be the ultimate clash of civilisations - the struggle between
the
oldest and the newest Atlantean cultures. Some time during this
struggle, or even before it, the West will reveal its new form of
energy.
In the
TESTIMONY BY JOHN J. MARESCA VICE PRESIDENT, INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
UNOCAL CORPORATION TO HOUSE COMMITTEE ON INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
SUBCOMMITTEE ON ASIA AND THE PACIFIC FEBRUARY 12, 1998, WASHINGTON,
D.C.),
it was said that "the region's total oil reserves may reach more than
60
billion barrels of oil -- enough to service Europe's oil needs for
11
years."
What about US oil needs then ? If 60 billion are only enough to cope
with *European* needs for 11 years, why is the US interested ? And
what
will happen after the 11 years ? My guess is that they'll wheel out
the new technology then, but
by then they'll already have sown the seeds of the destruction of the
modern Chinese state.
**********************************************************
7th October 2001
Here we go again. It would seem that our brave boys are in action once
again, Tony Blair has informed us, assuring us that our British troops
are "among the best in the world" and "esteemed throughout the world".
The UK government seem to be catching the US government disease, namely,
in all situations, no matter how tragic or deadly - just keep boasting.
Our Dear Leader tells us that our brave boys have been firing our brave
(British-built ;-)) cruise missiles from our brave submarines submerged
off the Afghan coast. I sure hope they won't be spotted by the highly
efficient Afghan coastguard, targeted by those deadly Afghan shore
batteries or depthcharged by merciless Afghan destroyers; I mean,
everyone knows the power of the Afghan navy, right ? And no doubt we'll
soon be sending in our even braver Gurkha mercenary infantry to cut
some
Afghan throats with those civilised kukri knives of theirs....
The Empire has struck back. The media can now start cheering. I don't
think we'll see this as an act of weakness or Clintonesque irresolution.
It will be ruthless and relentless. It will be accompanied by torrents
of empty words, the empty words of economic imperialists. Indeed, those
empty words have already begun. We heard Ari Fleischer speak tonight
of
the campaign for "freedom to prevail over fear", when actually the
creation of fear (by western governments and their media lackeys)
is
more likely to prevail over freedom, with the undermining of civil
liberties.
It is not the Taliban or bin Laden that the imperial elite are afraid
of. They are afraid of the only people who can destroy them, namely,
their own electorates. They must do all they can to keep those
electorates from waking up, from spotting that the emperor has no
clothes. Hence the torrents of empty words.
Meanwhile, are the US likely to withdraw from Saudi Arabia, Kuwait,
the
Persian Gulf ? Are they likely to make serious attempts to resolve
the
Israel/Palestine question ?
Are they likely to pass up the chance of setting up bases in Uzbekistan
and elsewhere in the region ? Are we likely to see the effort to deal
with the ROOTS of this problem ? Is the Pope likely to convert to
Protestantism ?
It will not only be bin Laden that they "take out"; in the short run
they will "take out" idealism in the developed world by closing the
window of opportunity 1999-2002 which has followed that of 1966-69;
in
the long run they seek to "take out" Islam as a cultural challenger
to western
materialism.
***********************************************************
8th October 2001
"this is a new age, a new world" - the message repeated over and over
since
Sept 11; " a turning point in history" - Tony Blair
Some commentators have claimed this to be the final end of the Cold
War
era
2001: Russia and USA combine against Islamic terrorists, with a future
alliance against China in the wings ?
When did that era begin ? Arguably in 1941, when Russia and the USA
entered the war against Hitler
Jupiter and Saturn: 1941 - 2001 - 60 years: 3 conjunctions = one trigon
of conjunctions, an invisible triangle inscribed against the
zodiac
1941 - Pentagon construction begins Sept 11; devastating attack on
Pearl
Harbour
1941 - New World Order declared by US Professor Quincy Wright, calls
for
tripartite postwar world order controlled by UK & US
"Quincy Wright, professor of international law at the University of
Chicago,
supervised the section of the commission that explored the creation
of a
political international organization. He served on the central
committee of the World Citizens Association, along with Frank Aydelotte,
another
member of the commission In addition to these organizations Wright
served on the executive committee of the Chicago Council on Foreign
Relations.
Thanks to his prominence as a professor of international law at the
University of Chicago, Wrights' opinions on matters of international
concern were widely respected. This was particularly true at the Department
of
State in Washington. Throughout the 1930's and 1940's Wright corresponded
with
Secretary of State Cordell Hull on topics of international law. Hulls'
respect for Wright was such that--in January 1939, on the Secretary's
recommendation-- President Roosevelt offered Wright the post of U.S.
national commissioner on an international commission. After the United
States entered into the war, Wright became an official consultant to
the
Department of State. Wright is recognized as the author of one of the
most important pieces of work ever written on the subject of international
relations."
(http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/4476/wright-paper/wright01.html)
1881 - 1941 : 60 years, another Jupiter-Saturn trigon
1881: Czar Alexander II of Russia, President Garfield of USA both
assassinated
1881: beginning of major modern pogroms against Jews in Russia because
of assassination of Czar (some Jews amongst the Nihilists and anarchists
involved); this leads to birth of Zionist movement, which leads to
founding of the State of Israel
1881: key date for US occult brotherhoods, NB the Hermetic Brotherhood
of Luxor (see David Ovason: "The Secret Zodiacs of Washington
DC" - a wacky
title for a very serious and well-researched book)
1881: centenary of electricity; "the year of electricity" in New York;
a
new age proclaimed.
1821-1881 : 60 years
1821: Czar Alexander declares Russian influence in North America extends
as far south as Oregon, closes Alaska to foreigners.
1821: Faraday's first electric motor
1821: death of Napoleon
1821: Hegel publishes "The Philosophy of Right"
23 Jupiter/Saturn trigon cycles = 1380 years 2001 - 1380 = 621
In 622 Mohammed left Mecca and the Hegira (from which the Islamic
calendar begins) commenced. Admittedly, this is one year out, but.....
