Eyes Rolling Hard

 

The only thing more insane than a right-wing conspiracy theory is a left-wing conspiracy theory.

A right-wing conspiracy theory (RWCT) is at least based on people doing research, examining history, seeking evidence and trying to draw conclusions from seemingly random and disparate events. Left-wing conspiracy theories (LWCT), on the other hand, "me too" emotional reaction to things they don't understand and refuse to learn about.

For example, an RWCT might posit that an obscure CIA memo in 1957, led to the Joint Chiefs taking such-and-such an action, which created thus and such agency that fomented the Capitol riots in 2021.  No problem.  I can look up the documents, read the transcripts, check the salient facts and allegations, and come to my own decision.

An LWCT sees no historical connection to anything, other than it is all evil Patriarchy, offers no documentation other than an article in the sacred New York Times, tells the reader how to feel about it all, assigned some random highly-edited facts, then demands that you believe it without any critical thinking, because the person espousing the theory is the only credible source for the information.

I've been quiet here for some time because I honestly can't separate the wheat from the chaff.  Firsst, we have to determine what is pure lie, what is part lie and what is true (not Truth, mind you).  Then we have to assemble the pieces like a giant jig-saw puzzle and see if we can make out a coherent image.  Then we apply the Laws of Thermodynamics to discern cause and effect.  If we begin to see a Big Picture, then we assume that we are on the right path, while at the same time trying to digest the profound implications of that Big Picture.

It's all very complicated and it is so easy to get bogged down in the minutiae.  To visualize the situation, we can think of it as a giant jig-saw puzzle, where ever piece is itself a separate jig-saw puzzle.  In other words, it's a fractal puzzle.  Fractals are usually mind-boggling to look at, but they are often very simple formulae and once you grasp the correct key, the lock bends to your will.

Nature abhors centralized power.  When we look out into her bowels, we see not one planet, but quadrillions; not one star, but trillions; not one galazy, but billions.  Nature has scattered her power over unimaginable time and distance.  Taking over an entire planet or solar system would hardly rate as an footnote in Nature's Handbook of History.

Bringing this grand vision down to a human scale, there has been a millennia-mong effort to centralize the worldly powers under one fist.  The Sumerians, Babylonians, Akkadians, Mongols, Mandarins, Greeks, Romans, Maya, Aztec, and hundreds more all tried to conquer their worlds.  They rose to incredible power and complexity, and then in a flash, they vanished.

I trace the current effort at empire to a single Papal Bull issued by Boniface VIII, called Unam Sanctam, published in 1302.  Essentially, the Roman Church laid claim to the entire Earth and all creature in, on and over it, in trust for the return on the Christ to claim His worldly kingdom.  This one document launched the Age of Exploration.  Expeditions were funded and sent to the ends of the Earth to map the Church's domain, quantify it's flora and fauna, and plant flags in anything that would sit still long enough to get a painting of it.

Oh, and pick up any gold and silver lying around to fund more of it, while you're at it.

This worked pretty well for a couple of centuries, based partly on the element of surprise (wait, where'd these guys come from?), and partly on superior war technology (wait, is that a metal sword?).  But a crucial event happened a little over a century after Bonnie the 8th staked his claim.

In Mainz, Germany, in the early 1400s, a guy named Johann Gensfleisch zur Laden zum Gutenberg had the bright idea to combine a wine press with his inventions of moveable type and oil-based ink, and overnight torn a gaping hole in his world.

That invention led to something called the Age of Enlightenment, which had the audacity to posit individual humans were their own sovereigns and could only be ruled by central authority by their consent to hand over limited powers to others.

This set off a wave of revolutions and independence movements across the entire globe, which peaked in the decade after World War II, but to a certain extent still simmers today.  With that, the Holy Roman empire finally died, along with the European royal houses whose power was entirely based on fealty to Roman.

Human nature being what it is, though, the collapse of one empire only creates the desire in some folks to create what they think will be a bigger, better empire that won't make the same mistakes as all the others, and put this group of greedy individuals in charge.  And it worked for 80 years or so.

In the wake of World War II, the United States (not the united States) was the only major power left with an intact power structure and currency.  Some folks saw this as an opportunity to recreate the world in the Enlightenment Image (nationalist-populist), but some other folks saw the opportunity to milk the world for their personal benefit (socialist-democracy).  The two have been battling it out in a low-level war behind the scenes ever since, with the latter having the upper hand with better propaganda.

But something changed.

