Friday, April 29, 2005

Congratulations to Vietnam on the Anniversary of Reunification

Today was the thirtieth anniversary of the reunification of Vietnam. Congratulations to the people of Vietnam for their hard-fought victory in the long American War.

I can remember what it was like in the United States then. The Republican administration of Gerald Ford, led by Secretary of Defense James Schlesinger (Donald Rumsfeld would not become Secretary of Defense until later that year) and Secretary of State Henry Kissinger as well as Chief of Staff Dick Cheney, tried to blame it on Congressional Democrats for voting against massive military aid for the South Vietnamese regime then in its death throes. They were afraid of taking the blame politically for losing Vietnam. You can bet that when Cheney and Rumsfeld have to leave Iraq in defeat (and, as with Vietnam, there will probably be a decent interval of a couple of years between the withdrawal of U.S. troops and the fall of the U.S. puppet regime) they will find someone else to blame. You can also bet that, just like thirty years ago, they will learn the wrong lessons.

What the right wing thought they learned from Vietnam was that the U.S. lost because a lack of will and strong political leadership. What they never admit is that they never could have won that war. They learned that they didn’t take enough control over what information the American public received. They thought that a mistake was made allowing reporters to roam around reporting what they saw and what troops told them. They never admitted that the war was a crime, not a “noble cause” at all. It is not hard to see that they have applied all their mistaken lessons to the Iraq War because they never learned the true lessons of Vietnam.

Throughout the Vietnam era in the United States, our political leaders warned us of the dire consequences of withdrawing without “finishing the job.” In fact, losing that war was one of the best things that happened to the United States. For a brief moment we had some humility and pacifist reflexes. That wouldn’t last, however, thanks to a concerted, generation-long effort of the right-wing and of the political establishment in general to overcome the Vietnam Syndrome (named as if it were a disease instead of a temporary attack of wisdom).

Are the Neoconservative a Secret Society/Cult?

In a previous post, we quoted Jeff Wells on the subject of whether those at the very top of secret societies actually believe the stuff the lower degrees do or whether they invert the teachings at the top levels:

This appears to be an important and not uncommon dynamic of secret societies at the highest grades of initation. (Or at least so far as the uninitiated can tell, given their secrecy.) The hidden knowledge reserved for the final degrees seems often to stand the earlier teaching on its head. God can turn out to be the devil, and the devil your elder brother Lucifer. You thought you were illuminated? Here's your illumination for ya, right here.The significance of this secret moral inversion could be found in the question begged by the case for an elite paedophilic cult: How could something so incredible be so pervasive, and operate internationally with the protection of professionals, judiciary and government officials? Perhaps because the bottom-heavy pyramid structure of secret societies provides numerous lower-order cadres who serve ends which are the absolute inverse of those they suppose. Just perhaps.

I ran across a review by the Billmon blogger of a new book by Shadia Drury on the Leo Strauss cult among the Neocons that points out this very phenomenon:

To the Straussians, rationality does not provide an adequate basis for a stable social order. To the contrary, the Age of Enlightenment has ushered in the crisis of modernity, in which nihilism – the moral vacuum left behind by the death of God – inevitably leads to decadence, decline and, ultimately, genocide.

That logical leap from Jefferson to Hitler might seem like the intellectual equivalent of Evel Knieval’s outlandish attempt to jump the Snake River canyon on a rocket-powered motorcycle. But it’s essential to the Straussian world view – just as it provides the crucial angst that gives neo-conservatism such sharp political edges.

When Newt Gingrich equated feminism with the destruction of Western civ, he was echoing (in his dumbed-down way) Strauss’s lurking fear that the liberal American state would steer the same course as the Weimar Republic – a political Titanic on a collision course with a totalitarian iceberg. Deprived of the moral certainty provided by religion and tradition, the masses are vulnerable to crazed political adventurers who would fill the nihilistic void with their own crackpot ideas – like, say, the international conspiracy of Communists and Freemasons. They might even be worse than Tom DeLay. Or, as Drury laconically puts it:

Strauss . . . does not disagree with Marx that religion is the opium of the masses, he just thinks that people need their opium.

What gives Straussian thought its special flavor – a bitter blend of hypocrisy and cynicism – is the fact that Strauss himself didn’t believe in the eternal “truths” he championed. He was a nihilist, in other words – but one who believed only the philosophical elite could be trusted to indulge in such a dangerous vice. In exchange for this privilege, the elite has a special obligation to uphold the “noble lies” the ignorant masses must live by if society is to survive.

What’s more, Strauss not only thought this – he believed the ancient philosophers agreed with him, which is why their texts shouldn’t be read literally – at least not by the privileged elite. It seems that Strauss, like Madonna, had a thing for Kabbalism. He believed his Greek role models had endowed their Great Books with two very different meanings: one for the elect and one for the masses (like first class and coach, in other words, but with extra frequent flyer miles for the PhDs.) But these secret meanings had been carefully concealed, so as not to scare the children with the awful truth – or, more accurately, the awful lack of truth. They could, however, be deciphered by wise and virtuous philosophers who understood and shared the classical world view – by Leo Strauss, in other words.

As Drury points out, people who go looking for hidden meanings usually find them. And everywhere Strauss looked – in the works of Plato, Aristotle and Nietzsche – he found . . . Leo Strauss, staring back up at him from the page. A philosophical case of “incestuous amplification,” in other words, a tendency the Straussians have emulated unto the present day, and not just in the Pentagon’s E ring.

The ridicule of the Straussians in the academy is connected to their unquestioning devotion to a set of ideas that they cannot or will not defend except to those who are already converted . . . For they do not want their ideas discussed openly or even known to anyone outside the charmed circle of initiates.

Wednesday, April 27, 2005

Is Bush Gay?

Is Bush Gay? Sure seems like it. Not that there’s anything wrong with that, BUT there sure is something wrong with rank hypocrisy and with right-wing gay politicians like Karl Rove and George W. Bush exploiting homophobia for political gain.

Let’s look at the evidence. He seems to like to kiss men’s heads a lot. When he was governor of Texas and was in intense negotiations with the Democratic leader of the legislature, when it came time for Bush to accept the deal, he grabbed the legislative leader and kissed him then said, “If you’re going to f--- me at least kiss me first.” Pretty good line, but as a heterosexual midwestern American, even one with pretty much all traces of residual homophobia gone, I can’t imagine making that joke. I find it hard to believe that a Texan would, too. Sherman Skolnick, who admittedly makes startling claims with great frequency but does a lot of real research, has long maintained that Bush has had a long-term gay relationshiop with fellow Bonesman Victor Ashe, the former mayor of Knoxville, Tennessee. Then, when Paul Martin, the Prime Minister of Canada was visiting and they were having their press conference/photo op, Bush turned to Martin and said, regarding Martin’s press secretary, “Your Scott is better-looking than my Scott,” referring to Bush’s press secretary, Scott McClellan, who is known to be gay. Again, not a comment that many heterosexual American men would make. Finally there is this set of photos of a budding romance between Bush and the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia released this week that is sure to make Laura jealous.

Now, with the reports that gay prostitute “Jeff Gannon” has spent much more time in the White House, possibly including overnight stays circulating, it may be time to take this stuff seriously. (See today’s Signs of the Times for more on this.) By that I mean, is there a possibility of blackmail here? Skolnick has claimed that the Chinese have blackmailed Bush on Ashe. For more on blackmail see this post by Catalytic Converter and this one by Perfect Infidel.

What I am wondering is this. Could the weak point of the 911 official story, the evidence that something other than a passenger jet hit the Pentagon be causing enough consternation that there needs to be a big distraction? And, if Perfect Infidel’s suggestion that Cheney was either a go-between between the coup plotters and Bush on 9/11 and that Cheney was perhaps in on the plot, which included a possible attempt on Bush himself, is right, then could this scandal both distract people from the economy, the war in Iraq (note the recent reports of plunging approval for the war, Bush’s handling of the economy and his overall approval ratings) and new revelations about 911, AND lead to Bush’s resignation which would also lead to Cheney becoming president? I get the feeling that if Cheney ever became president he would be the last one.