2001 - 720 (i.e. 12 x 60) = 1281 (Japanese, saved by 2nd divine wind
["kamikaze"] repel 2nd attempted Mongol invasion; Crusaders on
defensive; 1291 ejected from Acre, last remnant of former Kingdom of
Jersualem)
2001 - 1740 (i.e. 29 x 60) = 261 (Roman Empire under attack from 4
sides
+ simultaneous raging economic crisis)
************************************************************
8th October 2001
In the midst of the apparent flood tide of democratization after 1989
came the Iraqi invasion and annexation of Kuwait in August 1990. To
be
sure, democracy was not the issue; neither in Iraq nor in Kuwait could
there be much hope of fostering so Western a style of government.
Nevertheless, here was a challenge to regional stability in an area
of
special interest to the United States, so that in acting decisively,
President George Bush Sr. might give still more shape to what he now
called a "new world order" to be crafted by American leadership.
Then in September, Bush met with the Soviet Union's Mikhail Gorbachev
in
Helsinki. Gorbachev offered his full support for the coalition's actions
(though he provided no troops). It was certainly another blow for Saddam
as the Soviet Union had been a major supporter and supplier to the
Iraqi
regime. Afterwards, Bush issued the statement, "Out of these troubled
times a new world order can emerge."
The massive troop buildup continued in the Gulf and the world wondered
how this would all end. The U.S. economy was weakening rapidly and
the
Dow Jones closed at 2452 on September 28, off 18% from its July 16-17
close.
The president's address to a Joint Session of Congress on September
11,
1990, put the matter in Wilsonian tones:
"We stand today at a unique and extraordinary moment. The crisis in
the
Persian Gulf, as grave as it is, also offers a rare opportunity to
move
toward an historic period of cooperation. Out of these troubled times
.
. . a new world order can emerge: a new era--freer from the threat
of
terror, stronger in the pursuit of justice, and more secure in the
quest
for peace, a world where the strong respect the rights of the weak.
An
era in which the nations of the world, East and West, North and South,
can prosper and live in harmony. A hundred generations have searched
for
the elusive peace, while a thousand wars raged across the span of human
endeavor. Today that new world is struggling to be born, a world quite
different from the one we've known. A world where the rule of law
supplants the rule of the jungle. A world in which nations
recognize the shared responsibility for freedom and justice."
In mobilizing forces to combat Iraq, President Bush took a variety of
initiatives that might be called Wilsonian. Wilson has been praised
for
his skills - Lasswell calls him "the great generalissimo of the
propaganda front" - and not without reason. The same principles -
expression of altruism, distinction between the people and their rulers
and promise for a new, fair and constant - have been used since that
several times with great success.
Bush asked the United Nations for its support to defend Kuwaiti
sovereignty, and so showed his respect for the importance of
international institutions. He involved the Soviet Union, and so seemed
to be paving the way for a later collective security agreement with
Moscow. And he affirmed the battle to be one to have lasting
repercussions:
"The triumph of democratic ideas in Eastern Europe and Latin America
and
the continuing struggle for freedom elsewhere all around the world
all
confirm the wisdom of our nation's founders.... For two centuries,
we've
done the hard work of freedom. What is at stake is more than one small
country; it is a big idea: a new world order, where diverse nations
are
drawn together in common cause to achieve the universal aspirations
of
mankind--peace and security, freedom, and the rule of law. Such is
a
world worthy of our struggle and worthy of our children's future."
*********************************************************
8th October 2001
Faces are well and truly being revealed....
Sir John Keegan OBE, distinguished military historian, for many years
Senior lecturer in Military History at the Royal Military Academy
Sandhurst (Britain's West Point), Fellow of Princeton University, author
of many books including most recently (1999) "The First World War"
has written
the following appalling piece of racist and imperialist propaganda
in the "Daily Telegraph"
http://www.dailytelegraph.co.uk:80/dt?ac=006226015123304&rtmo=fwVYDfss&atmo=rrrrrrrq&pg=/01/10/8/do01.html
*********************************************************************************************
8th October 2001
Mesmerised by the - intentionally ? - distracting events in
Afghanistan, the world does not notice
that the once titanic Japanese economy appears to have hit its
iceberg,
is sinking by the bow, and is sending up emergency rockets.
******************************************************************
http://people.aol.com/people/special/0,11859,174592-3,00.html
September 12, 2001, New York City
>
> Louie Cacchioli, 51, is a firefighter assigned to Engine 47 in Harlem.
>
> We were the first ones in the second tower after the plane struck.
I was
> taking firefighters up in the elevator to the 24th floor to get in
position
> to evacuate workers. On the last trip up a bomb went off. We think
there was
> bombs set in the building. I had just asked another firefighter to
stay with
> me, which was a good thing because we were trapped inside the elevator
and
> he had the tools to get out.
If this story is true, it is momentous news, but note that the firefighter
doesn't say
anything more about it after "On the last trip up a bomb went
off. We
think there was bombs set in the building." Why is that ? Note also
the numbers in the
article: 24th floor, 500, 30, 20th: i.e. 23 - 24. A little dubious,
to
my mind. Where did this story come from ? Is it also not possible
that
something may have exploded in the building due to heat - boilers,
heating systems or whatever ? Explosions don't necessarily mean bombs.
The story needs corroborating.
******************************************************************
9th October 2001
This was a letter to the editor of the Daily Telegraph
from Christopher Booker (of Litton, Somerset),
a vitriolic anti-EU Tory writer for the
Daily Telegraph. Monday 8 Oct.
It could almost have been written by WT Stead himself,
except that he would probably have placed it on Pennsylvania
Avenue rather than Whitehall.
***********
SIR - I was prompted by
current events to pull down
one of my favourite childhood
stories, 'Mariners of Space' by
Erroll Collins, describing a
war between Earth and Mars.
The book opens thus:
"Gentlemen, it may mean
war!" Sir Robert Hargreaves'
voice was grave.
Challengingly, he looked
round the glass-and-steel
lined room off Whitehall,
where, in the year 2000, the
Earth Senate sat in
conference. Sir Robert's
fellow senators looked up
sharply at their President's
blunt words. Each man
represented one of the four
World Federations: John P.