In the 1960s, the US military created the ARPAnet, an electronic matrix of computers across nearly any physical space, with each terminal having a unique identifiers called an IP address, that allowed the military and their weapons developers to trade information quickly and secretly.

Folks thought this was pretty nifty and by the 1990s, the World Wide Web took root.  Suddenly, folks didn't need to access specific libraries with rare books and information, they could point and click and never leave the comfort of their couch/desk/dinner table.  If Gutenberg torn a hole in the world, the internet ripped it wide open.

This seemingly innocuous invention has done more to undermine global power structures than any combnation of events in all of human history.  There can be no elites when everyone has access to the same information.  There can be no centralized power structures when every individual with a terminal is just as powerful as any other.

Prove it? Wikileaks, GameStop, Bitcoin, the hundreds of sites that reproduce high-resolution scans of ancient and obscure documents (such as Unam Sanctam), YouTube, and on and on.

Oh sure, there are major efforts underway to censor various individuals, outlets and information, but information is a slippery thing.  The tighter you squeeze it, the more oozes through your fingers.  Like trying to block a river, eventually the water will find another way out - over, under or around, and in the end evaporation.  The breach in elite control occurred decades ago and there is nothing they can do to stop it.

Except conspiracy theories.

Recent years have seen the weaponizing of conspiracy theories.  We have seen the Qult and now the Insurrection, the Jews, the Jesuits, Black Popes and helicopters, Clubs of Rome and 300, Masons, Templars and Nazis.  All of these are distrctions.  These theories intend to keep folks focued on a single puzzle piece, while attempting to hide all the others.

The problem is, the internet is an insurmountable force.  For every bubble of secrecy inflated, there are thousands of pins salivating for the opportunity to pop it.  As the self-appointed elite try to build ever more exotic locks, the plebes build ever more sophisticated picks.  The demise of the system we have all gown up under is dying, and there is no palliative that can stop it.

The thing about our modern world is that we can pick any random point in time and space, and no matter how far back or forward we go, it is all the same - a fractal.  It seems, though, that we have reached a point where the Big Picture is going non-linear.  Truly, there is nothing new under the Sun, and as people scramble for answers, they find only different scales of the same problems.

It seems we have reached the end of usefulness for the current paradigm.  One of the axioms of critical thinking is that when you come to a dead end in one line of reasoning, you must change your perspective to find solutions.

The centralization of power and the specialization of knowledge in the the current paradigm is the poison pill that has lurked at its heart for centuries, the One Great Secret that no one was supposed to know.  But the Secret is out: we have reached the logical end of this line of reasoning.  There is no way to put a plaster on the current paradigm and keep it hobbling along like a beater car that has reached the end of its structural integrity.

Whether we want it or not, we are faced with the imperative to change or perish.  Like bacteria in a Petri dish, we have mined all the nutrients in our environment and must now change our environment or the colony collapses.  The environment is not just a reference to our physical surroundings, but a mental and spiritual realm, as well.

For myself, I leave the closed minds to fight over the bleached bones of yesterday's meal.  I choose to find a new and better source on which to dine - preferably one whose bounds are limitless and equally accessible by anyone willing to let go of the dry and nutritionless detritus the old world.

Behold, for I make all things new - Revelation 21:5

The Gay Divorcee

The high-level game of one-upmanship is progressing apace.  You've got the Russians shutting down AEGIS-class destroyers and the Americans blowing up Proton-M rockets with the latest communications satellite on-board.  The Crimean banks just switched to the new Russian financial clearing system and the Americans leaving scorched earth in Ukraine.

You've got China quietly sitting in the background.  These guys are shrewd.  Their rhetoric is clearly aligned with Moscow, but they haven't taken a direct action towards either camp.  They are playing their own game of watching and learning, while toodling around on the Moon with their little buggy learning all the stuff that has been so carefully hidden from the world for 50 years.

The EU is looking rather silly and confused.  On the one hand, they want to stay aligned with the US masters, but on the other, they see the US leadership has completely lost touch with reality.  They are teetering precariously on the fence trying to decide which side has the most king's horses and king's men to put it back together again.

Australia, historically a staunch US ally, is starting to waver.  They see the US playing a dangerous game of destabilization in the Pacific, which is soiling the Ozzie back yard.  They may have cultural and historical ties to the US,  but they also know which side of the toast is buttered when it come to trade and playing well with neighbors.