Monday, April 25, 2005

Why 911 Lies are easier to believe than 911 Truth

TV News Lies published an essay which shows the main problem facing 911-truth types when trying to persuade their fellow citizens (See also Signs of the Times for some interesting commentary on that essay). The crime is so big and would require so much rethinking on the part of people that they won't consider the truth of the matter no matter how much persuasive evidence is amassed:

In this post 9/11 era, most Americans are unable even to consider the possibility of US government complicity in the attacks on our nation even when confronted with a mountain of evidence. In contrast, many of these same people accept far less believable scenarios simply on the basis of faith and without a single shred of evidence such as believing in the existence of a God. Tragically, they seem to have the exact same blind trust in the Bush administration.

At close inspection, the official version of 9/11 is outrageously full of holes. When those of us who are knowledgeable discuss the evidence that has been unearthed about that day, there is so much to reveal that we don't know where to start or where to stop. When tapped for what we know, we have so much to expose that the torrent of information that rushes can sound like the meaningless rant of a lunatic. Regardless of how credible or tangible the evidence, when rolled out in front of the public, it often sounds too farfetched or irrational to believe.

The facts that have come out about 9/11 differ so greatly from the official story that they almost defy validity. On the contrary, the official version is so simple as to be perfectly believable. It places the entire blame on the work of a handful of terrorists who hated us for our freedom. Case closed.

It is important to keep in mind that the 9/11 issue is not simply a question of whose version of a story is correct. This is a case in which millions of people would be taking a great risk. They would have to consider that the very government they have trusted and supported for more than four years may have participated in an unthinkable atrocity. That, in itself, may be impossible. By opening their minds to an objective examination of what has been discovered about the 9/11 attacks, millions of Americans would have to abandon their blind faith in this administration, and reject the mistaken belief that those in charge of our nation can do no wrong. That, too, may be impossible.

Herein lies the paradox. If the American people want truth they must acknowledge that they have been deceived. If that were to happen, and if they were to accept the facts that have been uncovered by the independent 9/11 research community, their faith in their government would be irreparably destroyed. In the long run, it is far easier to maintain one's faith in a deceptive government than to deal with the painful details of that deception.

The consequence of such denial is that people end up believing what they must, rather than what is true. As time passes, they totally erase the distinction between fact and fiction in order to believe in their government, and they find themselves living in the America of 2005.

...Ironically, it's almost funny when the fact-based 9/11 research community gathers to discuss the events of that day. The official government version of what happened loses so much credibility in the light of the available facts, films, testimony & chronicled history that it is almost impossible not to laugh in disbelief when we start to share what we know. The evidence that has been amassed is so persuasive as to rip the official version of 9/11 to shreds. And still, there is no one but ourselves to hear us.

We go on and on and on like people obsessed because as responsible citizens of the world we have assigned ourselves the task of exposing the truth. But we also have to accept the obstacles we face. We must understand how and why people refuse to believe what we say despite all the evidence in our possession.

...The people who were responsible for the attacks of 9/11 did something so unbelievable that most people would not believe they did it, even if presented with conclusive evidence of their guilt. As a result, they also carried it off, and the evidence be damned.

In the end, there is always the comment by those who would discredit the research and the evidence that has been uncovered. The defenders of the official version of 9/11 inevitably ask how so many people could keep a secret. "Wouldn't someone have blown the whistle by now?" is the constant challenge by the champions of denial. How naïve they are.

At the higher levels of government the issue is no longer about secrecy, but about survival. The extent of the 9/11 crimes are so great that a very real scenario of self preservation has arisen. Exposing the truth about 9/11 would virtually mean the end of the United States of America as a viable power. If the good people in our government and in our intelligence community exposed the truth, America would never ever regain its credibility in the world. We would never again be respected or trusted. We would immediately relinquish our leadership position in the world and sink to the position of a rogue nation that had committed an unforgivable atrocity against its own people for political purposes. We would expose the huge betrayal of trust that has been developed and nurtured over our 230 year history as a nation.

The minute any ranking government official was charged with complicity in 9/11, this nation would be no more. We would never recover. The people who were involved in 9/11 know this. They know that there is more at stake than their exposure. They know that once they did what they did, they would never be held accountable.... [L]et me be the first to admit that these folks committed the perfect crime. Not in the sense that they would not be discovered, but in the sense they knew it would do more harm to the country to expose them than it would to play along with them.

The perpetrators of 9/11 knew they were they protected by the blind loyalty of the American people who would refuse to believe they could have been involved. But they had another ace in the hole as well. They knew that no one who cared for the nation would reveal the truth, for to seek justice would in essence bring down the nation.

Bottom line: the truth is out there, the evidence is real. But there are none so blind as those who will not see. Think about that, and weep for us all.


This is why it makes no sense to hand the Powers That Be a gift on a silver platter by closing off inquiry on the strong possibility that no passenger plane hit the Pentagon. We can't afford to give up any weapon of truth in this fight, including the myth that the United States is a force for good in the world that sometimes makes "mistakes." We have to attack (metaphorically speaking, of course) on all fronts.

Friday, April 22, 2005

New Developments in 911 Truth

I ran across some fascinating stuff on 911 recently. The Catalytic Converter blogger published a piece yesterday with some evidence of a concerted effort by a group of 911 Truth researchers to shut down inquiry into the Pentagon attack and to deflect attention away from 911 to Peak Oil by the same group. As the Catalytic Converter wrote: "Who better to debunk a conspiracy than suppossed conspiracy researchers?" These people patrol the internet emplying standard smear tactics used against "consipiracy" theorists: ridicule, gatekeeping, name-calling, and attacks on bloggers and web site creators for statements made on sites that are linked on their sites or blogs. One person who has been doing this a lot lately is Mark Robinowitz, who seems to be allied with Mike Ruppert and John Judge. See also David McGowan for both a convincing argument that the No Plane theory is sound and for a hilarous debunking of Judge, and the like.

The amazing part of the Catalytic Converter post comes with a link to The Perfect Infidel blog, which passes along a startling suggestion that the Russian spy satellites captured photos of a ship launched drone heading toward and into the Pentagon on 9/11. This information has become currency in some fierce cross-blackmailing beteen world powers. Ever wonder why the United States talks tough against France but always backs off and becomes more friendly before push comes to shove? Or why, by the same token, do France and Russia back off from coming out more strongly against the United States?

More importantly for our purposes now, though, is the evidence that the Bush gang are very concerned about the No Plane theory. Perfect Infidel relates a dinner she had in Paris with some French government connected types:

The dinner itself was "normal" in every respect, and MOST of the conversation was also "normal." It only got strange when politics - including the subject of George Bush and 9-11 - was brought up.

Our friends who circulate socially among various government officials brought out some photos to show of a recent private party. Among the attendees of said party - which I reiterate, was private and not an "official function," was the brother of Vladimir Putin! There was the usual grouping of various ministers, AND one of the most powerful men in the Financial World (and here I don't mean America, I mean the GLOBAL Financial world!)

What was interesting about these photos was the obvious camaraderie of these individuals depicted in the photographs. There was Vlad's brother whooping it up with what were obviously close pals in France.

Hmmmm...

So, of course I asked about this. What came next was, in a sense, quite shocking. It seems that it is common knowledge in these circles that Russian satellites photographed a ship-launched craft (seems to have been a drone type plane rather than a missle) that ended up impacting the Pentagon on Sept 11, 2001, and that, for various reasons this information has been withheld from the public.

I was naturally startled to hear this even though I have long held the opinion that it was NOT a commercial jetliner that hit the Pentagon. I think the thing that startled me was the fact that, if Russia (and perhaps other countries with satellites?) had proof that Flight 77 did not hit the Pentagon, why weren't they revealing this?