Rockerbilt, shrewd, just ruler
of the British-American
Empire; M. Borisov of
Moscow, soldier, reformer
and scientist; Dr Ming, wise,
law-giving chief of the Asiatic
Federation; and lastly, that
great statesman, Jacques
Ferrand, who had welded a
troubled Continent into the
United States of Europe."
Apart from getting the date
wrong by a year, along with
President Blair's name, it is
quite prescient. Incidentally,
the Martians lost.
------------------------------------------
The book referred to is:
Erroll Collins, Mariners Of Space, Lutterworth Press,
London, 1944
***********************************************************
11th October 2001
Below is a classic piece of pseudo-Hegelian doublespeak
from Fukuyama in today's "Independent" newspaper (UK). He tries
to persuade
(unsuspecting) readers that he and Samuel Huntington are somehow
on different sides of some debate, whereas in fact they both
serve the
cause of Anglo-American imperialism, and both desire the victory of
that cause.
Both can consider themselves "right" in their own terms: Huntington
right in the
short-term about the clash of civilisations; Fukuyama right in in the
long-term
about what the clash will ultimately lead to.
Consider this last sentence from Fukuyama's article:
"The clash consists of a series of rearguard actions from
societies
whose traditional existence is indeed threatened by
modernisation. The strength of the backlash reflects the
severity of this threat. But time and resources are on the
side
of modernity, and I see no lack of a will to prevail in the
West
today."
A more concise statement of the struggle between Ahriman and Lucifer
you could hardly find. It recognises that "modernity" does indeed
pose a
severe *threat* to traditional societies.
************
Francis Fukuyama: We remain at the end of history
'I remain right: modernity is a very powerful freight train
that will not be derailed by recent events, however
painful'
A stream of commentators has been asserting that the tragedy
of 11 September proves that I was utterly wrong to have said
more than a decade ago that we had reached the end of
history. The chorus began almost immediately, with George
Will asserting that history had returned from vacation, and
Fareed Zakaria declaring the end of the end of history. It is,
on the
face of it, nonsensical and insulting to the memory
of those who died on 11 September – as well as to those who
are now participating in military raids over Afghanistan – to
declare that this unprecedented attack did not rise to the level
of a historical event. But the way in which I used the word
"history" was different. It referred to the progress of mankind
over the centuries toward modernity, which is characterised by
institutions like liberal democracy and capitalism.
My observation, made back in 1989 on the eve of the collapse
of communism, was that this evolutionary process did seem to
be bringing ever larger parts of the world toward modernity.
And
if we looked beyond liberal democracy and markets, there was
nothing else towards which we could expect to evolve. Hence
the end of history. While there were retrograde areas that
resisted that process, it was hard to imagine an alternative
civilisation in which people would genuinely want to live –
particularly after socialism, monarchy, fascism, and other
varieties of authoritarian rule had been discredited.
This view has been challenged by many people, and perhaps
most articulately by Samuel Huntington. He argued that rather
than progressing toward a single global system, the world
remained mired in a "clash of civilisations" where six or seven
large cultural groups coexist without converging and constitutethe
new
fracture lines of global conflict. Since the successful
attack on the centre of global capitalism was evidently
perpetrated by Islamic extremists unhappy with the very
existence of Western civilisation, observers have been
handicapping the Huntington "clash" view over my own "end of
history" hypothesis rather heavily.
I believe that in the end I remain right. Modernity is a very
powerful freight train that will not be derailed by recent events,
however painful and unprecedented. Democracy and free
markets will continue to expand over time as the dominant
organising principles for much of the world. But it is worthwhile
thinking about what the true scope of the present challenge is.
It has always been my belief that modernity has a cultural
basis. Liberal democracy and free markets do not work at all
times and everywhere. They work best in societies with certain
values, whose origins may not be entirely rational. It is not
an
accident that modern liberal democracy emerged first in the
Christian West, since the universalism of democratic rights can
be seen in many ways as a secular form of Christian
universalism.
The central question raised by Mr. Huntington is whether
institutions of modernity will work only in the West, or whether
there is something broader in their appeal that will allow them
to make headway in non-Western societies. I believe there is.
The proof lies in the progress that democracy and free markets
have made in regions like East Asia, Latin America, Orthodox
Europe and South Asia. Proof is also offered by the millions
of
Third World immigrants who vote with their feet every year to
live in Western societies and eventually assimilate to Western
values.
But there does seem to be something about Islam, or at least
fundamentalist Islam, that makes Muslim societies particularly
resistant to modernity. Of all contemporary cultural systems,
the Islamic world has the fewest democracies (Turkey alone
qualifies), and contains no countries that have made the
transition from Third to First World status in the manner of
South Korea or Singapore.
There are plenty of non-Westerners who prefer the economic
and technological part of modernity and hope to have it without
having to accept democratic politics or Western cultural values
as well (for example, China or Singapore). There are others
who like both the economic and political versions, but just can't
figure out how to make it happen (Russia is an example). Forthem,
transition to modernity may be long and painful. But
there are no insuperable cultural barriers likely to prevent
them
from getting there.
Islam, by contrast, is the only cultural system that regularly
seems to produce people, like Osama bin Laden or the
Taliban, who reject modernity lock, stock and barrel. This
raises the question of how representative such people are of
the larger Muslim community. The answer that politicians East
and West have been putting out since 11 September is that
those sympathetic with the terrorists are a "tiny minority" of
Muslims. It is important for them to say this, to prevent
Muslims as a group from becoming targets of hatred. The
problem is that dislike and hatred of America and what it
stands for are clearly much more widespread than that.
Certainly the number of people willing to go on suicide
missions and actively conspire against the US is tiny. But
sympathy for them – feelings of schadenfreude at collapsing
towers, an immediate sense of satisfaction that the US was
getting what it deserved, to be followed only later by pro forma
expressions of disapproval – is characteristic of much more
than a "tiny minority" of Muslims. It extends from the middle
classes in countries like Egypt to immigrants in the West.