The US has obviously lost a lot of points in South America.  Brazil, a long-time ally and hot economy, is finding much greener pastures elsewhere.  Columbia and Venezuela, having been invaded by the US decades ago under something called the "War on Drugs," struggling to get out of the US tent and breathe a little fresh air.  Even quiet little Ecuador is tired of being ridden by economic hitment and want to get a little taste of their own resources.

Argentina hasn't had much luck the past few decades getting their economic cow pies together, but they are quite sure that playing in the US sandbox (and by extension the UK box-read Faulklands) is not in their best interests.

Underneath all of these macro currents, the number of secessionist movements globally has jumped dramatically in the past few years - Scotland and Venice being notable examples.  On this point, I am definitely torn.  Having worked many years in the Texas independence movement, I know the impulse and drive that makes a people want to throw off oppressive slavery and make a few decisions for one's self, for a change.

The problem with this is that you run smack into the old "devil you know" situation rather quickly.

Anyone who has ever been divorced knows that weird feeling of suddenly missing what was making you miserable.  You'll fall for anyone almost instantly just to replace that comfort of the familiar as fast as possible.  In a different situation, it's called the Stockholm Syndrome.

Once you have gone through all the court proceedings, and your friends have long since tired of hearing your litany of reasons for wanting out of the marriage, you find yourself in a position of being solely responsible for your well-being and the choices you make.  Even worse...in those moments when you just want someone to lean on, even a barb-wire covered post is better than nothing.

Furthermore, you no longer have anyone to back you up, regardless of the cost to your dignity and self-respect.  It's like the escaped slave running through the bramble, stepping on sharp stones with bare feet, and tripping over unseen obstacles - evenutally he will have the thought that at least he had three squares and knew where all the hazards were back when he was in captivity.

Finally, the main problem with independence is that one tends to cast wildly for new friends to work with, and this is where nefarious types step in to take advantage of one's weakness.  This is the classic divide-and-conquer scenario.  Break a member of the herd off alone and they are quickly very vulnerable to your evil machinations.

Herein lies the rub...people want independence and freedom, which is a good and, some would say, holy desire.  But there are wolves at the gates waiting to rip the flesh from bone as soon as those people are free of their protective shell - whether by stealth (sheep's clothing) or the direct take-down.

The PTB have acted in concern as a single, if not factionalized, entity for centuries.  They are above nations and without loyalty to anything but themselves.  Though they may disagree on the methods and tactics, they are united in their desire to rip us apart.

Smaller and smaller political units means the PTB have an easier and easier time of conquering.  That is why you see such effort to tear apart the Ukraine, or slice Scotland off the top of the island, or divide the various political forces within Iran, or keep the 'Stans ancient rivalries and hatreds stoked.  The larger the group, the harder it is to attack.  Exploiting weakness is a sure-fire way to win.

Humans have an instinct to 'circle the wagons' when under attack.  Obviously, the bigger the circle, the harder it will be to attack, and the opposing force risks a great deal in doing so.  Ideally, you want to get each wagon alone, so that there are no protected sides, no layered defenses and far more vulnerabilities.

The one major weakness of independence movements is that they rarely have long-term plans for when they succeed.  Cast loose, nations are like new divorcees, they will bed down with anyone who shows the least interest in them in order to feel the old comfort again, and that's where the PTB usually win.

Independence movements should first put their efforts and momentum into reforming what they have.  Failing that, they should corral their best and brightest to come up with a long-term strategy for survival once independence is gained.  This includes listing one's assets and deficits, and carefully forging relationships that include parsing the other sides' agendas.

One thing is certain, most independence movements fails right at the point where they succeed.  Since most do not have long-term plans, the general populace reacts with rebound syndrome and will run back to the devil they know rather than face an uncertain future.

Long-term plans must, perforce, include cultural, legal, diplomatic, educational, and economic solutions to the future.  It is easier to change an existing plan, than to plow forward in the dark with no clue.

One thing is sure - those outsiders who will support an independence movement from the start often have hidden agendas.  It is only after a successful divorce that worthy potential suitors will step forward.  It is key to remember that 'divide and conquer' always serves the divisor and never the divided.

The first step to independence is to act like you are already independent and start making clear-headed and long-reaching decisions for yourself, and especially taking full responsibility for the outcome of those decisions - good or bad.

Oftentimes one finds that by thinking and acting independent, one becomes independent.  Revolution by arms is never so efficient and clean as revolution by mind.  Stop thinking like a slave and the rest follows.

Beware The Agitprop

"Insider Claims Obama Wants to Kill the Dollar!"