It was explained to me that during part of the time George Bush was "incommunicado" on September 11, 2001, he was on the phone to Putin "negotiating." That was a polite way of saying "blackmailing." Apparently, Bush, by way of MOSSAD and/or the CIA had enough goods on Vlad to keep him silent.

Now THAT explains why Putin has not responded publicly to the rather obnoxious
criticisms of Russia made by Bush and Condi Rice.

In any event, it was explained to me further that these satellite photos HAD been revealed to Thierry Meyssan who was asked by either French or Russian intell to write his book "Pentagate" to "leak" the info that Flight 77 did not hit the Pentagon. His instructions were, apparently, that he had to "make the case" without recourse to official backing; he couldn't refer to the satellite photos.


In addition to the Meyssan book, it was the Pentagon Strike video that kicked damage control into overdrive.

Perfect Infidel then mentions Mark Robinowitz's web site as a pillar of the
damage control team:

Another interesting event in this timeline was the creation of a website with the domain name oilempire.us. This site lists what it calls "Bogus 9-11 Websites" saying:

The three biggest stories used to alienate the public from 9/11 truth

1. No Planes on 9/11 (Pentagon, North Tower WTC, "pod plane" at SouthTower, Pennsylvania)

2. The Jews Did It (Israel had foreknowledge and possibly played a role, but that doesn't justify anti-semitism and Holocaust Denial)

3. The Victims' Phone Calls Were Faked (a way to keep the 9/11 families and the skeptics from working together)

why are there bogus 9/11 websites? a mix of malice and incompetence, but both make real evidence harder to find

Considering the very good case for the involvement of MOSSAD in 9-11, the
very good case that the victims phone calls WERE faked, not to mention what I
have discovered about satellite photos on 9-11, it sure does look like the Oil
Empire Website is a "plant," so to say. So I did a whois lookup. Here's what I
found:

...The site is claimed by a Mark Rabinowitz even if it was "prepared for use" as early as February of 2003. That, in itself, is rather suspicious. Seems that this was right about the time that the Meyssan book was making a splash.


What Ruppert, Robinowitz, et. al. seem to miss is that, now that the United States is no longer the hegemonic world power that it was a few short years ago, what the "average American" is prepared to accept as true is not as important as what the average world citizen is prepared to accept. The Perfect Infidel anecdote about the dinner shows that much of the world takes as given what many people in the United States wouldn't even allow themselves to consider. The ground is shifting.

Wednesday, April 13, 2005

911 a False Flag?

Thinking objectively can lead one to interesting places. Take 911, for example. Many people tend to ignore obvious evidence because they do not wish to go where the evidence will lead them. If you bring up the idea that the evidence leads to the fact that the operation was run from elements in the national security establishments of the United States and Israel, people back away quickly. Not just right-wing patriots, either. People who would agree in a minute that the U.S. Government would kill innocent people in what used to be called the Third World will tell you that the people in charge would never kill their own innocents knowingly. This despite reams of documented historical evidence that they have done this again and again. They will say, well, there were abuses in the past, but we wouldn’t do that now. They will believe that Israel would murder Palestinians without any hesitation but would never believe they would murder United States citizens even if it served their national interest. Furthermore, what is even more strange, many Americans who think that the United States would run a horrible false flag operation will not say that Israel would do such a thing, despite the fact that there is better evidence of Israel having conducted false flag operations. David Ray Griffin, the author of The New Pearl Harbor (and excellent book) did not even mention Israel, in spite of the dual citizenship and open lobbying and advocacy of Israel by most of the Neocon figures and numerous Mossad spy rings caught in the United States. Is it fear?

If you’re interested and enjoy this kind of objective thinking, here are some links. The Signs of the Times has an excellent compendium of news articles on this on April 13. What Really Happened has this this, on the Mossad spies celebrating the attack celebrating on the World Trade Center. See also this from Indymedia, or this in American Free Press.

All this stuff is useful to at least consider before the United States gets conned into attacking yet another country (Iran or Syria) in order to “protect” Israel. On that front, see the piece in today's Counterpunch by Kurt Nimmo:

It's really sad when you have to read newspapers and web sites in the Middle
East to find out what is happening in the United States. For instance, al-Jazeera was about the only site outside of Israel to report that General Yoav Gallan, war criminal Ariel Sharon's "military advisor" (that is, he tells Arik the Butcher the best way to kill Palestinians and other Arabs), "has reportedly handed Bush documents and aerial photos of Iranian nuclear installations during the Israeli prime minister's Monday meeting with the U.S. President George W. Bush, Israeli public radio reported on Tuesday."

In short, the Israelis have devised a few fake photos to lay on Bush since
Iran does not actually have "nuclear installations," as the International Atomic Energy Agency reported late last year. Israel wants the United States to bomb the daylights out of Iran, a possibility that will grow more and more remote as time passes, a fact that really freaks out Sharon and his Jabotinskyite partners in international crime who want every Arab or Muslim nation in the Middle East bombed or at least cowed by the same sort of shock and awe Bush used against Iraq.

...Here's a novel idea... if the flipping Israelis are so hot to invade (or at minimum bomb) Iran, let them do it themselves. Of course they will not do this since there are around 66 million Iranians and about 6 million Israelis, including a couple hundred thousand rabid settlers in the West Bank, Gaza, and the land Israel filched from Syria. Better to get the stupid Americans to do it, although it appears the Pentagon is not exactly chomping at the bit to invade Iran considering the mess in Iraq. So here we have Sharon and his mass murder advisor presenting Bush the Dumber with photos, obviously contrived since nobody can find nukes in Iran except the Israelis and their Neocon buddies, who are, just like the Likudites, demonstrated and practiced liars and deceivers, well tutored in making up fake "intelligence," as the Neocon lie factory, the Office of Special Plans, did in the lead up to mass murdering around 100,000 innocent Iraqis.

And Now for Some Real Heretics, Part 14

Continued from Part 13:

The “men’s club” Abendsen mentions is the true ruling form of patriarchal society and it can trace its roots much deeper into primate, male-dominance hierarchies:

... Which is, simply, that --rooted in human society as far back as prehistory and everywhere present in societies studied by anthropologists--the ultimate governing body for masculine identity, solidarity and authority in a society composed of women and children as well, is the "Men's Club.' As a trustee of tribally or culturally defined
masculinity, this institution is universally restricted to male membership, with women and children excluded by threat of violence, psychological ploys, and any number of deceptive techniques intended to mislead and intimidate outsiders. In few words, then, it is necessarily a secret society' attended by various "cover stories," all designed (among other things) to deny the nature of its existence, indeed that it exists at all. Its secrecy is so absolute that information leaking from its own members is punishable by death. Only in this manner can it guarantee itself the absolute safety it needs to function as trustee for whatever "secrets" revelation of which would overthrow the absolute power it otherwise possesses. (Control of information is absolute control.) This is a general statement of fact about a type of social structure which anthropologists have documented at great length in nearly every society
they have observed.

In a male-dominated patriarchal culture, imagine the even greater significance such "men's clubs" take on ...

'MEN'S CLUBS' TODAY

The Army, the Church, the State (all exclusively, until the present, "men only") are such institutions on a high level, while examples on lower levels are quite numerous. All have their official "secrets" with access restricted to smaller and smaller elites as
one nears the apex of the pyramid. These are obvious facts, but they need to
be re-evaluated in a different context, which I am attempting to provide here. There are also "men's clubs" on an international (even global) level, still obvious, composed of men with a consequently wider understanding of events on that scale, on a higher level than even some of the best minds can grasp. on that level, too, there are official "secrets," which one can only imagine, attended by even more stringent security measures for "international security."