This broader dislike and hatred would seem to represent
something much deeper than mere opposition to American
policies like support for Israel, encompassing a hatred of the
underlying society. Perhaps, as many commentators have
speculated, the hatred is born out of a resentment of Western
success and Muslim failure. But rather than psychologise the
Muslim world, it makes more sense to ask whether radical
Islam constitutes a serious alternative to Western liberal
democracy.
Even for Muslims themselves, political Islam has proven much
more appealing in the abstract than in reality. After 23 years
of
rule by fundamentalist clerics, most Iranians, in particular
nearly everyone under 30, would like to live in a far more liberal
society.
All of the anti-American hatred that has been drummed up
does not translate into a viable political programme that Muslim
societies will be able to follow in the years ahead.
We remain at the end of history because there is only one
system that will continue to dominate world politics – that of
the liberal-democratic West. This does not imply a world free
of
conflict, or the disappearance of culture as a distinguishing
characteristic of societies. But the struggle we face is not
the
clash of several distinct and equal cultures struggling amongst
one another like the great powers of 19th-century Europe. The
clash consists of a series of rearguard actions from societies
whose traditional existence is indeed threatened by
modernisation. The strength of the backlash reflects the
severity of this threat. But time and resources are on the side
of modernity, and I see no lack of a will to prevail in the West
today.
The writer is a professor of international political economy at
the John Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies.
This article first appeared in the 'Wall Street Journal'
**************************************************
12 October 2001
Herewith a piece from one of the most intelligent - and
most devious - writers in the British academia-media interface,
the Oxford scholar Timothy Garton Ash, a man completely at home
in the world of ChathamHouse/Bilderberg. He is their "Europe" expert,
their "Germany" and "Central Europe" expert, and here we see him
deftly repositioning Europe for the coming struggle
against China, which country, needless to say, is not at all mentioned.
The last paragraph of the article, with its clever adoption of a
Bismarckian motif, is perhaps the most illuminating. Again, it's from
today's
NWO strumpet "The Independent" newspaper (London)
http://argument.independent.co.uk/commentators/story.jsp?story=98984
2 October 2001
Timothy Garton Ash: Why this war in Afghanistan will
redraw the map of Europe
'The Islamic world is Europe's "near abroad". We must address
the discontents on which terrorism feeds'
War changes everything. The war against terrorism, now a hot
war in Afghanistan, has this in common with the Cold War: that
it touches every part of the world, and reshapes their politics.
How will it reshape Europe?
I have been in eight European countries over the last three
weeks, trying to answer that question through conversations
with political leaders, intellectuals, guerrilla chiefs in the
mountains of Macedonia, and ordinary people in the streets of
Madrid, Paris, Warsaw and other capitals. Here are a few
things it may change.
The position of Britain: Tony Blair plays Churchill to Bush's
Roosevelt. The war again confirms the very special relationship
that the British have to the English-speaking peoples "across
the pond", as we revealingly say, reducing the Atlantic Ocean
to something narrower than the English Channel. What's more,
the feeling is currently reciprocated by many Americans, which
was by no means always the case. (The former German
Chancellor Helmut Schmidt once quipped that the special
relationship was so special that only one side knew it existed.)
Will this put more distance between Britain and continental
Europe, confirming all the old Gaullist suspicions about the
British always putting America before Europe? I think not. I
encountered remarkably few such suspicions, even in Paris.
On the contrary, it will probably increase the British Prime
Minister's diplomatic weight in Europe, and his ability to act
as
a "bridge" between Europe and the United States. Moreover, he
himself clearly intends to follow the left hook with a right.
After
fully engaging with the United States in this war, he hopes to
use his enhanced prestige to lead Britain more fully into
Europe, and especially into the European monetary union.
The position of Russia: Vladimir Putin is the other European
politician who has seized the coat-tails of history. Many
expected him to demand Western approval for Russia's
"anti-terrorist" war in Chechnya, and a slowdown on Nato
enlargement to include the Baltic states, as the price for his
support for the war against Osama bin Laden and his kind.
Instead, he has used that support as a launch-pad for a
strategic campaign to have Russia accepted as a full member
of the West, and of Europe.
The Nato Secretary-General, Lord Robertson, confirms that at
his recent meeting with Mr Putin, the Russian president made
it plain that, while he still did not like the idea of the Baltic
states joining Nato, he was certainly not going to attempt to
stop it. President Putin seems almost to be rhetorically
exaggerating the threat of terrorism as a new common enemy,
in order to place Russia more firmly in the West. There are
many thorny questions for the West along this path – above all,
how far should we compromise our own standards in order to
encourage Russia to proceed in the right direction? – but the
right direction it surely is.
The eastward enlargement of Nato: At a meeting of the heads
of state of all the Nato applicant countries in Sofia last Friday,
Lord Robertson emphatically assured them that the current
crisis would not slow this down. So did a message from
President Bush. This seems to me credible. This war has
shown what Nato is, and what it is not. On the one hand,
Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty has been invoked for the
first time. The attack on one member state is formally
considered as an attack on all. On the other hand, we see that
Article 5 does not mean all member states throwing closely
co-ordinated military forces into the front line; it simply means
member states doing what they are ready and able to do, if and
when the directly affected country asks them. If international
terrorism is the big new threat, a broader but slightly looser
transatlantic alliance makes even more sense than it did
before.
The enlargement of the European Union: Alas, this may well be
slowed down. The 11 September attacks have caused the topic
of internal security, including Europe-wide policing, border
controls, arrangements for extradition between member
countries and so forth, to shoot up the European agenda,
propelled especially by countries like Spain, which faces its
own terrorist threat in the Basque ETA movement. As the French
foreign
minister, Hubert Vedrine, pointed out to me, this may in effect add
yet another set of requirements to the already daunting list of things
central and east European countries have to do before they can join
the European Union. And this will be a very difficult set of requirements for countries
with weak and often corrupt police forces, judiciaries and
customs services to fulfil. One glimpses the depressing
prospect of the second eastward Nato enlargement coming
before even the first eastward enlargement of the EU.