Ah, the smell of Hearstian news-making, rather than news reporting.  If that reference is a bit obscure for you, dust off the old history books and look up the Spanish-American War.  You might also want to watch "Citizen Kane" not only for its artistic value, but for the thinly veiled references to Hearst.

At any rate, the above-linked article brings the whole alarmist reporting issue to the fore.  People, especially Americans, reading that article might think that the death of the dollar is tantamount to the Apocalypse.  Certainly, most of the world has been brainwashed into thinking the Almighty Dollar has rays of golden sunlight shining out its proverbial hindquarters.

In point of fact, my respect for Obama, which can only go up at this point, would rise ever so slightly.  Nothing would do the world a greater good than to kill the dollar.  Nothing would alleviate so much suffering and horror in the world as the death of the dollar.  Nothing would go further to achieving world peace than the demise of that empirical tool known commonly as "the dollar".

In point of fact, the cited article is little more than 'mental manipulation' on the part of some group to achieve a certain public mind-set, at the minimum among nationalists.  That the article refers to an 'intel insider' makes me even more suspicious that this is part of a much larger effort to circle the wagons in the States.

It's a very common ploy of oligarchs and dictators to create an outside threat in the minds of the citizenry.  We humans have this instinctual response of closing ranks when we perceive a threat to our well-being.  We put aside our minor differences and join forces for at least long enough to fight off the threat before returning to our normal bitching and grousing.

This instinct is behind the use of children by the PTB.  They create a threat to our children, real or imagined, because they know people will rally to the cause until the threat passes.

In the same way, the extant article is using economic fear to cause people to drop their arguments with the empire and rally to the causus belli to save our economic hides.  In the minds of readers, the article creates the idea that, "Hey, I use the dollar to pay for everything...my house, my kids' education, my wife's hairdresser!  If the dollar dies, so do I!"  This fear, in turn, causes the reader to rally in defense of the dollar - and by extension, the PTB - in order to protect one's very way of life.

In truth, nothing would be better for Americans or the world at large than to see the dollar go down the tubes.  The dollar is a weapon and tool of the Anglo-American empire that, for the better part of a century, has been used to subjugate people and destroy cultures throughout the world.

In addition, the dollar is literally NOTHING.  It represents nothing, is backed by nothing and has no particular benefit to anyone using it, except the PTB, of course.  Frankly, the death of the dollar would be a brilliant moment in world history, as it would defang the PTB, destroy the Federal Reserve and neuter the Anglo-American hegemony.  The dollar's demise would collapse the IMF and World Bank and free great masses of human beings from abject slavery and poverty.

I see your jaw hanging slack because you think what I am saying is high lunacy, but think about it...

Without the dollar, the Western empire would not be able to control global energy, food and labor supplies - a central and key component of the Anglo-American hegemony.  The DuPont/Monsanto cabal would not be able to force GMOs down our throats (literally).  The Rockefeller/Rothschild oligarchs would lose complete control over global oil supplies and prices would immediately begin dropping as producing nations competed to replace their artificial incomes under the current regime.  And the demise of the dollar would open up the market to more currencies, creating more opportunities and cancelling slave-wage contracts in the third-world that are denominated in dollars, thus giving rise to better wages and more competition for all.

Another benefit of the 'death of the dollar' would be the demise of the global narcotics mafia.  Nearly that entire market is based on dollar cash trade, thus enriching those who control the flow of dollars and the means by which to launder such incomes.  In this way, the oligarchs and mafia dons sit atop a mountain of dollars and use them to kill, maim and control millions.  The death of the dollar would be the death of the War on Drugs, which is little more than a protection rack for those few families who control the authoritarian strings of governments.

At home, the death of the dollar would free Americans to seek out new and valuable currencies to replace the old.  In this way, they would see a vast increase in personal wealth, the death of oppressive taxation and an economic renewal unlike anything that country has ever experienced.  Ridding themselves of worthless debt paper and installing new, credit-based paper in its stead, would free up capital, increase the buying power of families, and return people once again to a mentality of saving, which is the engine of growth.

In the abcense of fear-mongering, the death of the dollar would be an event of such great importance to the growth and well-being of the world that words can hardly express how exciting such a thing would be.

One thing is absolutely sure...the Anglo-American empire is deathly afraid of killing the dollar.  Nothing could be further from the truth than to have their meat-puppet called Obama working on such an agenda.  They are certainly not yet prepared to replace the dollar system, as nearly every international contract of any importance is based on the dollar.  The death of the dollar would force the renegotiation of millions of important deals without the perceived power of the dollar backing the side of the oligarchs.  Thus, entire nations would be scouting about for better terms with more valuable backing than whatever the oligarchs would use to replace their precious dollar.

