Democracy Revisited

by morton_h, the blogger 

The definition of democracy says peoples rule. A better definition is majority rules. But what if the majority for any reason is dominated by ignorant morons, lazy, corrupt, lazy feline cowards? And this majority then assembled as a lynch-mob and in a collective atmosphere of low self-esteem and evil in a killing mood set her sights on a vulnerable group that seems well suited to be blamed for the misfortune of the majority? 

[scroll ned for at læse på dansk] 

In fact, 51% of a country's population in a democracy may decide to withdraw the 49% of their civil rights and call it a democratic decision. It seems to be one of democracy's problems: the tyranny of the majority.

Another problem for democracy seems to be its corruptability. The people can be deceived, bribed, seduced and lied to by those who know how do and don't have scruples of putting it into action. The people as prey for psychopaths. This knowledge is now systematized to an unprecedented extent. Give the people bread, when they need it, let them play - plenty of spectacle - whenever they need it. Scare the life out of them, give them a financial crisis, pour poison into their brains, tell them that they are under fire, send them to war. A survey of history will quickly show that this has taken place everywhere throughout all generations, both before and after the advent of democracy.

Or wrap them in a blanket of media confusion. People hunger for stories, give them stories. Give them bedtime stories, they love it the way only opium can be loved. Deep in their subconscious at the actual well they know that it is 'Lies and Latin', but they love it anyway, for they have made a pact with each other and themselves - and possibly the other guy - not to say anything. Do not mention the war! The world wants to be deceived, says the old proverb.

We are currently witnessing some very comprehensive plays on the global giant screens. They show us 24/7 designed and conceived realities in a gigantic Laterna Magica. The largest so-called democracies in the world are currently hyperactive as both directors and actors on the magic scene. But they also show us - for those who still have eyes to see, ears to hear and brains that are able to think for yourself - or maybe for the first time in their lives dare perception and thinking - that democracy no longer is what it purports.

We owe the argument to be specific. The most trendsetting and exemplary - according to himself - Democracy: United States, is no longer a democracy. And it is not, although is wages one war after another anywhere in the world, - still according to itself - to heroically defend its so-called democracy and generously donate it to this world of democracy-postage-undersized people. They want us - according to them - by their grace for our own good to let go of the heavy burdon weighing on us, our resources, our possessions, our self-determination and if it should be necessary: our lives.

In 'God's own country' there is no longer democracy. And what is worse, the Republic is dead. 'Res Publica' is 'the people's cause' and is in its true, uncorrupted meaning the institution or rather a set of rules designed to ensure that democracy = majority rule does not assault the minority and the individual. It is the better half of democracy. Should anyone doubt that this is the case, I would urge you to study the United States and the present decay its institutions. If you dare, because it's scary and sobering knowledge that appears.
You may start here: Century of Enslavement

In the period since 'Democracy - first edition' there are enough blogs and links to perform such a study. United States no longer has an intact and functional constitution but de facto matial law and in a war-like situation. The Homeland Security is now a standing army in case of a Civil War 2.0. The country is lawless and is driven by high-level mafia dudes in suits. Citizens can be detained and killed without trial. Drones are now used against the citizens. The Government - or rather an agent for bankers, business and Wall Street that calls itself National Security Agency, is spying bigtime on its own citizen (without being national or providing security). The state provides no protection of citizens against criminal attacks, and the state is in many cases criminal as seen with its unconstitutional and illegal tax organisation, the IRS. The country, as non-democracies in the habit, conducted between 80-100 wars, large and small, large, obvious and less obvious, since WW2.

Why talk about America and democracy? Simply because we are all Americans. Simply because the world has seen up to this country that promised so well and had this dynamic pioneer energy - until it went so horribly wrong. Simply because we for too long time have been running in the ass in this nation, followed its bid and pulses, acquired its culture, seen the movie, bought its products, copied its slogans, admired its presidents like pop stars, eat their burgers, copied their jewish neuroses, invested in their dollars, bought their fighter jets, immersed us in Hollywood, smoked their cigarets and drunk their Coca Cola, taught us their language with extra heavy potato-in-mouth-sound, engaged in their wars, consumed their mythology intravenously ... in short: in all conceivable ways associated ourselves with this entity.