On the highest level we as Westerners can visualize, the "men's club" must be composed of individuals --men-- who have the ultimate vision of the West as a cultural entity, hold in their grasp the ultimate decision-making power over its activities, and safeguard the ultimate "secrets” which maintain the identity of the West against vulnerabilities of which only they are aware. This is the apex of the
pyramid of knowledge and power. This is the hierarchy to which all lesser hierarchies, such as Church and State, inevitably lead -- and it must, therefore, subsume all "secrets" regarding religion as 'well as politics. Given the way things work, as empirically observable, whether or not one accepts the literal physical existence of the "Men's Club"(as a discrete institution), at least one can be certain that its members exist as a group or class and that, reasonably, they should know one another on intimate terms.
Interpreting the cruxifixion story in the patriarchally-approved New Testament, Abendsen comes to a startling conclusion about the real meaning of “men’s club” Christianity. Noting that blame for Jesus’s crucifixion is attributed directly to no one, with blame spread around fairly equally between the Jewish high priests, the people, Judas, and the Roman authorities, that the message that the negatively-polarized, secret ruling class, men’s club secret societies are imparting to those in the know by the New Testament is that it is the patriarchal God who killed Jesus:

THE INVISIBLE HALF OF THE EQUATION

Examining the single archetypal act which binds (or separates) Slayer and Slain, we will give our attention to the murderer rather than, as is customary, to Christ the willing victim.

Putting aside what will be (for many) the anxiety attendant upon breaking taboos, we shall attempt, just for a moment, to identify with the murderer of God, in order to understand his experience of the act, vicariously, and divine his motives in this, the most absolutely evil of all imaginable acts.

The sensitive reader may already feel an intimation of why this, above all, is a "secret" restricted to those few who have attained near-absolute power as literal fact, rather than (as it is for us) merely a concept.

Note well that the Gospel accounts of the crucifixion make every effort to prevent an identification with the slayer rather than slain. The "dead God" alone has the spotlight.

Immediate responsibility for his death is blurred and no single person is presented (instead, several are suggested) as its human agent.

Judas betrayed Christ, but under the latter's own instruction.

The Jewish authorities (Herod and his High Priests) brought charges of blasphemy against Jesus, but under law, the power to try and punish criminals was invested in the Roman governor of Judea, who abstained from making judgments relative to Jewish religious law.

Thus, the original charge was changed to treason against Rome. Jesus as King of the Jews (in a literal sense) and as Son of God (symbolically) challenged the authority of the Emperor, not only with respect to appointment of legitimate provincial rulers (e.g., Herod) but in the Emperor's own capacity as "Son of God," like other Caesars.

Pilate absolved himself of any personal responsibility and (in what appears to be an interpolated incident, pro- Roman and anti-Semitic) allowed the Jews to make the final choice. At any rate, it was under the laws of the Roman Empire that Jesus was sentenced to death.

At this point it is hastily concluded that, in the apparent conflict between Caesar and Christ, it was ultimately the Roman Emperor who murdered Christ.

Bad enough, and for many a kind of precedent, but not entirely true.

One could equally well decide that the true murderer was the Roman centurion who delivered the coup de grace, thrusting his spear into the side of Christ not yet dead upon the cross.

In fact, many would have us believe that there was, in Germany during WWII, a "Satanic" cult centered around possession of the surviving murder weapon, the 'Spear of Destiny," which granted near-absolute power -- as apparently it did (for awhile) to its last claimant, Adolf Hitler.

True or false, such beliefs lend credibility to our basic argument, but nevertheless fall short of the even more radical conclusion which one may draw, upon careful weighing of all the scriptural evidence ...


WHO KILLED THE SON OF GOD?

In accepting the role of Messiah as 'suffering servant," preordained to die by scriptural prophecies embodying the Word of God the Father --the patriarchal Jehovah, worshiped with ram-sacrifice-- Christ accepted his fate at the hands, ultimately, of God Himself.

It was to the will of God that Jesus submitted, as he himself often enough asserted and since the orthodox Jewish religion of his day held --like today's Fundamentalists-- that no man (anywhere) rules but under appointment by God (the one and only God, for all) , we have come full circle back to Caesar but with an altogether different perception of the "truth" of the matter ...

Yes, it was the Emperor who murdered the Christian God (the Son of the matriarchal God) -- but in blameless obedience to that same patriarchal God -- and indeed, in the Emperor's traditional capacity a s the (equal but opposite) "Son of God" in a more truly patriarchal sense!

Could there be any greater --theologically sound-justification for murder as a sacrament than this model of God as murderer of His own Son?

Or for the conviction that God granted His patriarchal 'Son," the Emperor, absolute power (based on violence) in this world, in preference to claims made by the matriarchal Son of God, who was obligated to obey the Emperor and submit meekly to his power no differently than any other human subject?

Absolute power indeed! Literally godlike.

The 'inferior' matriarchal God, or Son of God, murdered 'harmlessly" in this worship , was exiled to some 'otherworldly" Kingdom Of Heaven, to rule over a population of similarly exiled human souls, all martyrs and innocent victims, no longer of any concern to us here in the world of the living -- the real world in which the Emperor is the true and "preferred' ruler under God the Father.

The bottom line in this interpretation of Caesar vs Christ invalidates all challenges to --and renders impossible all rebellion against-- patriarchal' authority as manifest in worldly power, and does so through faultless theological argument, culminating in what amounts to a "revelation."

In this view, one may see that violence, and the resolution of conflict through violence, is not only inescapable but is actually "good", holy, indeed a glorious sacrament -- ultimately reaffirmed by the-central archetype of Western religion. Right under our noses.

Thus the claim, "God wills it," motto of the Knights Templar motto during the Crusades, the predecessor to our own "God is on our side." The violent are under the guidance of God.

This explains a lot about the devoutly religious President of the United States, doesn’t it?

As does this,

Let us pause to retrace our steps and note how we arrived at this startling realization (a high-order rationalization) through the simple process of identifying with the agent of ritual sacrifice, the "murderer of God," rather than his victim.

Note that this is something which is normally inconceivable, rarely occurring(consciously) to anyone other than the mentally deranged -- except for those in positions of the utmost power, such as commanding general of the army or the Emperor (or Pope) when persecuting heretics or leading armies against the infidel, or the Pope performing Mass in his (NB) literal role of sacrificial agent, only "symbolically" also the sacrifice. . .

In other words, the predisposition toward such an identification is found only among persons who have some experience of power as expressed through instruments of violence.

It is reasonable to assume that, the greater the degree of such power, the greater the likelihood of identifying with an all-powerful, supremely destructive God of Death, the murderer of all lesser Gods (including Christ) -- Jehovah to some, Satan to others. For the modern Emperor, invested with absolute power like the mad Caesars of old, this identification may indeed be inescapable.
Abendsen points out the interesting fact that the Indo-European or Aryan revolution in the Near East and eastern Mediterranean did not spare the ancient Hebrews. Laura Knight-Jadczyk in her book, The Secret Hisotry of the World and How to Get Out Alive raises some interesting questions about this in her work, that perhaps key elements of the early Hebrews were Indo-Europeans, pursuing an agenda contrary to the interests of the Semitic tribespeople in which they became embedded.

To be continued...

Tuesday, April 12, 2005

And Now for Some Real Heretics, Part 13

Continued from Part 12:

Continuing on our discussion of occult secret groups and humans producing "food" for higher level negative beings, William Bramley and the pseudonymous Hawthorne Abendsen have also written well on this. Bramley claims that the standard religions as well as the secret societies were controlled by “extraterrestrial” beings for their own benefit, as a way of keeping the human race serving their ends, not our own. Wars, plagues, etc. are all created to supply the negative emotional “food” for these beings. Abendsen (whoever he is; the name comes from a novel by the great Gnostic science-fiction writer, Philip K. Dick), in a long article called “Inside the Men’s Club” first published in The Project a journal published by A-albionic Consulting and Research, ties all this in with patriarchal social relations, ritual bloodletting and sacrifice, sexual abuse, and secret-society homosexual initiation rites.