Obviously, the cited article is nothing more than a ploy to create fear in the reader, thus causing them to actually rally on the side of the banksters to save a worthless piece of paper called the 'dollar'.  In other words, all of us who know that the banksters are the cause of all the misery in the world today are being asked to rally around those very banksters because we perceive that the dollar is our only hope and salvation in these times of economic trial and trouble.

In fact, nothing could be further from the truth.  The dollar is the primary tool of the bankster class and the multi-national corporations that are destroying productivity, wealth and sovereignty worldwide.  That the article cites 'intel insiders' is yet another clue that this is alarmist agitprop designed to create fear and rally the populace even against our own best interests.

The death of the dollar would be an historic miracle of proportions we can hardly imagine at this moment.  Yes, it would create some very short-term pain, but in the long run, it would be of inestimable value to all humanity.  Lancing a boil always causes immediate pain, but it subsides quickly and promotes much faster healing.

It is in the best interests of all 'real' people to pray for the death of the dollar, especially before the banksters and globalists have an alternative system in place.  It would open a window of opportunity rarely seen in our world history.  It would destabilize the oligarchs and unseat the imperialists, giving humanity an unprecedented opportunity to raise the fortunes of all humans everywhere.

Let us hope that the article is correct in at least one assertion: “We’re just going to kill the dollar.”  To that, I respond, "Please do, and the sooner the better for all of us!"

(P.S.- Do NOT click on any ads on this page (other than the Amazon store.  I have not approved them, don't want them and do not endorse them in any way, shape or form.  Thanks!)

Simple Questions, Complex Answers

One of our long-term readers and correspondents, LK, has done it again by sending a huge, loaded question using their regular economy of words:

"What is your take on the military and CIA and how O is getting rid of them?"

I could take the easy route out of this one and say that Obama is paving the way for the Anticrhrist, and I'd have backup, but I'll resist the temptation and delve a bit deeper into this issue.

Let's dispose of the Petaeus case first.  In case you've been under a rock for the past decade, and a lot of folks are, David Petraeus was the US general sent into Afghanistan to oversee the "Quiet Surge" against Afghan "Taliban warlords and strongmen", and prevent the Anglo-American Empire from becoming yet another victim in the long line of historic empires who met their doom in that land.

Forget for a moment that under the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan in the 80s, it was known as "military escalation" against "Taliban freedom fighters".  See Tom Hanks in "Charlie Wilson's War".

In a desperate attempt to keep the American public on track with the war effort, Petaeus was built up into a military genius and his "Surge" was considered highly successful, though facts tend to disagree.  As a reward, Petraeus was handed the reins of the CIA, figuring he'd be a compliant sort, lest the PTB take away his glorious mantle.

Well, it seems that Petraeus knows a great deal about the events in Benghazi and the death of the Libyan ambassador there.  So much, in fact, that he was called to testify before Congress.  My guess, and this is a good bet, was that he stated to his handlers unequivocally that he wouldn't lie under oath.  This wouldn't do, since it would undermine the five or six officious versions of those events and even lead to Obama being brought up on criminal charges before Congress (often called impeachment).

For damage control, Petraeus was pushed...er, fell on his sword to bury a few big skeletons in the US closet.  We can assume this since having an extra-marital affair is about as unusual in Washington as cockroaches in a New York brownstone.  Hell, if Bill Clinton could get away with leaving "DNA evidence" on Monica Lewinsky's blue dress, not to mention JFK's dalliances, we can easily assume much deeper motives in this case.

Of course, this is all speculative, but history and the evidence presents a strong argument.

Now, as for the larger question of disassembling the military, we will have to climb a bit further out on the limb of speculation, but I believe the cumulative events of the past 20 years will support the weight.

First of all, we must define current events.  There are basically two major groups vying for world domination.  One is the Socialists (often called communists, which is a gross misnomer), and the other is called the Fascists.  The Socialists envision the world dominated by the State and operated by a central steering committee.  The Fascists see the world dominated by corporate interests and run by a Board of Directors.  The central goal is the same, this is only an argument over who's heel the world will be squashed under, and how it will be done.