The United States has set the tone in the World since WW2. And what is this nation today? How has its character developed? The United States is today a totalitarian, semi-fascist regime. As Hitler's Germany, Mussolini's Italy, Franco's Spain, Stalin's Soviet Union, Mao's China it is an unholy fusion of government and business. The states protection of citizens against unrestrained, boundless exploitation of individuals was wiped out in these social experiments of the 20th century. In the 30s the state swallowed the corporations. Today, corporations have swallowed the state. The result is the same, only more sophisticated.

Mussolini refused the to be called 'fascist'. He wanted to be called 'syndicalist' or 'corpokrat'. So be it. The syndicates are = the overall corporate structure = Corporatism is an equally wide name for what we see today in the United States: it bought and corrupted the democratic institutions. On the surface it is a democracy = spectacle for the people. On the back is an oligarchy, a sophisticated fascist dictatorship, a kleptocracy, a late-Roman slave society, a military industrial complex, a form of state-monopolized gangsterism. Beloved child has many names.

Throughout the Western World the same decadence is seen. Decadence was the actual USA export item. The European Union is made of the same substance. The United States was the experiment, the EU was the fulfillment, both projects are a very small group of people's wet dream for total control. Rome was of course not built in a day. The Roman Empire is built every day before our eyes, and all roads lead to there.

Solon

Democracys large Achilles heel is that it is corrubtible, manipulable and seducable. 'Demos', people can be controlled 'kratos'. The Greek knew about demagogy. The man who conceived the idea of democracy in Greece, Solon, the philosopher Plato's teacher, had something else in mind. Democracy meant to him: 'the people governing for the people'. Not like now: elite control of the elite through people using illusory big screens, so that people think that it even has something to say about governing. In ancient Greek terminology: oligarchy (the 'best', the aristocracy, the elite controls). You could also call it illusory democracy.

Actually, it is historical nonsense that it was the Greeks who invented democracy, and moreover, they had just as much oligarchy and aristocracy going on in their city-states. The ancestors of those we usually call the Vikings, the Nordic people, had a widespread and far more sophisticated democracy, and their Al-Ting is the world's first democratic body, in which incidentally both men and women, high and low had access. The modern democracies have, for instance. still an Ombudsman, and the word is not even translated. But this piece of history is wiped out by the Roman Empire's successors, the Catholic Church, whose for insurmountable pain-in-the-ass for centuries were none less than these stubborn tribes to the North. The Norsemen became the epitome of contempt for the Roman Empire. The Romans admired in return Greeks, who later then were ascribed the honor of democracy, while the Norsemen was portrayed as a kind of Scandinavia Mongolians, with horns and helmets pillaged in aimless rape and plunder.

Not so. See The Vikings - The Christian Character Murder

Plato had in general no great faith in democracy. He had seen how this lynch-mob had sentenced his teacher Socrates to death. It was a barbaric act, but it was indeed a democratic decision. In his treatise 'The State', he describes the ideal leader as the enlightened, 'philosophical' king. A kind of 'enlightened benevolent despotism'. First you have to learn to control the internal state, then you can control the external. Professional politicians will not do, they should only be allowed to spend half of their lives on policy not to be corrupted by power. That this happens inevitably, we do not need to study history to discover, we just need to open a random newspaper. Solon was right 2380 years later, when the much-vaunted democracy has sunk down to absolute disgrace.

It is called 'representative democracy'. As expected-to-be stupid, lazy, deluded or just naive citizens, we put a cross on a ballot and believe that the Holy Sepulcher is well guarded. We believe therefore that a person who lives by the commit policy, that relies on being re-elected four years later, has the full overview and foresight to make decisions that has deep consequenses both for us and our children and theirs to come. We do not know or do not want to know that this person is just as stupid, lazy, beguiled or just naive as ourselves. And it gets worse day-to-day after the election, so finally we have a fully developed amoral individual who we strangely still think should be empowered to take decisions on our behalf. We have the politicians we deserve - they are a mirror and a projection of ourselves. We beg to be deceived.