The Balkans: I cannot count the number of times that people
have said to me in the Balkans, "the international community...
I mean, the United States". But now the United States has
other priorities. Moreover, the task in a country such as
Macedonia is a complex one, which does not fit easily under
the rubric of "war against terrorism". For it involves brokering
and sustaining a peace settlement with Albanian guerrilla
forces who in other contexts might be described as terrorists.
And, indeed, are so described by ethnic Macedonians.
Explaining the arrangements made for amnesty for the
Albanian guerrilla leaders, the Macedonian president, Boris
Trajkovski, told me: "I signed an agreement with the
Secretary-General [of Nato] and the Secretary-General's representative
signed an agreement with the terrorists." So will
Europe now take up the burden of this complex, messy and
morally ambiguous task? Currently, a small contingent of
German troops is supporting EU monitors, and the EU's foreign
policy chief Javier Solana is there almost every week. I still
doubt if the EU is ready and able to look after its own
backyard. One thing, however, is clear: the US is unlikely to
keep pulling Europe's irons out of the fire, as it did for most
of
the 20th century.
A European foreign policy? One can argue this both ways. On
the one hand, the Islamic and Arab worlds are Europe's "near
abroad", and we have perhaps 20 million Muslims in Europe.
So there is a vital European interest in addressing the
underlying causes of the discontents on which terrorism feeds,
whether among Palestinians, Kurds or Algerians. This crisis
should therefore catalyse co-ordinated action in the Middle
East and North Africa. On the other hand, the left-Gaullist idea
that Europe should have an approach very different from that
of
the US, and perhaps even see itself as a rival superpower,
must seem less plausible and palatable at a time when the
West as a whole is under attack. If the outcome were to be a
more active European foreign policy, but one that complements
rather than contradicts American approaches – as Blair'sdiplomacy
in
the present crisis has done – that would be a
good result of a bad business.
These are just a few of the patterns in the European
kaleidoscope that the war against terrorism has changed, and
may change still more. Asked for his view of Africa, Bismarck
famously observed: "Here lies Russia and here lies France,
and we are in the middle. That is my map of Africa." The world
has changed since Bismarck's time, and Europe is no longer
at the centre of it. Today, the map of Europe is being redrawn
in Afghanistan.
The writer is Director of the European Studies Centre at St
Antony's College, Oxford, and author of 'History of The Present'
*******************************************************
13th October
There is always a temptation to think that the times in which WE
live are the most significant times, the most evil times etc. Imagine
if
we'd had CNN etc at the time of the Mongol invasions, or live coverage
of Tamburlaine's wars against the Muslim states of the Middle
East.
Having said that, I do happen to think that the 21st century IS or
WILL
BE the most significant century since the Resurrection BECAUSE it is
humanity's coming of age, its Ego incarnation in the sense of one century
of
human development since the birth of Christ being equal to a year in
the life
of a single individual (as I've discussed elsewhere on this site).
However, I do not think
that Srebrenica or even Rwanda, despite their awfulness, were especially
unique horrors in the way that the Holocaust or Hiroshima and Nagasaki
were. Tribes have always tried to exterminate
rivals. One could even see the Holocaust in this way, but it
was
something much more, because it was so coldly, calculatedly, and
mechanically executed and also because it was directed against the
people of Jesus in whom had lived the Christ. This is the signature
of
the Anti-Christ, who will always bear a particular resentment against
the Jewish people for having enabled the Christ to act on the physical
plane. (By the way, I do NOT see the enmity of the palestinian Arabs
for
the State of Israel as an example of this Sorathic resentment.) I would
hazard a guess that the AntiChrist has also harboured a special grudge
against the German people since 1945 for having failed to exterminate
the Jews. Hiroshima and Nagasaki were also indeed unique horrors; they
were not "tribal" attempts to wipe out a rival people; rather, they
were
displays of sheer annihilatory power such as the world has never seen
in
recorded history - displays of the utterly ruthless violence of the
counter-Sun. Compared to that event, Osama bin Laden's activity is
on a
par with that of a traditional, if well-organised, bandit who strikes
hard and dramatically at the forces of authority, shakes his fist and
runs away. The American people will have to live with that karma of
the
1945 A-bombs till the end of their history, just as the Germans will
have to live with the deeds of the Nazis, and the British (if only
they
could remember it !) with the Opium wars and Opium trade.
*********************************************************
13th October
As an example of what's going on underneath, and is more or less
disguised by, the "drama" of Bush vs bin Laden:
New Scientist magazine - the UK's Scientific American,
this week has
a feature on what it calls "The Big Chill" - from next month electricity
will be
delivered to 30,000 US homes in Frisbie (!), Detroit via superconducting
cables. This will effect a revolution in electricity. An article in
New Scientist
by Paul Grant (who manages the superconductivity programme at the
Electric Power Research Institute, Palo Alto, California) says: "...we
expect future generations to talk about 2001 as the year electricity
changed forever .....The message is simple. The superconducting
revolution is here. Resistance is useless." Seems kind of appropriate
that Rumsfeld & Co are talking about Cold War 2, doesn't
it ?
It appears that one of the features of superconductivity will be a
greatly increased use of silver rather than copper, so all you
developing countries out there who are rich in silver deposits, get
ready for increased attention from the Pentagon and CIA.
Note in passing that the 60 year cycle Jupiter-Saturn trigon of
conjunctions takes us back to 1941 and 1881; 1881, 100 years on from
the
discovery of electricity in 1781, was celebrated as another Year of
Electric Revolution in the USA when public electric lighting really
took
off, 2 years after Edisons's first electric light bulb went on in 1879.
*******************************************************
13th October
Consider Zbigniew Brzezinski's eye-opening view of the events of the
years, put forward in 'The Cold War and Its Aftermath' in "Foreign
Affairs" (the magazine of the Council On Foreign Relations),
the 70th anniversary edition, Fall 1992:
"Despite the prevailing view of the time that these two dangerous
clashes [Berlin and Cuba] ended as American victories, the US successes
were largely tactical while the Soviet gains were more strategic.