In the US, these interests are represented by the Democratic and Republican parties respectively.  In other countries, they have different names, but in nearly every case, there are two dominant parties who simply trade reins back and forth in things euphemistically called 'elections'.  The Socialists want to unwind the military and middle classes of strong Fascist economies in order to subject everything to the States.  The Fascists want to build up the militaries and middle classes in order to prosecute their wars of domination over Socialist strongholds.

The Socialist faction is centered around Russia, China and parts of Europe, while the Fascist segment is headquartered in the US and UK.  The recent US elections were a victory for the Socialists, which is why the corporate media and business interests are wringing their hands.  The firing of Petraeus and other efforts to undermine the US military are also related to the Socialist efforts to bring the corporate war machine to heel.  By discrediting Fascist military leaders, the Socialists can advance their people into key positions, and with Obama being a lame-duck president, he is free now to begin the pogrom in earnest, having fooled enough of the population into supporting him.

The Socialists have also gone out of their way to undermine the middle classes of the US and Europe.  The Socialists want something similar to Orwell's dystopia in "Nineteen Eighty-Four", while the Fascists envision a strong middle class controlled by creature comforts and gee-gaws.  In actuality, we are seeing a sort of amalgam emerging globally, with the growth of Asia's and the subversion of the West's middle classes.  In effect, the independent Fascist middle classes must be brought to heel, while the cowed populations of Socialist states can be allowed to enjoy some rewards in order to keep them tied to the wheel of state.

In order to create the fusion of Socio-Fascism, the US/UK military might must be crushed and a new leadership with more compliant and less nationalistic allegiances must be installed.

Given the growth of Asian middle classes and the soon to be complete destruction of Western middle classes, plus the balancing of military strength across the planet, that some kind of truce has been made at the highest levels of global domination, with a fusion of the two competing economic and political systems being the consensus outcome.  Eventually, probably sooner than later, an equilibrium will be struck globally with power being shared between corporate and state interests.

Whether this will be a successful marriage of opposites (not complete since they share the same overarching goal) remains to be seen.  Certainly, the masses seem content when they have disposable income, TeeVees and little blinky lights in a box to distract them.  However, there seems to be a need on the part of the PTB to completely expunge the independent spirit still flickering in certain Western cultures.  Those people must be completely dismembered and rebuilt in the image of the PTB.

For their part, the PTB seem to have come to a consensus.  The Socialists see the value of creature comforts and hypnotic toys in keeping the masses controlled, while the Fascists have witnessed the value of forced production and consumption.  And certainly both sides are happy with the re-election of Obama and the fall of Petraeus, since it advances the goal of subduing the West into the global empire.  The Obamacare tax beginning next year will be the final nail in that coffin.

On the other side is a small but growing number of people who realize that slavery is slavery, whether the chains are gold or steel.  There is a definite war going on with the Socio-Fascists on one side and the free humans on the other.  The Ron Paul campaign exposed a great number of them, and that may in fact have been the purpose of allowing Ron Paul to be as successful as he was, whether or not Paul was aware of it (and I haven't decided which yet).

The free thinkers have been drawn into the open now.  Their positions and strongholds have been revealed.  If you perceive the PTB being a little cockier and more at ease, this is why.  The final battle for global domination can begin in earnest now, since all sides and see each other clearly.  The problem is that most free thinkers don't know what they've done yet.  People like Assange and Paul have smoked out the resistace and the PTB can target them at last.

Where is all this leading?  Well, that is entirely up to you, dear reader.  First, you must decide if you are a Socio-Fascist or free thinker.  Then you must determine what defensive and offensive positions you will assume.  Finally, you must take positive action to join one side or the other.  The time for fence-sitting is finally past and the Big Showdown is at hand.  The only weapon the free thinkers have is creativity and culture.  The PTB have shown their modus operandi over the past 500 years.  It only requires a commitment to study on your part to get up to speed.

As usual, LK has opened a large can of worms with a simple question.  The answer requires every non-zombie to face the decision of what price they are willing to pay for "peace and security".  The evidence and strategy are plain enough to support this speculation.

So, which is it?  The freedom to choose your own path?  Or the security of having it chosen for you?  The former will require you to leave everything behind, while the latter will see everything taken from you by force.  By 'everything' I mean dignity and self-achievement, not toys and gee-gaws.

Petraeus served his masters well, and we see the price of his loyalty.

As for me, give me liberty or give me death.
==================================
This just in from another long-time reader, correspondent and benefactor of our efforts...

"Hello Bernard:

Again, we appreciate your blogs. Keep up the vigil.