According to Abendsen and many others, the patriarchal revolution during the third milennium BCE sparked by Indo-European (sometimes called “Aryan”) expansions as well as palace-coups by partriarchal military groups in the ancient despotisms led to a religious revolution which reassembled older, more matriarchal religions into a patriarchal template.
Alongside the symbolic ram/lamb-sacrifice by priests in the temple, the shedding of the blood of nonbelievers (the Enemies of God) by the warlord-king was regarded as an equally "sacramental" act. Which is to say --and this is a fact of momentous significance-- that the collective human sacrifice we know as war is a religious ritual in honor of the patriarchal God!

In the patriarchy, the warlord-king and his army of followers become, in effect, the
priests of the patriarchal God. Generally in the I-E [Indo-European] world, only a warrior might become king, under God.

Taking a modern "secularized' view of warfare, which incorrectly regards it as
'universal' and 'natural,' most of us fail to grasp the essential nature of this phenomenon, the central characteristic of Western history.

Originally, and sometimes even today, the act of killing another human being, an "enemy' --in God's name, no less-- was an ecstatic religious experience (like its antithesis, sexual ecstasy) for patriarchal warriors 'possessed' by the God of Destruction and acting as his agents in the world.

Those who fully grasp the meaning of this fact may themselves have a "revelation," in which they encounter, face-to face, the existential reality of the patriarchal God. This can be terribly disturbing, to say the least. -- even if we choose to say His reality lies only in the 'collective unconscious" of true believers, "inspiring' their wills,
frightening enough when seen acting in mass-unity

The ultimately ecstatic" nature of violence gives us insight into the archetypal power of common patriarchal themes --the 'Evil" Enemy who deserves to die, the "glorious" or "holy' War, the willingness to risk sacrifice oneself in order to kill the Enemy, etc.-- over men-s minds throughout history, even today. It also enlightens us as to why such behavior so often occurs in the context of religion, "in the name of God,' as with modern Fundamentalists in their espousal of war against "godless' Communism, or (NB) among those modernized OT [Old Testament] patriarchal warriors, the Israelis at war with the Palestinians.
Ritual bloodletting and sacrifice are, according to Abendsen, what the old patriarchal religions have in common with Satanism. In fact, Abendsen argues that the luciferian secret societies we find throughout history whenever we lift up rocks, believe themselves to be the keepers of the true “Old-Time Religion,” the one that never abjured human sacrifice.
In the ritual of the Levitical priesthood, presumably transmitted by God to Moses --and the Law of God in orthodox Judaism-- before roasting the lamb (preferred above other animals) on the fire-altar, the high priest must kill it and spill its blood, sprinkling it ceremoniously upon the white of his robes.

It is enlightening to read the OT [Old Testament] passages describing this mandatory method of worshiping God (God's command) and then compare it --a logical but forbidden quantum leap-- to our popular image of voodoo, black magic, or "Satanic" ritual. The two are one and the same.

This is not to imply that Jews are "Satanists" but it does, in fact, suggest that what we see here is the true face of the Old Testament (patriarchal) God.

This God we normally visualize in more gentle terms (if at all) confusing Him with the Christian "God of Love," whom early Christians held to be a distinct entity, or possibly the old God in a new, "reformed" mood. Nevertheless, the OT accounts of the Old God's blood-thirst, ruthlessness, etc., accurately reflect the behavior of His "appointed" rulers throughout the course of history in the patriarchal West.

One notes how easily fanatic Christians (dwelling primarily on the OT, curiously, as "the word of God") pass into a kind of psychotic megalomania, identifying with this deity. it is obvious, also, how wholly responsible the Jehovah figure is for continual wars and persecutions andgeneral unceasing violence, "justified' (sacralized) by religion
According to Abendsen, the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem in 70 CE and the end of the Jewish priestly temple-centric system of blood sacrifices drove the practice underground, where it could meet the old tradition of Egyptian masonic practices.

One may ask, purely conjecturally, whether there existed factions of ultra-orthodox Jews who took issue with the stream of Jewry which has continued to this day and who did continue the traditional form of worship--i.e., ritual animal-sacrifice-- in secret of course (being a displaced and suspect race) and in territories other than Judea. Neither Judea, the center of a genocidal campaign by Rome, nor Alexandria was safe anymore.

Why should there not be? I raise this question with no intention of answering it yet---merely to provide background for other observations.

There were persistent rumors throughout the middle Ages about Jews performing bloody human sacrifices (allegedly of nonbelievers) in secret "Satanic" rituals. (It is good to keep in mind that any non-Christian worship was branded as the work of the Devil -- obviously "projection," in view of how "Satanic' Christianity's own God really
is.)

History provides us with no evidence in support of that claim as above stated. Jews (as known today) justly find those charges to be dangerously inflammatory, fueling a malicious antisemitism, and completely untrue if applied to themselves.

Nevertheless, unaccountably given the lack of evidence, those rumors persisted, impossible to squelch.

One possible explanation is that someone simply read the Bible and imagined, reasonably, that a traditional practice at one time the rule was still part of Judaic religion.

Another explanation, for which there is at least circumstantial evidence, is that someone --no longer Jewish per se but of questionable cultural identity, alien among Imperial Christians-- was engaging in secret ritual sacrifice, and not in honor of
"Satan" but in honor of the patriarchal God as He actually --historically and in His own scriptures- - presented Himself.

What was going on (if indeed it was going on) would presumably be difficult to judge by our conventional morality then and now.

However, it would appear to be the patriarchal religion in its original, and therefore purest, form. Given its survival intact a such a late date, this might suggest a priestly caste possessing thorough understanding of the theological considerations
involved (such as noted in these pages) and therefore quite extraordinary minds, attuned to the workings of ultimate existential power in the real world.

If this were the case, then, logically, they would operate not only insecret necessarily, but at the highest levels of worldly power .
. .

TRUSTEES of THE ORIGINAL PATRIARCHAL RELIGION

As it is, two groups (both in close association) answering to this description
have actually existed-- documented and recognized by mainstream historical
scholarship.

Not surprisingly, each has been accused of atavistic sacrificial rituals (of human volunteers as well as animals)--as well as homoerotic practices, the latter accusation gaining in significance as we proceed.

Moreover, rather than being unfounded (as in the case of Jews in general), some solid and much circumstantial evidence exists---in the best historical sources, no less---that these accusations were proven.

Furthermore, both these accused groups assert that they are Jewish by race [which is meaningless, "Jews' being believers in a particular faith] but not by religion -- having their origins in an apostate form of worship anathematized and persecuted by the Elders of orthodox Judaism at a very early period in Jewish history.

By any currently existing definition of Judaism, acceptable to Jews and Christians alike, they could not be considered Jews at all. Similarly, they could not be considered Christians.

One consequence of this was that, for want of any better label and in unanimous outrage, both Jews and Christians rejected them as heretical and "Satanic" (Islam alone, by the way, acknowledged their legitimacy, for reasons which would take us off on yet another historically fascinating, but unfortunately [for our immediate purpose] tangential, discussion.)

In their own defense, however, they astonished everyone by making the counter-claim that they were practitioners of the pure form of Judaism,with Judaism the apostasy -- and further, that, by virtue of this "fact," they possessed the understanding by which Jesus Christ could be welcomed as an integrally Jewish Messiah (equal to Moses) whereas Jews, as "apostates," obviously could not. You can imagine the theological (and political) chaos that ensued in the smoke-filled rooms of Church and State.

With an entirely open mind, and with access to modern research that raises doubts about the "official" histories of both Judaism and Christianity, there is, in actuality, much to recommend their claim.

Incredibly, the accused groups were entirely willing to produce evidence substantiating their claims, which they believed was so extraordinary in
nature that no one could deny it. Unfortunately, for whatever reasons, the Church and State chose the standard patriarchal means of dealing with the problem--murdering all those concerned, destroying whatever "evidence"could be located, and sequestering all parties who had participated in thetrial, silenced under pain of death.

All is documented by history -- except that evidence.

HISTORICAL 'SECRET SOCIETIES'

It is time now to reveal the identity of these two groups, who will play an important role (with other related groups) in further discussion here, and in the as-yet unwritten even more lengthy version, of the subject matter relevant to a history of the patriarchy.