The
uncontested Soviet construction of the Berlin Wall consolidated
Soviet
control over East Germany - thereby terminating Soviet fears of
Western
subversion of its domination over central Europe - while the withdrawal
of Soviet missiles from Cuba was purchased [an interesting choice
of
word ! - TMB] by the Kennedy administration through a blanket guarantee
of the continued existence of a pro-Soviet regime. In effect, immunity
was successfully extorted for a geopolitically important Soviet
forward
base in defiance of the line drawn by the once inviolable Monroe
Doctrine."
- in other words, a covert bipolar agreement on spheres of influence.
Significantly, Zbig nowhere in the article focuses on the supreme
importance of 1961-2 - as you might have expected him to do if he wanted
to give the impression that the Cold war really was a close run thing
that threatened the very existence of humanity. On the contrary, he
makes this statement: "...despite some illusions propagated by Krushev
and entertained by Brezhnev, the Soviet Union was forced to play
"catch-up ball" throughout the Cold War. The bottom line thus has
to be
that a full-blown Soviet victory was never in the cards, except
very
briefly, right after World War II."
Of 1961-2 he says: "[Khrushnev] was the Master Bumbler...he could
not
achieve a breakthrough, even though he brought both sides dangerously
close to a military collision at a time of still relative strategic
inferiority." That is all he says about it. Recall that throughout
the
Cold War, there were intermediaries like Averill Harriman and
Arnold
Hammer to-ing and fro-ing between Washington and Moscow.
By the way, it is also of interest that Zbig focuses on the period
1975-80 (his own period in government, of course) as THE key period
of the Cold War,
when the USA repulsed what he calls "the Soviet offensive thrust" that
started in the early 60s. And what does he say was key to this US
victory ? Why, Afghanistan of course, together with Poland and the
arms
buildup. About Afghanistan he says this: "Geopolitically the Soviet
invasion of Afghanistan in December 1979....propelled the US to
adopt,
for the first time ever during the entire Cold war, a policy of
directly
supporting actions aimed at killing Soviet troops. The Carter
administration not only undertook immediately to support the Mujahadeen,
but it also quietly put together a coalition embracing Pakistan,
China,
Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Britain on behalf of the Afghan resistance.
Equally important was the American public guarantee of Pakistan's
security against any major Soviet miltiary attack."
What Zbig DOES emphasise very much is the following:
"....from a historical point of view, the collapse of the Soviet
Union,
which endured for some 70 years, is more than overshadowed by the
disintegration of the great Russian empire, which lasted for more
than
300 years. This is an event of truly historic magnitude, pregnant
with
geopolitical uncertainties....The West is correct in stressing that
it
sees Russia's eventual destiny as a major player in the European
concert
of nations and as one of America's partners in dealing with the
world's
wider problems."
This is VERY significant; it shows that for members of the western elite such as Brzezinski,
Russia, not the USSR, has always been the real enemy and it hints obliquely at US-Russian
cooperation against China, a theme he amplifies in his later book
The Grand
Chessboard
(1997)
****************************************************************
14th October
As far as I am concerned, it is not a fantasy that elements within the
US authorities connived at the sinking of the USS Maine in Havana in
1898, nor that they were complicit in the destruction of Pearl Harbour,
nor that they were directly responsible for the MOST RUTHLESS mass
destruction of human beings that has taken place in living memory,
in
Japan in 1945, nor that they were complicit in the assassination of
President Kennedy. If they can do such things, then the claims in
James Bamford's book National Security Agency, Body of Secrets:
Anatomy of
the Ultra-Secret National Security Agency (2001) (about
the
Joint Chiefs of Staff who "proposed launching a secret and
bloody war of
terrorism against their own country in order to trick the
American public into supporting an ill-conceived war they intended
to
launch against Cuba.") ought at least to be granted a hearing.
Similarly, given
such precedents, the claim that perhaps elements within the authorities
were also complicit in the events of Sept 11th also deserves a hearing,
more than a hearing; it deserves serious consideration, not least
because the stimulation of the climate of terror and fear (world war,
Cold War, 10 year war, endless War, bio-war, war of civilisations,
clash
of cultures, on and on it has gone) that has been spread throughout
the
world - not just in the USA - since Sept 11th has emanated almost
entirely from the US authorities and from their overseas subordinate
instruments, Blair, Schroeder, Robertson & Co, not to mention their
instruments in the corporate media.
Those who regularly castigate conspiracy theorists will not bother even
to
consider the possibility that the US elite may have been involved in
such an event, and will focus their attention only on bin Laden and
what
they see as foreign threats. Bamford would appear to have come
up with "hard evidence"
about the complicity of elements of the US authorities/elite in previous
disasters. Any sensible policeman looking for evidence leading to a
crime will entertain all leads when they seem to point in particular
directions. If a member of the family has been in the past involved
in
crimes against members of his own family, it makes sense at least to
investigate the possibility that he may have done it again, and not
just
to assume that he is innocent just because he is a member of the family.
To sum up, it is not a question simply of speculation, but rather of
opening or closing one's mind to certain directions in which to look
for
evidence.
*****************************************************************
14th October
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk/newsid_1598000/1598340.stm
This appalling story is quite typical of the way the British
establishment has throughout history treated many of those of its citizens
who
are prepared to fight and die for it. Similar dismissive attitudes
towards British troops was shown by British civil servants during combat
in the Gulf, Kosovo and Sierra Leone. Unfortunately, too many
British
people are such tribalists in their instincts that they never learn
that
their social superiors have never given a damn about them since the
days
when Wellington described his men - those who helped defeat Napoleon
for
the British Establishment - as "the scum of the earth". What price
Blair's pieties about freedom, democracy, civilisation and justice
now ?
He's only just got back from Oman lecturing the troops out there why
they have to be ready to fight and die for these things. Many probably
weren't listening, having still in their minds the sexy image of the
lascivious bump and grind routine which Geri Halliwell (our UN
spokeswoman to the Third World on contraception and population control
!),
former lead singer with the Spice Girls, served them up just two
days before, a show paid for by Her Majesty's Government, i.e. by us
taxpayers. For "our boys", bread and circuses and pious lectures, but
no life insurance policy.
