Post by Wayne Hall on Mar 21, 2011 23:08:38 GMT -5
The Putin-Medvedev "dispute"
Yesterday the international media were gloating that they had got Putin and Medvedev arguing with each other. Medvedev was taking exception to Putin's tailending of Gaddafi's rhetoric about a new Crusade, reversion to the Middle Ages, etc.
If Terry Boardman's analysis is correct
halva.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=talkforever&thread=180&page=1
that United States objectives include reconstructing the "Islamic World", complete with Caliphate, as the new enemy "other", Medvedev might have the more up-to-date and adequate positions in this connection, insofar as the Crusades rhetoric might well assist in movement towards that goal.
In any case the conclusion is surely that there is no way that one can "take sides" in the current war between Gadaffi and "the West". What one has to do is to attempt to dismantle "the West". The most appropriate focus for this purpose must surely be Japan, which has always been an "honorary" member of the West anyway, but now is being treated most dishonorably, to be screamingly euphemistic.
Surely the focus should be on George Ure's article on the Japan Earthquake and HAARP:
www.enouranois.gr/english/haarp/indexearthquake.htm
and in particular on this implicit demand:
"I don't know about you, but I'd sure like to see HAARP open up and report all of it's transmitter operations and array headings for the week prior to the Japan quake. Not that I'm asserting any wrongdoing, of course. BUT I am bothered down at the soul level level what jumps out of the magnetometer readings."
An adequate analysis of today's conjuncture would make it very clear that the world's populations have now been divided up into two categories: populations that can be subjected to overt military attack, such as Arabs, Muslims etc. and populations that can only be attacked in the guise of "natural disasters" such as Japanese, Europeans, Americans. Of course "natural disaster attack" victims can be conscripted into supporting overt attacks also. Note that Japan's present rather anti-American government nevertheless supported "the West's" attack on Libya. Who will reveal the hidden aspect of this? Not the Japanese, no doubt. One 9 point Richter earthquake per lifetime would be enough for most people, I would say.
W.H.
www.enouranois.gr
2011/2/25 Terry Boardman
Elana,
As I see it, there is far more to the developing Middle East situation than what the BBC for example and the rest of the MSM media here in Britain would have us believe. Just as in 1989, they are telling us that "no-one could have foreseen the events that have unfolded so dramatically" and that "the West has been caught unawares" by these events etc. All of a sudden, they were talking about men such as Mubarak and the ex-President of Tunisia as awful dictators and tyrants who suppressed their own people for decades, talking about them as if they were Saddam Hussein. Yet our governments had supported these 'tyrants' for 30+ years, and the British mainstream media were largely silent about them all that time. They were installed during the Cold War as part of the bulwarks against communism and the USSR, and now, it seems to me, that certain forces in the West are moving to dismantle this last remnant of the Cold War (except, of course, for N.Korea, and arguably, China itself). I have seen wikileaks documents (via the Norwegian Aftenposten site) that detail how the US government, for example, was working for the overthrow of Mubarak since at least 2003, and using all kinds of "civil society NGO" covers and the like (as in the other 'colour revolutions') for the purpose. The British got up to similar tricks under Lord Palmerston in the 19th century when they sought to stimulate or back so-called 'populist' revolts against monarchic or aristocratic regimes in order to facilitate British economic ties and trade with those countries. This kind of manoeuvre is astutely shown, for example, in the old movie "Burn", starring Marlon Brando, made in the mid-60s. Rudolf Steiner pointed out how the Russians were doing the same thing in the Balkans from the 1870s to 1914, using so-called 'Slav Welfare Committees' (the NGOs of those days) to run guns and other weapons to Balkan pro-Russian forces.