In your Y2K+12+Doom rant you posed a good point about all those instantly disappearing dissenters, such as the many Ron Paul supporters, following the Obama 2.0 selection. Like thousands of others I believe had done, I wrote in my vote for Paul. However there is not one mention in the media or alternative media about him that I can find.

I wanted to send you a link to an interesting article that you might not know about because it is on a financial website.

http://www.financialsense.com/contributors/cris-sheridan/big-data-meets-big-government-moneyball-world-now

Along with moneyball and and scientific advances in neuromarketing techniques being used by the media there isn't much hope for all those Facebook members armed with Ipods and a deficit in critical thinking skills, which is just about everybody. Remember in "The Manchurian Candidate" when everybody in the company was going around parroting the same phrase, "Raymond Shaw is the kindest, bravest, warmest, most wonderful human being I've ever known in my life." Well, a lifelong friend emailed me after the election and said enthusiastically, "Did you hear Obama's acceptance speech? He is the kindest, warmest, most wonderful man!" The heartfelt letdown is that my friend really meant what she said and there was nothing I could say for an answer without being terribly insulting.

Sometime I feel very alone, but your website is a great lift.

Best wishes,
RF

P.S. You know what I miss the most about Indonesia. Riding on a crowded public bus with all those gentle, sensitive people,,,and durian...I miss durian.

Excellent points there.  Especially the one about the strange Obama zombies.  All very worrisome, indeed.

As for the durian, I know just what you mean.  And that brings up another simple question.  Who was the first person to look at a football-sized fruit with lethal spines all over it that smelled like month-old gym socks stuffed with rotten onions and contained yellow, slimy worm-like fruit and think, "Hey, that looks good to eat!"

Those Who Forget History

On this date, in 1492, Cristobol Columbus, an Italian (Genoan) sailing under the flag of Spain and funded by the Catholic Empire through the pockets of the Spanish king, first caught sight of land at what we generally call Hispanola today.  Hispanola, of course, means Little Spain, and Columbus dubbed the people already living there 'indians,' since his best intel was that he had found the east coast of India.

Columbus did not discover the so-called New World.  His mission was to sail south of the Northern Lands and find a route to Asia that was tradeable.  At that time, North America was well-known in academia.  New Vinland, off the coast of modern Canada, had been a Viking colony for centuries.  An Irish monk had produced a map in 1135, that clearly showed the coast as far south as the current Cape Cod.  Other secret maps showed the east coast of North America and South America, though the central regions were still blank.  Some maps also show parts of Antarctica, while others clearly show the Northern Passage, long before Columbus came along.

But, the well-known northern route was impassable half the year, and dangerous the other half.  Plus, it only came to that annoying thing called the Northern Lands, that stood between Europe and the gold and spices of India and the Spice Islands (Indonesia).  The overland route to get there was treacherous, and the sea route had to cross Cape Hope at the southern tip of Africa, which was famous for ship-wrecking storms.  The Ming emperors of China were laying claim to overland routes and attacking any caravans that didn't pay tribute.

Meanwhile, Admiral Zheng He was doing pretty much what Columbus did, only 50 years earlier.  He was sent by the Ming emperor to map and discover new trade routes, and also to claim everything he found in the name of the emperor.  Though disputed, there is evidence that he landed in modern California and mapped at least part of the west coast of North America.  Zheng describes a plant in his logs that looks and sounds a lot like a prickly pear cactus, which only grows in the Americas.  Rock carvings and glyphs have also been found in California bearing characters that look a lot like old forms of Chinese.

There is even more evidence, completely rejected by the Catholic hierarchy, and thus western civilization, that trade flourished between South America and ancient Egypt.  A great many mummies in Egypt have tested positive of cocaine, which could only come from South America.  There are many other lines of research, as well, that would ties the Old and New Worlds together centuries, if not millennia, before Columbus.  So what, exactly, did Columbus discover, and what was his real mission?

Evidence has come to light in recent years, including the discovery of one of Columbus' wrecked ships, that the hull and keel designs for his ships was radically new.  Supposedly imparting greater speed and maneuverability, these designs were state secrets of Spain until the 1980s.  The king of Spain had given Columbus three of these vessels to test in open ocean as part of the deal.

Zheng He

Columbus had pitched the deal to the king by noting the gap between North and South America on the super secret documents of the time, probably by combining some of the best of the maps.  He proposed that the gap between the continents offered a route through to southeast Asia, thus avoiding the overland routes controlled by the Ming, and sneaking in the backdoor to load up on all those riches.