***********************************************************
15th October
May I recommend the monthly "Prospect" magazine (that rare bird these
days, a collection of essays, long and short) as one which gives insight
into the thinking of the British Establishment and its media allies
- as
well as a few other people. Only relatively few articles can be
downloaded from their site at :
http://www.prospect-magazine.co.uk/
but all articles are listed at:
http://www.prospect-magazine.co.uk/index/subject.html
and you can get an idea of the kind of people and the kind of things
that are discussed. The magazine only started in the mid-90s. It is
expensive and aimed only at the elite and opinion-formers.
VERY SIGNIFICANT INDEED, I believe, is the article by Anatole Lieven
"The Second Fall", which, notably IS available for download
at:
http://www.prospect-magazine.co.uk/highlights/essay_lieven_secondfall/index.html
This echoes in far greater detail The Economist article of Dec 1992
-
Jan 1993 which I analysed in my book "Mapping the Millennium", though
it
is rather more sociological than geopolitical. That Economist article
looked back at the 21st century from the vantage point of 2992. This
Lieven article does something similar, looking back to 2000-2200 from
2759, when "the immortals" (the elite) leave Earth (the masses) to
its
fate. The picture he paints of the next two centuries could hardly
be
more depressing, and one can recognise a number of themes that
relate
to comments of Rudolf Steiner.
Here is a quote from another article by that same Anatole Lieven - he
crops
up all over the place - It comes from his article "Western Policy
in Central Asia:
Values or Geopolitics?" on Eurasianet.org
(http://www.eurasianet.org/osn/eurasianet.html)
"Certain voices for example have advocated making Uzbekistan in effect
America's "regional policeman" for the area — exactly the
role
supposedly played by the Shah in the Persian Gulf. Tendencies in
this
direction could perhaps be increased by the new balance of
both power
and ideology between the State Department and the Pentagon. Under
General Colin Powell, the State Department is unlikely to be seeking
new
areas of U.S. involvement, and, in the case of Russia's bloody war
in
Chechnya, it has already demonstrated a willingness to speak out
over
human rights."
Now who might those certain voices be ? The Shah was set up and then
abandoned by the West. Might the game plan be to set up Uzbekistan
as
the West's regional representative and abandon it too, allowing an
Islamic Revolution to occur there which might lead on to a regional
Pan-Islamic Emirate ?
********************************************************
20th October 2001
Things have certainly become nakedly transparent since Sept 11th.
Courageous commentators like Robert Fisk and Natasha Walters
in The
Independent (London), and other honest and sensible
letter writers to that paper
might as well give up. Their contributions are merely cosmetic
- printed
in order to maintain the appearance of a spurious 'balance' of
views.
However, The Independent leader of 22 October said
it all: "what this
Orwellian 'war without end' is really about, The Independent
leader
said, is "the re-ordering of the world so that large parts of
it are no
longer alienated by and resentful of the dominance of liberal
capitalism
and Enlightenment values" - a world made in the image of neo-imperialist
'liberal' hacks of the mailed fist like David Aaronovitch, Anne
McElvoy,
Donald McIntyre, Philip Hensher and all their ideological bedfellows
over at "The Economist". Well, there are quite
a few in this country who
don't happen to share the Fukuyaman vision of a late 18th century
Anglo-American Epiphany, Enlightened and Eternal. The Independent
and
the rest of the New World Order gang in the media are taking
quite a
gamble this time, hoping Joe Public will stay duped during the
procession of Cheney's "never-ending" war, but don't forget the
story of
the Emperor who had no clothes...
***********************************************************
20th October 2001
It's looking increasingly likely that the anthrax scares in the US
are
home-grown, perhaps from the "Remember WACO" gangs of the Far Right
militia or other anti-Federal
govt "patriot" forces, or from other individuals with grudges
against the US govt/establishment
who are taking advantage of the current crisis to attack the targets
of their resentment. It's
also possible, of course, that the anthrax crisis is created by CIA
or NSA agents with a view to
ultimate implication of Iraq, thus justifying war on that country.
By steadily ratcheting up
the tension on the American population and media, an eventual "revelation"
by the US govt
that Iraq was somehow involved would lead to a torrent of "public opinion"
in favour of removing Saddam
Hussein. So, the US goes in and does that....and then ?
******************************************************************
28th October 2001
The military-industrial complex rides again - this time for decades.....
What a perfect situation this is for the military: the world on a
permanent war-footing - no short-term sideshows like the Gulf and Kosovo
in
restricted areas, but a permanent practice opportunity worldwide. Military-related
industries of course will benefit, old ordnance can be got rid of ,
and the US economy, as post-1941 (60 years ago = 3 x Jupiter-Saturn
conjunction trigons;
one conjunction every 20 years), will rise again out of the doldrums
- always assuming
no nukes arrive in suitcases.
I mean seriously, folks, the inmates have indeed taken over the asylum
here. And they said the "1984" scenario was a nonsense that would never
happen ?! We are talking here since the fraudulent takeover by Bush
in
last year's Presidential election about a coup in the USA; the country
has clearly been taken over by a gang of war criminals, a gang
particularly subservient to special industrial, commercial and financial
interests, a gang that is blithely and arrogantly threatening "the
(relative) peace" of the world (insofar as the world ever has real
peace, that is) for decades to come - that means the lives of ourselves,
our children and grandchildren. The force applicable by the deluded
criminal fanatics of al Qaeda simply does not bear comparison to the
power
available to the gang of calculating criminals in Washington. The only
thing those
US govrenment criminals fear is the voices of the egos of the citizens
in countries
throughout the world, and especially in the USA itself, raised in combination.
As the people of the United States defeated a similar gang and their
war crimes in 1966-73*, so the
people of the world will have to raise our voices to defeat this gang
in
our time.