What concerns me is whether we are going to see some kind of repetition of the events of 1917, the year of the *two* revolutions. After all, as in Russia in spring 1917, it is not as if the new 'governments' in the Middle East have any new ideas about how to cope with their socio-economic and demographic problems. The West made sure that Trotsky - the man who organised the Civil war victory for the Bolsheviks - got to Russia in 1917 from America and then made equally sure that the Whites received insufficient support and were blocked at every turn so that the Reds would win. And why? because the capitalist-communist dialectical world divide was intended to take place. C.G.Harrison was describing in London already back in 1893 how precisely such a 'managed' socialist revolution would emerge in Russia as "an experiment", managed from the West, that is. The totalitarian experiment lasted for exactly 72 years and was then terminated in accordance with the termination programme devised by "the 1980s Project" of the Trilateral Commission and the CFR (the CFR and RIIA having themselves emerged as twins c.1919-1921 from the very same western circles that devised the experiment).
Back in 1992, certain elite circles in the West (e.g. as described in The Economist in December that year) were already pointing to this year 2011, as the year in which the pan-Islamic world would undergo a revolution which would be the harbinger of even more dramatic events -namely a pan-Islamic 'Caliphate' would emerge that would eventually ally with China and make war on.....Russia and seize all its territories east of the Urals! Russia could then be drawn into the embrace of the transatlantic entity that would be created between North America and the then emerging EU. Recall also that 100 years ago, in late 1911, not only did the Chinese revolution begin that overthrew the Ching Empire, but also in that year Italy declared war on Turkey to seize the Turkish North African possessions in Tripolitania (Libya). This Italian war weakened the Ottoman Empire to the point where the small Balkan states (Serbia et al) saw their chance and formed a league to declare war on Turkey themselves in 1912. Two Balkan wars followed in 1912-1914, and these were the curtain-raiser for what then took place in Sarajevo on 28 June 1914 which was followed just over a month later by World War One.
In the 1990s Samuel Huntington and his friend Brian Beedham of The Economist envisioned the 21st century world divided according to culture and religion rather than economic theory and politics as in the 20th century. They did this because they were in touch with esoteric knowledge of the structure of time and history, the kind of knowledge that C. G. Harrison had 100 years ago. They thus divided the world into cultural blocs. In the very week that George Bush 1 declared the New World Order in the US Congress on 9.11.1991, The Economist came out with this new world imagination or mental map for the 21st century. The 16 page special feature (complete with a new transatlantic flag that showed Europe inside the USA) was innocuously titled "Defence and the Democracies". The cover of that issue featured an Arab prince with his falcon and the headline "End of the Old Order". It identified the Islamic and the Confucian (i.e. Chinese) cultural regions as the two main remaining challenges to western 'democracy' (i.e. elite-dominated consumerist materialist 'culture'). Starting with Saddam Hussein, the Islamic world was promptly taken on. 3 x 7 or 21 years later, the final phase of the remodelling of the Islamic world is upon us, and out of it will either come consumerist pseudo-democracies that tow the western line and do as they're told, such as Turkey, or else a new global dialectic, a new enemy, a Green force to replace the Red, indeed to replace the non-existent illusion that was Osama bin Laden and his so-called 'global threat' of Al-Qaeda. The pseudo-democracies will most likely emerge in the short term, if at all, but in the longer-term, the pan-Islamic Sunni movement is all too possible; keep October 1917 in mind.
Think also of the situation in the Middle East some 700 years before, c.1250. Who was there? The European Crusaders, the Muslim forces and......the Mongols. For the first time in recorded history - all three Eurasian cultures clashed. The Muslims were squashed between the invading Crusaders and Mongols, but somehow managed to survive. Now think of Russia some 7 centuries years later, in 1917-1920. Who was there, after the exit of the defeated Germans? The Russians, fighting each other, Reds vs Whites (Sunnis and Shi'ites anyone?), the western Allies, the leading Freemasonic nations (Brits, Americans and French, oh and the Czech Legion on the Trans-Siberian Railway playing a not insignificant role) and....the Japanese, in Siberia.