The first group, whose trial and disposition has been described, is the Knights Templar, the ruling military and later economic elite (with the approval of Church and State) of Christendom for two and a half centuries,1099-1314 AD.

The second group is the Freemasons, who were not parties to the above trial
but who have suffered similar inquisitions on a smaller scale from the early
1700s (although their activities are documented at least a century earlier)
to the late 1800s. There is good reason to believe thatTemplar cells (in Spain and Scotland, not subject to the laws of Rome) survived, and in time evolved into the Freemasons, since the two groups in fact make claim to the same history. No lunatic fringe, these Freemasons. Masons were central figures among the Founding Fathers, they were central in the French Revolution, and they were equally central in the administration of colonies by the British Empire. By the way, Prince Charles will freely admit that he is the current "titular" Grand Master of British Freemasonry. [Actually Prince Charles was the first Royal to refuse to join or preside over the Masons–the Duke of Kent is the current Royal Patron of Masonry–Lloyd Miller, Editor] Heads of State (and Church,currently) regard it as a honor --and advantage-- to hold such a position in the patriarchal society's most celebrated and (depending on whichLodge) most powerful "men's club."

Groups like the Freemasons have always been a puzzle. On the surface, or rather at the lower levels, the spritual practices and beliefs seem fairly benign, yet there have always been whispers of darker practices at the higher, more secret levels. William Bramley explains the puzzle by claiming, as a result of his reading of ancient Mesopotamian myths, that these groups had their origin during a time when a race of humanoids from space or, in the way the ancient languages are usually translated, “gods” from the heavens, ruled the earth and introduced humans (homo sapiens sapiens) as their worker-slaves. Bramley calls this race of gods, the Custodians, as in the custodians of Earth. At that time, according to the old Mesopotamian stories, two gods feuded over the human race, one who came to like the human race (Ea or Enki) and another who didn’t (Enlil). The one who was looking out for the human race taught groups of them some secret knowledge of the “gods.” These groups were called the Brotherhood of the Serpent. Soon, however, the necessity for secrecy corrupted the groups and provided a vehicle for Custodian control and manipulation of human groups. Now it must be kept in mind that these Mesopotamian myths pre-dated Genesis, and provided the source material for Genesis. The religious history of human race since then has been a story of someone trying to bring positive knowledge to the human race and then that knowledge getting corrupted and twisted by the Custodians and their human allies at the apex of human power hierarchies. More on that later. This “Brotherhood” tradition has descended down the milennia to the Freemason, Illuminati, the Templars and others.

To be continued...

Monday, April 11, 2005

And Now for Some Real Heretics, Part 12

Continued from Part 11:

We discussed the idea that humans might in the position of livestock: kept and bred for food for other beings. If so, how would they do it?

One suggestion is that by manipulating events on earth, they can maximize the harvest of the negative emotions that serve as food for the negatively oriented Service to Self (STS) beings at higher levels. William Bramley wrote about this in his popular book, The Gods of Eden. Castaneda as well had Don Juan ask Carlos to compare the skills of humans as engineers to their skills in developing belief systems for the common benefit, asking why are we so good at the former and so bad at the latter (Castaneda, Carlos, The Active Side of Infinity, pp. 219-20). Laura Knight-Jadczyk has suggested that the Organic Portals, those who don’t have higher centers, can be used as portals to do the work of 4th and 6th density STS beings, sort of like those glove-boxes that allow people to work with toxic or radioactive material.

David McGowan, in his book The Politics of Serial Killers, and Knight-Jadczyk have both mentioned that programmed, Manchurian Candidate-style killers might be activated all at once to introduce mayhem into society at an optimal point Michael Topper wrote about how even souled beings could be manipulated by their free-will into giving up their free-will to the negative beings by promises of power and wealth. Here is an excerpt from an article where Knight-Jadczyk assembles some material from Micheal Topper. Topper’s material appears on the web from time to time than disappears. It comes from scans of his journal from the 1980s, Thunderbird. Here Knight-Jadczyk pulls together Topper’s material on “stalking,” the method by which the higher-level STS types trick people into serving as food for them through their own free will.

The negative guys, on the other hand, play the game in terms of domination, subjugation and absorption of other consciousnesses. But, they too, understand that the rules of the game posit that in order for them to truly "absorb" into their being these other "consciousnesses," that the "other" must choose to become part of their "self-aggrandizement." An unwilling "food" is, in essence, not "nutritious" so to say. If the consciousness does not choose, it becomes a "poison" to the consciousness that seeks to "eat it."

…The aim of Stalking is to create a completely controlled artificial environment composed of thoroughly predictable human behaviors - made predictable because they have been programmed to respond to cues of conditioning [inculcated through centuries of lies and obfuscations presented in the form of religions] and all of this revolves around a 'story' that is actually untrue, and wholly misrepresentative of the real negative aim.

The important thing to remember is this: there is NOT a "unified conspiratorial activity" going on here in the hierarchy of government. The "divide and conquer" effect is also manifest at this level and and suits the alien purposes to a "T." Such activity at ALL levels is consistent with their program of STALKING, in which confusion and cross-purpose prevents a clear perception on the part of the Stalkees.

Yet, at some deep level there may be a direct conspiratorial interaction between the "secret government" and the negative aliens... but it is unlikely that any name of those involved would be recognized by anyone, no matter how "in the know" regarding the subject. These "secret superiors" are just that: SECRET. Any organization you can name, or about which you are AWARE, are merely "outer circles."

What is the designed objective of this STALKING? It is two-fold. First, the effect of Stalking is sort of like stampeding a herd of cattle. Bit by bit, they are consolidated into a "negative mode" which consists of the idea of "us vs them." Even though, on the surface, it may seem that this "mode" is positive or STO,(i.e. save the world because it is "wrong" or flawed, or blighted with original sin or whatever) the very fact that it is formed in the "dominator" mode of perceiving salvation "outside," means that it can more easily be "taken over" body, mind and soul at a level that is "unseen and unseeable." In other words: Satan CAN and most often DOES appear as an Angel of Light!

…The primary object of Negative stalking is to persuade through strongly influenced, but not robotic, behavior patterns, the Free Choice of the targeted CONSCIOUSNESS to align with negative higher-density existence. Because, in the Long Run, the object is the "eating" of functioning units of consciousness by the negative hierarchy, with Free Will intact! It is not good food otherwise!!!! And this is where physics comes in again... because the CONSERVED ELEMENT OF TRUE CONSCIOUSNESS is the irreducible value of Free Will. The mind of the subject must retain Free Will which distinguishes consciousness as such.

The instant the negative polarization is chosen as a result of true prerogative of Free Will, the "subject" immediately becomes functionally a "part" of the higher-dimensional entity responsible for having induced the choice in the first place, regardless of the deceptive means employed, or the persuasive misrepresentations used in conditioning the terms through which the fateful choice is made. In other words, confusion, physical and/or emotional/mental pain, exhaustion, blackmail, and even forms of torture are legitimate modes of "persuasion." Of course, the more subtle the means used, the more value is retained. A "tortured" consciousness is the equivalent to being "overcooked." Many higher level Beings of Darkness are veritable connaisseurs! They particularly relish the subversion of those who are truly pure and strong willed!

There's an immediate PSYCHIC BOND in this relationship to the higher density negative being who is the "handler" of the human "agent" who is now a functional part of his "eater/master," and, the negative hierarchy is proportionately enhanced with every "induction/absorption" of additional members.

In other words: the negative hierarchy is a pyramidal food chain... the apex of the pyramid is comprised of the most persistent of the negative graduates, the one who has stuck it out against every evidence of diminishment, and is the ultimate example of "wishful thinking."