* It is often said that the Vietnamese defeated the Americans in
Vietnam. Certainly, for a small nation, the Vietnamese gave an
incredible account of themselves, but if the people of the USA had
followed their "government" during the Vietnam War through thick and
thin, as in 1941-45, then no military efforts of the Vietnamese would
have sufficed to defeat the US. It was in the Vietnam war that the
phrase "the battle for hearts and minds" became widespread. The US
authorities lost that battle at home, because the American people,
led
by the younger generation, finally saw through what their war criminal
government was doing. The choice for war or peace lies within the
conscious ego of each person. That is where modern wars are essentially
fought; it is a spiritual struggle.
********************************************************
28th October 2001
In foreign affairs "The Economist" of London has long
been the
mouthpiece of the Royal Institute of International Affairs (RIIA, aka
Chatham House), which in turn has been in tandem with its US equivalent,
the Council On Foreign Relations (CFR; its magazine is "Foreign
Affairs"). These two foreign policy organisations, whose
joint roots go
back to transatlantic elite talks in Paris in May 1919 at the Hotel
Majestic at the time of
the Treaty of Versailles, have between them coordinated Anglo-American
foreign policy through such transatlantic elite networks since the
1930s.
These bipartisan circles have other extensive media "assets" in the
BBC,
"The Independent", Telegraph (owner Conrad Black) and
the Murdoch media
empire (Sky satellite TV, The Sun, The Times, The
News of the World
newspapers in the UK)*. Since at least 1992, "The Economist"
has been
hinting that Uzbekistan would be the country to watch in Central Asia.
We are now seeing daily more evidence of that. Needless to say, The
New York Times,
Time and Newsweek magazines have also long
been "assets" whose editorial
policies have been aligned with these same transatlantic elite foreign
policy circles - the RIIA and the CFR.
* of course, for the sake of "balance", these media organs do also
feature articles by writers not necessarily favourable to their
consensus. Their editorial lines over decades, however, and the majority
of their articles have followed a consistent thread - that of
maintaining Anglo-American global hegemony.
***********************************************************
28th October 2001
As I see it, the Anglo-American world has a special responsibility for
having introduced three impulses into world evolution which have worked
destructively: in the cultural sphere, the Darwinian concept of blind
accidental natural selection (not the same as evolution, where Darwin
was right); in the political sphere, the concept and practice of party
politics and dualistic adversarialism in the political sphere; in the
economic sphere,
the concept and practice of the "free" market and the liberation
of egoism in all 3 areas of the economic realm: production, distribution,
and consumption.
Anglo-Americans need to work hard to get others to see that these
three impulses have been disastrous, and must be replaced by suitable
healthy ones. In Anthroposophical circles, a certain amount of work
has
been on the 1st and 3rd of these, but very little on the 2nd.
*************************************************************
28th October 2001
In its end of year double issue 1992-3, The Economist
gazed into its
crystal ball for the 21st century and imagined that in 2011 a
certain
Colonel Algosaibi would overthrow the corrupt House of Saud and
institute an Islamic Republic that would unite most of the Muslim world
under its leadership. This would then link up with the Chinese for
an
attack on the West. The main victims of this successful onslaught would
be Turkey and Russia, which would lose all its territory east of the
Urals. Just thought I'd mention it.....we may not have to wait till
2011
for some of this to happen.
Meanwhile, keep the following dates in mind:
1933 - 1966 - 1999
1945 - 1978 - 2011
************************************************************
28th October 2001
100 years ago the world's leading superstate - Britain - was fighting
to
oppose its will halfway round the world on the Boers of South Africa,
a
wretched people which it saw as obscurantist, backward, and intolerant,
but who were putting up surprisingly strong resistance; it took the
British 3 embarrassing years to conquer them. Behind the struggle -
dressed up by the British as a struggle for the rights of oppressed
English-speaking folk in South Africa, lay the will to control the
gold
and diamonds of that country. They have controlled them ever since.
Today, behind all the righteous bluster about justice for the victims
of
Sept 11th and rights for Afghan women, there lies the will to control
the vast oil and mineral reserves of central Asia. America is determined
to control them for the foreseeable future (see Zbigniew Brzezinski's
1997 book "The Grand Chessboard"). Imperialism was the
dominant western
political philosophy 100 years ago; the word seems to be coming
back
into vogue among those British media commentators who write for media
organs close to transatlantic elite circles.
*******************************************************
30th October 2001
Here's an excerpt from BRAVE NEW WORLD wherein Huxley's elite explains
the turning point from the OLD world's freedoms and pursuit of truth
and
knowledge to the NEW world where freedom is sacrificed in the name
of
peace, security and happiness and the people are tranquillized and
erogenously
stimulated into acquiescence.
Whereas in writing '1984' Orwell dwelled on educated generalities, it
seems Huxley was in-the-know regarding actual specifics. Read for
yourself what he says in Chapter 16, page 273:
"People USED to imagine that knowledge was the highest good, truth
the
supreme value. ...People still went on talking about truth and beauty
as
though they were sovereign goods. Right up to the time of the Nine
Years' War. That made them change their tune all right. What's the
point
of truth or beauty or knowledge when THE ANTHRAX BOMBS are popping
all
around you? That was when science first began to be controlled --
after
the Nine Years' War. People were ready to have even their appetites
controlled then. Anything for a quiet life. We've gone on controlling
ever since. It hasn't been very good for truth, of course. But it's
been
very good for happiness." [end quote]
----------------------------------
Note that a Nine Years' War would take us to 2010/2011, which is not
only the date specifically mentioned by the transatlantic
elite-connected magazine "The Economist" (the only media
organ allowed
into Bilderberg meetings apparently) back in 1992-3 for a coup in Saudi
Arabia that would lead to an pan-Islamic-Chinese alliance, but is also
the date that corresponds to 1978 and 1945 in 33 year cycles:
1933 - 1945
1966 - 1978
1999 - 2011
******************************************************
©Terry Boardman
Homepage | 911&
After: Thoughts & Observations (2)
Third Millenium
: Third Way? | New World Order |East-West
Issues|Kaspar Hauser