A major problem with these elected officials is that they have a horizon of maximum 4 years, meaning till their next re-election. Everything they do in between is a preparation for that re-election. Another problem is that they willingly or reluctantly us are fed by lobbyists, officials and media that filters and organizes all knowledge and basis for decisions. An even bigger problem is that these media, lobbyists and officials have their knowledge from the large undefinable blob that is the global media factory, the bureaus, the feeding organs, the think tanks aka the infowar labs of shady deep state structures and the corporate-owned news agencies - same-same by the way. If you then ask a scienctist, you ask a person in a fragmented knowledge structure. Scientists do not talk to other scientists. The real experts often say no - or are not invited - and those who accept the invitation do not know enough - they just want the media attention and the advancement of their careers. Actually, they just want a little love and recognition. Media and politicians have over the years developed an unholy alliance, where they are in bed with each other. It is mutual parasitic with the media as the fourth column in the state - without that authority's actual ulterior motive: to be a watchdog for abuse and corruption. For it has in the meantime forgotten, what it should do.

There is no real business case for good and honest journalism any longer. News are defined for punch-ability and market-ability. It forces politicians to express themselves callously. Mainstream media today no longer provide and perform their duty to pursue the truth, an they have increasingly lost credibility. As democracy they are now reaching the bottom line. It is a huge problem for what is left of democracy. People have developed a tabloid facination and look at politicians and politics as disneyfication of the political entertainment arena, especially in the strong addictive and potentially manipulative visual media where spectacular post Roman dramas are going on. We are daily witnessing human sacrifice for the sake of this entertainment abuse in the electronic Colloseum.

Democracy has become a brothel. Some have allowed themselves to become employees, the rest have become customers of the whorehouse. We bear all the responsibility, even if we disclaim it. 'Couch voters' is the slightest problem. Still worse is the comprehensive apathy that prevails in the spectator democracy. As a pathetic pseudo demoratic gesture we can overcome ourselves and occasionally cheer on those who are being ripped off by the lions. Or maybe the lions themselves. Or may our favorite gladiator who is about to demolish some 'evil' regime out in the outskirt of the civilized world where we by the way have never set our foot and whose people and leaders we knew nothing until they suddenly figured as Bogey Men on CNN. On the big screens we are told that it is "humanitarian" wars, and it is for the local poor bastards own good that we destroy their infrastructure, bomb their cities and help them afterwards to manage their natural resources, as they are too immature to even do it for themselves. It also appears that evil men with long beards and Kalashnikovs in deserts and mountain caves threaten our civilization and our democracy, as indeed they are just jealous. War is being sold as a defense and the spread of democracy, while behind the screens it is regular pillage and slaughter.

This widespread abuse bares strong resemblance about the role Christianity has played. It was the prototype big screen that the Roman Empire, later to become the Roman Catholic Church used for people to pacify them. Pax Romanorum it was called. It was with the cross in his hand that the missionaries paved the way for the plundering of the world's people. Just behind them came the soldiers in armor and the ships that filled their holds up. Then came the signatories / bureaucrats and recorded and listed. Today media missionary are singing hymns of democracy before sending helicopters and gunships, shortly after which the oil companies arrive. In both cases, the people will be told that it is their own sake.

It has become very difficult to tell the difference between the shabby democracy and the sophisticated tyranny today. It is also difficult to distinguish between the feudal society where the kings and the church decided everything and 21st centurys hollowed democracies, where the corporations and corrupt congressmen do the same. We are witnessing the formation of a neo-feudal world society in which the New World Order electronically and genetically modified slaves will populate the global village.

The modern state has reached a condition we might call post-democracy where rulers technocratic tweaks will be able to maneuver around the troublesome crowds, whos precense only seem annoy the technocrats and stand in the way of their path. EU is an example. All major decisions are adopted by the EU Commission, that is made up of people who are not elected but chosen appointed by their predecessors or by oligarchs-technocrats who sits in the back room. What is supposed to be the democratic part, the EU Parliament, has virtually nothing to say. The members of the Parliament will daily tear the hairs out of the head by having to consider 40 new bills, which primarilly is humanly impossible and deeply irresponsible and, and secondly as a result implies a suffocating sediment, a bureaucratic mud that paralyzes European societies. We now have to live with around 100.000 bills whose sole purpose is to pollute any attempt of national sovereingty. EU is a tool for killing the national state. We have on several important occasions seen this disgusting post-democracy in action, for example. manipulation of the pseudo voting that took place in the new treaty and the EU-expansion. Empires expand, you know. The treatment of Ireland told a grimm story. The EU has in recent years even stepped in as looting institution (six southern European countries, now also France, Ireland, Iceland) and belligerent financial war-power (Ukraine) with NATO and Pentagon + the neocon thinktanks that rule in deep state US.