This "Ultimate Wishful Thinking" means that they/it cannot SEE that they do not
become God by assimilation and control of other selves... but that the real result is a gradual compaction and implosion and dissolution into primal matter and NON-being.
Certainly one has to wonder at all the secret societies in this regard. The initiate must obey the masters before knowing what the masters are up to. Jeff Wells, the Rigorous Intuition
blogger (motto: What you don’t know can’t hurt them), puts it this way:

This appears to be an important and not uncommon dynamic of secret societies at the highest grades of initation. (Or at least so far as the uninitiated can tell, given their secrecy.) The hidden knowledge reserved for the final degrees seems often to stand the earlier teaching on its head. God can turn out to be the devil, and the devil your elder brother Lucifer. You thought you were illuminated? Here's your illumination for ya, right here.The significance of this secret moral inversion could be found in the question begged by the case for an elite paedophilic cult: How could something so incredible be so pervasive, and operate internationally with the protection of professionals, judiciary and government officials? Perhaps because the bottom-heavy pyramid structure of secret societies provides numerous lower-order cadres who serve ends which are the absolute inverse of those they suppose. Just perhaps.
Given all this, it would not be a surprise to find that the top leadership of these secret organizations are manipulated by, or are in league with, fourth-density STS. While this may sound extremely far-fetched, many of those very people have admitted as much. Hitler, for example, spoke of communicating with a terrifying being. Do a search on OTO or the Thule society if you are interested. And what else is black magic and sorcery but relations with negative beings beyond third density for selfish purposes? Here is Jeff Wells again:

Imagine what must have been swept up by the Allies at war's end, in Project Paperclip. Not only Nazi science, but the esoteric knowledge of Himmler's Ahnenerbe, the Nazi Occult Bureau.

From Michael Fitzgerald's Storm-Troopers of Satan: an Occult History of the Second World War:

"Hardly an occult theory escaped the attention of the Nazis, especially in
Himmler's Occult Bureau and the German navy. It cannot be stressed too often that the world as perceived by the Nazis was a magical cosmos. As such, anything which could assist them in their aims of world domination through magical means was eagerly grasped. And in every case, where the choice existed between a positive and negative symbol, the Nazis opted for the negative, evil version. In this respect they demonstrated their consistent adherence to a conscious and deliberate Satanism, an attempt to establish a religion of blood and destruction.... Probably at no time in recent history has the world come closer to falling under the domination of a group of initiates serving consciously Satanic ends.”

Now consider this: if Paperclip brought together the esoteric knowledge of "left-hand path" Anglo and Germanic secret schools in the "fight against communism," how would we recognize it today?

And let's just suppose - and I'll grant it's a big suppose, even in this context, and even with such supporting evidence as exists, since it beggers not only our credulity but our decency - that there is an international network of paedophilic elites. The question ought to be, why? Can it really all be attributed to the indulgence of forbidden desires? Or could it have an esoteric dimension - might it be about power?And not in the usual, true sense of power in abusive relations. I mean, in the esoteric sense. The Crowleyan sense. The sense of sex magick.

To be continued...

Friday, April 08, 2005

Have you heard the news out of Iraq?

Have you heard the news out of Iraq? No, of course you haven't and neither have I. The United States military is not letting any news about what they are doing now out of there. I am afraid that the United States is conducting a complete bloodbath there-- Fallujah on a large scale and we won't know the full story for years, if ever. And, for Americans, if it isn't on TV it's not real. And if you are a journalist who might get some news out, they will kill you like they tried to kill Guilia Sregna.

Here is what John Pilger said about Fallujah coverage. Note that the atrocity he mentions is only one example out of hundreds.

An Australian Broadcasting Corporation correspondent, Eric Campbell, recently promoting a book of his adventures, described the broadcast "coverage" of the war in Iraq. "Live satellite is a travesty," he said. "Basically, if [the reporters] are on satellite, they haven't seen anything. The correspondent is read the stories from the wire and told that is what they have to say on air - that's in the majority of cases."

That may help to explain why the horror of the American attack on Fallujah has yet to be reported by all the major broadcasters. By contrast, independent journalists such as Dahr Jamail have reported doctors describing the slaughter by US marines of civilians carrying white flags. This slaughter was videotaped, including the killing of most of a family of 12. One witness described how his mother had been shot in the head and his father through the heart, and how a six-year-old boy standing over his dead parents, crying, was shot dead. None of this has appeared on British television. When asked, a BBC spokesperson said: "The conduct of coalition forces has been examined at length by BBC programmes." That is demonstrably untrue.

Tuesday, April 05, 2005

And Now for Some Real Heretics, Part 11

Continued from Part 10:

I've always thought that Behaviorist psychology was evil and a complete crock. However, looking at it in terms of the issue of the Pre-Adamic Race versus the Adamic Race, it is still evil, but perhaps, for those without souls, it might work. Maybe Behaviorism is psychology for Organic Portals (OP's).

If you look at two of the founding fathers of twentieth century advertising and public relations, John B. Watson (1878-1958) and Edward Bernays (1891-1955), makes this clear. Watson was one of the founders of Behaviorism, the school of psychology that took the position that you can completely ignore any interiority of the subject and focus only on stimulus and response. That humans are machines that seek pleasure and avoid pain. According to one definition,

Behaviorism was a movement in psychology and philosophy that emphasized the outward behavioral aspects of thought and dismissed the inward experiential and sometimes the inner procedural aspects as well; a movement harking back to the methodological proposals of John B. Watson, who coined the name. Watson's 1912 manifesto proposed abandoning Introspectionist attempts to make consciousness a subject of experimental investigation to focus instead on behavioral manifestations of intelligence. B. F. Skinner later hardened behaviorist strictures to exclude inner physiological processes along with inward experiences as items of legitimate psychological concern.

Watson explicitly drew the connection between humans, animals and machines:
He studied the biology, physiology, and behavior of animals, inspired by the recent work of Ivan Pavlov. He began studying the behavior of children, as well, concluding that humans were simply more complicated than animals but operated on the same principles. All animals, he believed, were extremely complex machines that responded to situations according to their "wiring," or nerve pathways that were conditioned by experience. In 1913, he published an article outlining his ideas and essentially establishing a new school of psychology. It was new because Watson disagreed with Freud and found the latter's views on human behavior philosophical to the point of mysticism. He also dismissed heredity as a significant factor in shaping human behavior.
The spread of behavioral psychology in the mid-twentieth century reinforced some of the worst excesses of that century, including the arresting and torturing of dissidents, the bombing of enemy civilian population centers and cultural monuments, and the like. Aside from the fact that none of those things (bombing, torture, etc.) worked very well, the enabling of modern, mechanistic evil is clear.

Watson, interestingly, was kicked out of Johns Hopkins in 1920 for having an affair with an assistant and went into the advertising industry, becoming president of J. Walter Thompson in 1924.

Bernays was by that time already ensconced in private industry as a public relations specialist, working for, among others, that pioneer of psychologically manipulative advertising, Procter & Gamble. Bernays, unlike Watson, believed in the unconscious, bragging to everyone who would listen that he was a nephew of Sigmund Freud. He not only worked for private corporations, but took an interest in propaganda or the manufacturing of consent in modern industrial societies. He said that, "If we understand the mechanism and motives of the group mind, it is now possible to control and regiment the masses according to our will without their knowing it." His work was studied closely by the Nazis, but it is not hard to see his techniques in liberal capitalist countries. In his book, Propaganda, we find the famous quote:
The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country. ... We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of. This is a logical result of the way in which our democratic society is organized. Vast numbers of human beings must cooperate in this manner if they are to live together as a smoothly functioning society. ... In almost every act of our daily lives, whether in the sphere of politics or business, in our social conduct or our ethical thinking, we are dominated by the relatively small number of persons ... who understand the mental processes and social patterns of the masses. It is they who pull the wires which control the public mind.

Now this stuff is a long way from stimulus and response. Bernays may have shown how best to manipulate those with potential souls, while behaviorism could only work well with OP's.

Friday, April 01, 2005

And Now for Some Real Heretics, Part 10

Continued from Part 9:

I was preparing to continue the last installment by following up on the last idea, that humans may be controlled like livestock for the benefit of higher yet negatively polarized beings, when I found that another blogger, Frozen Nose, posted a lucid, easy to understand essay doing just that. I will reprint most of it here:

On Man Being Food for Something Else

In the following I will talk about various teachings that in one way or another propose that man is farmed like a natural resource by some higher power.