Russia is the bridge of Eurasia and Israel is the centre of the world. Brzezinski understands all this very well. It is the goal of the forces opposed to healthy human development (though paradoxically they provide us with resistance for the development of our own freedom) that the middle term is always attacked by the poles on either side of it - the attempt to attack the heart and squash it between the head and the guts. The elite forces of the west will seek to use the East (Islam and China) as a hammer and themselves as an anvil, and between them crush the Russians and remake both Russia and Israel in their own image.
In 1992 The Economist forecast that by 2050 'the West' (aka 'the international community' aka Anglo-America, or the English-speaking world + its satellites) would have seen off the eastern challenge of the Muslim-Chinese alliance (rah rah Crusaders!!) but that in the meantime, unfortunately, Russia would have been radically truncated. "Truth" magazine of London in 1890, edited by a man with close ties to the highest echelons of the British elite, also forecast a coming European war, the result of which would be that all the monarchies of Europe - except that of Britain (well, well!) would be abolished and republics created everywhere, and that Russia would become.....a desert.
As for Wayne's 'two minds', I think that if one is in two minds then at least there is the possibility, if one hangs in there suspended for a while listening to them both, and avoids being pulled in either direction, that a third mind can emerge between them, and this will be the one to go with.
Terry
----- Original Message -----
From: Elana Freeland
To: Sent: Friday, February 25, 2011 2:36 PM
Subject: Re: Libya/Gaddafi
Doesn't the timing of these "people's liberations" in Egypt and Libya seem oddly right? Mubarak in Egypt in office 30 years (one generation), Gaddafi in place for "four Saudi kings, three Syrian and three Egyptian presidents, and five Arab League secretary generals...eight US presidents, several of whom served for two terms, and five French ones."
Is this just a NWO change of the guard disguised as a people's revolution? I keep thinking about the V2K technology used with the Iraqis in 1991 when they all heard the voice of God telling them to lay down their arms. Is the V2K god now telling them to rebel so one huge trade bloc from North Africa to the Middle East can be established in the name of the people? Is this just more Mackinder-Brzyzinski? I still maintain that nothing mass political is accidental.
E.
Yesterday the international media were gloating that they had got Putin and Medvedev arguing with each other. Medvedev was taking exception to Putin's tailending of Gaddafi's rhetoric about a new Crusade, reversion to the Middle Ages, etc.
If Terry Boardman's analysis is correct
halva.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=talkforever&thread=180&page=1
that United States objectives include reconstructing the "Islamic World", complete with Caliphate, as the new enemy "other", Medvedev might have the more up-to-date and adequate positions in this connection, insofar as the Crusades rhetoric might well assist in movement towards that goal.
In any case the conclusion is surely that there is no way that one can "take sides" in the current war between Gadaffi and "the West". What one has to do is to attempt to dismantle "the West". The most appropriate focus for this purpose must surely be Japan, which has always been an "honorary" member of the West anyway, but now is being treated most dishonorably, to be screamingly euphemistic.
Surely the focus should be on George Ure's article on the Japan Earthquake and HAARP:
www.enouranois.gr/english/haarp/indexearthquake.htm
and in particular on this implicit demand:
"I don't know about you, but I'd sure like to see HAARP open up and report all of it's transmitter operations and array headings for the week prior to the Japan quake. Not that I'm asserting any wrongdoing, of course. BUT I am bothered down at the soul level level what jumps out of the magnetometer readings."
An adequate analysis of today's conjuncture would make it very clear that the world's populations have now been divided up into two categories: populations that can be subjected to overt military attack, such as Arabs, Muslims etc. and populations that can only be attacked in the guise of "natural disasters" such as Japanese, Europeans, Americans. Of course "natural disaster attack" victims can be conscripted into supporting overt attacks also. Note that Japan's present rather anti-American government nevertheless supported "the West's" attack on Libya. Who will reveal the hidden aspect of this? Not the Japanese, no doubt. One 9 point Richter earthquake per lifetime would be enough for most people, I would say.