He also wanted to find tradeable wind currents that would allow travel much father south than the perilous northern Atlantic.  Navigators there were stuck for six months of the year, and ice floes presented major hazards for the other six months.  A more southerly route, both coming and going, would be a major coupe and give the one who possessed that knowledge wealth beyond calculation.

In fact, Columbus believed he had landed in the eastern extent of Indonesia, when in fact, he had hit an island in the Caribbean.  Seeing no other imperial flags around (i.e. the Ming), he stuck Spain's flag in the sand and claimed the land for the Holy Roman Empire.

In the east, Zheng had done much the same thing in southeast Asia, Australia, India, and the Middle East.

Certainly, if Columbus could find the backdoor, it would provide invaluable military advantage.  By this point in history, Europe had been threatened by Attila the Hun and Jengis Khan.  If the Holy Roman Empire had a means to flank an Eastern army, they would have tremendous tactical advantage in the event of another invasion.

In other words, 500 years later, we are replaying the trade wars that first ignited in the 1400s.  East versus West, competing to see who will control which lands and trade routes.  Staking out territory and performing an elaborate dance in order to avoid direct confrontation.

Things never change.

Today, China is staking out its client states and sphere of influence, and the Anglo-American Empire is doing the same.  It involves not only trade and access to mineral wealth, but now has taken to the skies.  The Anglo-Americans have staked out near-Earth orbit with their space station, and the Chinese have launched the first section of their own station, with the second piece to follow next month.  Both sides are still vying for military and economic advantage over the other.  And the brown and black skins are again annoying cannon fodder in the middle, squatting on all that wealth that the empires need to feed their greed.

It serves the interests of the Western Empire to keep these things secret and foster fairy tales like Columbus discovering the New World.  One, it hides the vicious and bloody truth, and two it promotes a benign farce that Westerners have just been casual explorers, wanting to find new things and meet new people.  One has to only read "Bury My Heart At Wounded Knee," to know that this fairy tale is all but true.

What all of this highlights is that current events are nothing more than the playing out of centuries-long global conquest.  The battles have flared up and receded, but the same currents that began even before the Crusades are still influencing modern headlines.  There has been a war raging between East and West for far longer than most of us know or admit.  Because most of us stopped reading and learning somewhere around high school, we labor under the illusions cast over our eyes, and are unable to see the currents of time swirling through our lives.

Our educations have left us crippled and blind.  We were taught by rote, memorizing 'facts' and regurgitating them on tests.  Once we left school, we figured all that 'old stuff' didn't have anything to do with our modern lives.  We just needed to remember October 12, 1492, to pass the test.  What did anything else matter?  There were girls to chase and things to do, and then families and mortgages and car payments.  Who cared about Columbus?

Someone cares, because the battle, of which he was a small part, is still raging and still impacting our lives.  At the highest levels in both East and West, someone hasn't forgotten, and they are still pushing their agendas written centuries ago.  It's as real as the feud between the Amish families that led to the beard cuttings just recently.  These things have been going on forever, but from the outside, they look like strange isolated events without context.  And since it wasn't our beard, we go about our business after a brief chuckle, having no clue about why and having no interest in finding out.

In fact, it is this very history that has kept the truth about UFOs and ruins on other planets and evidence of life "out there" hidden from most of us.  The Brookings Report of 1960 recognized what cultures with superior technology do to those without.  They looked at the history of Columbus and Zheng and all the rest, and saw that advanced cultures always decimate the lessers.  Even the concept of 'advanced' based solely on guns and indoor plumbing is a conceit to justify egregious actions against who are perfectly happy not engineering the world.

Colubus' Notes to Marco Polo

At this very moment, there is a tribe here in Indonesia whose society is commonly termed 'Stone Age.'  They are perfectly happy that way and have avoided contact with the world at large.  But, they made a fatal mistake.  Their ancestral lands were set atop one of the richest tin deposits ever found.  Now a French company is in the process of destroying these people and their way of life to get to the dirt under them.  What's the bet they've already stuck a flag in it?

So, along we go on our merry ways, not a care in the world.  No one looks to see what has gone before to understand where we are.  At the bare minimum, we owe it to ourselves to find out why mistakes were made before, and try to avoid them.  More useful would be to understand our compulsion for empire, and the death and destruction it carries.  Then maybe, just maybe, folks could live in peace and pursue their individual enlightenment and happiness.

Or we could just destroy more people for money.