In archaic Christianity, in the the Gospel of Thomas we have:

(60) a Samaritan carrying a lamb, who was going to Judaea. He said to his disciples: (What will) this man (do) with the lamb? They said to him: Kill
it and eat it. He said to them: While it is alive he will not eat it, but (only) when he kills it (and) it becomes a corpse. They said to him: Otherwise
he cannot do it. He said to them: You also, seek a place for yourselves in rest, that you may not become a corpse and be eaten.

This is at some variance with the theme of the good shepherd. This is understandable though, since the Nag Hammadi texts had not gone through the centuries of selective editing undergone by the rest of the Bible. Even so, this may be interpreted in countless allegoric ways. The core of the matter is that man is food only insofar he is "dead," which we may interpret asmechanical, without consciousness.

Castaneda, in his last book, The Active Side of Infinity, speaks of a cosmic predator that uses man as food: Man has a glowing coat of awareness which the predator eats, leaving just the bare minimum of "consciousness stuff" for man to remain physically alive. The predator "milks" man through arranging for constant trouble and crisis and senseless preoccupation, so as to generate flashes of awareness that it then proceeds to eat. "Seek a place for yourselves in rest" in Thomas above means do not waste "soul stuff" for feeding the predator. In other words, do not react mechanically to whatever the world throws at you, or, yet in other words, "remember yourself."

Gurdjieff introduced the expression "food for the moon" in relation to man's position in a cosmic system of reciprocal feeding of everything. The Gurdjieffian cosmogony is complex but a quick summary is found in The Revelation in Question by James Moore. The "standard textbook" on this subject is Ouspensky's In Search of the Miraculous.

Exactly what the moon represents is not described in much detail. The food in question is described as vibrations generated by intense human experience, for example the experience of violent death. While being food is inescapable, man may still modulate the quality of his contribution to the cosmic demand of vibrations. With man being less and less conscious, nature found it necessary to substitute quantity for quality of vibrations, thus leading to population explosion and increased incidence of natural catastrophy and war. From Beelzebub's Tales to his Grandson:

And so, my dear Hassein, when it appeared that the instinctive need for conscious labor and intentional suffering in order to be able to take in and
transmute in themselves the sacred substances Abrustdonis and Helkdonis and thereby to liberate the sacred Askokin for the maintenance of the Moon and Anulios had finally disappeared from the psyche of your favorites, then Great Nature Herself was constrained to adapt Herself to extract this sacred substance by other means, one of which is precisely that periodic terrifying process there of reciprocal destruction.

Boris Mouravieff, drawing on Gurdjieff and Eastern Orthodox monastic tradition, states the following:

This task is crushing. Under normal conditions of peace, insufficient quantities of energy are transmitted to the Moon as a result of the work of human society and its surrounding fauna and flora. This necessitates
interventions on the part of the Deuterocosmos, which provoke convulsions in the Tritocosmos. The aim of the latter is to increase the energy expended at this level, so as to ensure the nourishment and growth of that cosmic foetus that is the Tessaracosmos. This is, for example, the cosmic origin of wars and revolutions, of epidemics, and of all the other large-scale catastrophes that plague humanity. ... considerable conscious efforts must be made by exterior man on the esoteric plane before man can efficiently contribute as he must - by his own evolution - to the harmonious evolution of the System of Cosmoses.

The Gnostics, who also may have figured among Mouravieff's influences, maintained that the Earth and material creation in general were the product of an evil demiurge, chief of the "archons of darkness" or "princes of the air." Mouravieff calls this being or principle Absolute III and also indirectly identifies it as the Yahweh of the Old Testament, just as the Gnostics did. This Absolute III through various spirits plays humanity against itself as in a game of chess, with the effect of generating vibrations for "feeding the moon."

Various modern channeled sources speak of man being a source of psychic food for various beings. They speak of this as they would of eating bread, as a most obvious state of matters. We'll take Barbara Marciniak's Bringers of the Dawn as an example:

Consciousness vibrates, or can be led to vibrate, at certain electromagnetic frequencies. Electromagnetic energies of consciousness can be influenced to vibrate in a certain way to create a source of food. Just as apples can he prepared and eaten in a variety of ways, consciousness can be prepared and ingested in a variety of ways. Some entities, in the process of their own evolution, began to discover that as they created life and put consciousness into things through modulating the frequencies of forms of consciousness, they could feed themselves; they could keep themselves in charge. They began to Figure out that this is how Prime Creator nourished itself. Prime Creator sends out others to create an electromagnetic frequency of consciousness as a food source for itself. The new owners of this planet had a different appetite and different preferences than the former owners. They nourished themselves with chaos and fear. These things fed them, stimulated them, and kept them in power. These new owners who came here 300,000 years ago are the magnificent beings spoken of in your Bible, in the Babylonian and Sumerian tablets, and in texts all over the world. They came to Earth and rearranged the native human species. They rearranged your DNA in order to have you broadcast within a certain limited frequency band whose frequency could feed them and keep them in power.

...The practice of sacrifice to various gods goes throughout all ages. The sacrifice phenomenon goes from having a religiously flavored way to eat meat to complicated and ritually strict forms of human sacrifice. In the latter category, the practices of the Aztecs are informative. In Aztec Warfare, Western Warfare Richard Koenigsberg documents how it was a declared purpose of warfare to procure sacrificial victims for feeding the Sun god. The Western powers of WWI engaged in the precisely same activity, however more hypocritically: The author argues that the nations competed in which would sacrifice more young men, so that their blood would nourish the greatness of the nation. The name of the would-be god is changed but the idea remains. The trench battles of WWI were militarily extremely inefficient and costly in casualties. The moon always makes a profit while the nations bleed. The Aztec's peculiarity was that this was openly recognized and they were willing participants in
feeding a bloodthirsty god.

Even the most cursory review of diverse cultures and ages points to the theme of man being food. Indeed, this is hard to miss, once one looks. Still, this is the strictest taboo and object of denial, where materialistic man relegates this state of matters either into ignorant past or the fringe realm of cookery.

In modern popular culture we have new renditions of the theme, maybe best exemplified by the Matrix movies. This has a dual effect: On one hand, it creates an automatic association of the theme with the realm of science fiction, a time honored technique of dealing with anything troubling. On the other hand, it provides a modernized version of the ancient theme with at least a partly valid outline of the profile of the question. Thus, as with legend in general, these works speak at different levels to different audiences. Ignorance and denial cannot be overcome by force, thus for man to benefit from any such information there must exist a certain questing spirit. The impulse is generally beneficial but again can get diverted by too much identification with specifics of one story or hero.

What to do about it? Gurdjieff devotes a whole chapter of Beelzebub's Tales to the impossibility of any political solution to the scourge of war. History and present bear witness to the grim correctness of his views. Man should wake up and change. In Castaneda's words, man should no longer honor the contract binding him to the predator. But the predator is internal, as is Gurdjieff's mythical "organ kundabuffer." Such a revolution is in the first place internal, yet it does not necessarily take the form of political pacifism or any other ism. The Gnostics' denouncing of the human condition cost them dearly. Gurdjieff may have taken the lesson of history to heart and refrained from including evil demiurges or bloodthirsty intrusive aliens into his cosmogony because this would on one hand have invited even greater enmity against him and secondly would have diverted attention off the central aspect of the problem: The evolution of man. The situation is not seen as a moralistic punishment for a fall. It is seen as a natural consequence of a state of being, just as it is a natural consequence of being a rabbit to sometimes get eaten by a fox. Freedom exists only on a vertical axis, where man may evolve "being" and thus escape certain otherwise
inevitable laws. We might speak of outgrowing a spiritual-ecological niche or of not being "dead," as in the parable of the Gospel of Thomas.

To be continued...