W.H.
www.enouranois.gr
2011/2/25 Terry Boardman
Elana,
As I see it, there is far more to the developing Middle East situation than what the BBC for example and the rest of the MSM media here in Britain would have us believe. Just as in 1989, they are telling us that "no-one could have foreseen the events that have unfolded so dramatically" and that "the West has been caught unawares" by these events etc. All of a sudden, they were talking about men such as Mubarak and the ex-President of Tunisia as awful dictators and tyrants who suppressed their own people for decades, talking about them as if they were Saddam Hussein. Yet our governments had supported these 'tyrants' for 30+ years, and the British mainstream media were largely silent about them all that time. They were installed during the Cold War as part of the bulwarks against communism and the USSR, and now, it seems to me, that certain forces in the West are moving to dismantle this last remnant of the Cold War (except, of course, for N.Korea, and arguably, China itself). I have seen wikileaks documents (via the Norwegian Aftenposten site) that detail how the US government, for example, was working for the overthrow of Mubarak since at least 2003, and using all kinds of "civil society NGO" covers and the like (as in the other 'colour revolutions') for the purpose. The British got up to similar tricks under Lord Palmerston in the 19th century when they sought to stimulate or back so-called 'populist' revolts against monarchic or aristocratic regimes in order to facilitate British economic ties and trade with those countries. This kind of manoeuvre is astutely shown, for example, in the old movie "Burn", starring Marlon Brando, made in the mid-60s. Rudolf Steiner pointed out how the Russians were doing the same thing in the Balkans from the 1870s to 1914, using so-called 'Slav Welfare Committees' (the NGOs of those days) to run guns and other weapons to Balkan pro-Russian forces.
What concerns me is whether we are going to see some kind of repetition of the events of 1917, the year of the *two* revolutions. After all, as in Russia in spring 1917, it is not as if the new 'governments' in the Middle East have any new ideas about how to cope with their socio-economic and demographic problems. The West made sure that Trotsky - the man who organised the Civil war victory for the Bolsheviks - got to Russia in 1917 from America and then made equally sure that the Whites received insufficient support and were blocked at every turn so that the Reds would win. And why? because the capitalist-communist dialectical world divide was intended to take place. C.G.Harrison was describing in London already back in 1893 how precisely such a 'managed' socialist revolution would emerge in Russia as "an experiment", managed from the West, that is. The totalitarian experiment lasted for exactly 72 years and was then terminated in accordance with the termination programme devised by "the 1980s Project" of the Trilateral Commission and the CFR (the CFR and RIIA having themselves emerged as twins c.1919-1921 from the very same western circles that devised the experiment).
Back in 1992, certain elite circles in the West (e.g. as described in The Economist in December that year) were already pointing to this year 2011, as the year in which the pan-Islamic world would undergo a revolution which would be the harbinger of even more dramatic events -namely a pan-Islamic 'Caliphate' would emerge that would eventually ally with China and make war on.....Russia and seize all its territories east of the Urals! Russia could then be drawn into the embrace of the transatlantic entity that would be created between North America and the then emerging EU. Recall also that 100 years ago, in late 1911, not only did the Chinese revolution begin that overthrew the Ching Empire, but also in that year Italy declared war on Turkey to seize the Turkish North African possessions in Tripolitania (Libya). This Italian war weakened the Ottoman Empire to the point where the small Balkan states (Serbia et al) saw their chance and formed a league to declare war on Turkey themselves in 1912. Two Balkan wars followed in 1912-1914, and these were the curtain-raiser for what then took place in Sarajevo on 28 June 1914 which was followed just over a month later by World War One.
In the 1990s Samuel Huntington and his friend Brian Beedham of The Economist envisioned the 21st century world divided according to culture and religion rather than economic theory and politics as in the 20th century. They did this because they were in touch with esoteric knowledge of the structure of time and history, the kind of knowledge that C. G. Harrison had 100 years ago. They thus divided the world into cultural blocs. In the very week that George Bush 1 declared the New World Order in the US Congress on 9.11.1991, The Economist came out with this new world imagination or mental map for the 21st century. The 16 page special feature (complete with a new transatlantic flag that showed Europe inside the USA) was innocuously titled "Defence and the Democracies". The cover of that issue featured an Arab prince with his falcon and the headline "End of the Old Order". It identified the Islamic and the Confucian (i.e. Chinese) cultural regions as the two main remaining challenges to western 'democracy' (i.e. elite-dominated consumerist materialist 'culture'). Starting with Saddam Hussein, the Islamic world was promptly taken on. 3 x 7 or 21 years later, the final phase of the remodelling of the Islamic world is upon us, and out of it will either come consumerist pseudo-democracies that tow the western line and do as they're told, such as Turkey, or else a new global dialectic, a new enemy, a Green force to replace the Red, indeed to replace the non-existent illusion that was Osama bin Laden and his so-called 'global threat' of Al-Qaeda. The pseudo-democracies will most likely emerge in the short term, if at all, but in the longer-term, the pan-Islamic Sunni movement is all too possible; keep October 1917 in mind.
Think also of the situation in the Middle East some 700 years before, c.1250. Who was there? The European Crusaders, the Muslim forces and......the Mongols. For the first time in recorded history - all three Eurasian cultures clashed. The Muslims were squashed between the invading Crusaders and Mongols, but somehow managed to survive. Now think of Russia some 7 centuries years later, in 1917-1920. Who was there, after the exit of the defeated Germans? The Russians, fighting each other, Reds vs Whites (Sunnis and Shi'ites anyone?), the western Allies, the leading Freemasonic nations (Brits, Americans and French, oh and the Czech Legion on the Trans-Siberian Railway playing a not insignificant role) and....the Japanese, in Siberia.
Russia is the bridge of Eurasia and Israel is the centre of the world. Brzezinski understands all this very well. It is the goal of the forces opposed to healthy human development (though paradoxically they provide us with resistance for the development of our own freedom) that the middle term is always attacked by the poles on either side of it - the attempt to attack the heart and squash it between the head and the guts. The elite forces of the west will seek to use the East (Islam and China) as a hammer and themselves as an anvil, and between them crush the Russians and remake both Russia and Israel in their own image.
In 1992 The Economist forecast that by 2050 'the West' (aka 'the international community' aka Anglo-America, or the English-speaking world + its satellites) would have seen off the eastern challenge of the Muslim-Chinese alliance (rah rah Crusaders!!) but that in the meantime, unfortunately, Russia would have been radically truncated. "Truth" magazine of London in 1890, edited by a man with close ties to the highest echelons of the British elite, also forecast a coming European war, the result of which would be that all the monarchies of Europe - except that of Britain (well, well!) would be abolished and republics created everywhere, and that Russia would become.....a desert.
As for Wayne's 'two minds', I think that if one is in two minds then at least there is the possibility, if one hangs in there suspended for a while listening to them both, and avoids being pulled in either direction, that a third mind can emerge between them, and this will be the one to go with.
Terry
----- Original Message -----
From: Elana Freeland
To: Sent: Friday, February 25, 2011 2:36 PM
Subject: Re: Libya/Gaddafi
Doesn't the timing of these "people's liberations" in Egypt and Libya seem oddly right? Mubarak in Egypt in office 30 years (one generation), Gaddafi in place for "four Saudi kings, three Syrian and three Egyptian presidents, and five Arab League secretary generals...eight US presidents, several of whom served for two terms, and five French ones."
Is this just a NWO change of the guard disguised as a people's revolution? I keep thinking about the V2K technology used with the Iraqis in 1991 when they all heard the voice of God telling them to lay down their arms. Is the V2K god now telling them to rebel so one huge trade bloc from North Africa to the Middle East can be established in the name of the people? Is this just more Mackinder-Brzyzinski? I still maintain that nothing mass political is accidental.
E.