Post-democratic EU and the United States is not significantly different from the way you ran the USSR. As Philip K. Dick wrote: 'The Empire Never Died'.

The philosopher Solon, the Greek version of democracy's father is turning in his grave, looking up at the starry sky. Democracy is now a lost project, and the world is waiting for what rises of its ashes. It can procede in two direcions. Either enter the global tyranny in full character. It will undoubtedly take place in conjunction with a new and 'total' war, a World War III. Some say that it hs already started. Or the whole machinery falls to the ground - which it does in both cases - and gives way for a new direct form of democracy that can not be oligarchises.

In the morphology of Western Empire it has always risen like a gas balloon till it cracked, then moved to another area of land or dressed up in other clothes. The Roman Empire was to the Catholic Church, Charlemagne's Frankish Empire, the German-Roman Kaiserreich, Napoleonic Empire, the British Empire, the Third Reich, the American Great Powers and now EU Superstate. Tzarist Russia was somehow on the periphery of Europe although an empire. The Ottomans were no more European than half of Istanbul and China was just way out there.

The Empire wanted then, as now to become a global empire. Today, the Empire finally has a global response, to which the Imperial with its optics of envy can only respond by war. All of its thinking is Darwinian, everything is permeated by war, everything is 'last man standing'. No one shall be commensurate with the Empire, equality is unimaginable for exeptionalists. Pax Romanorum is basically nonsense, since it presupposes subordination and true nature of man is not subjugation and slavery but freedom.

Democratic history is the story of a civilization that is about to arrive to an end. It is just a matter of time historically, before we can do more than see the contours of what rises from the ashes. Currently it may seem like the black eagle, the cote of arms that appears to have followed the morphing Empire around 2500 years. It looks both to the East and to the West, and it holds what it sees. But it may well be that its time is over and that the next few thousand years is intended for a friendlier animals notwith envy, jealously and paranoid beak and claws guarding the compass.

Demokratiet

Definitionen af demokrati er folkestyre. En bedre definition er flertalsstyre. Flertallet bestemmer. Men hvad nu hvis flertallet af en eller anden grund er domineret af uvidende tumper, dovne, korrumperede, forædte kujoner? Så kan dette flertal samles som en lynch-hob, der i en kollektiv stemning af lavt selvværd og ondt i sulet har udset sig en udsat gruppe, der synes velegnet til at få skylden for at flertallet mistrives. Synes vi stadig godt om det hellige, almindelige demokrati?

I realiteten kan 51% af et lands befolkning i et demokrati beslutte sig til at fratage de 49% deres civile rettigheder og kalde det for en demokratisk beslutning. Det synes at være et af demokratiets problemer: flertalstyranni.

Et andet problem for demokratiet synes at være dets korrumpérbarhed. Folket kan bedrages, bestikkes, forføres og belyves af dem, der ved, hvordan man gør. Denne viden er i dag systematiseret til et uhørt omfang. Giv folket brød, når de har brug for det, giv dem skuespil - masser af skuespil - når der er brug for det. Skræm livet af dem, giv dem en finanskrise, hæld gift i hjernen på dem, bestik dem, fortæl dem, at de er under beskydning, send dem i krig. Et vue gennem historien vil hurtigt vise, at dette har fundet sted overalt i enhver generation, både før og efter demokratiernes fremkomst.

Eller pak dem ind i en dyne af medieforvirring. Folket sulter efter fortællinger, giv dem fortællinger. Giv dem godnathistorier, de elsker det, som man kun kan elske opium. Dybt nede i deres underbevidsthed ved de egentlig godt, at det er løgn og latin alt sammen, men de elsker det alligevel, de har lavet en pagt med hinanden og sig selv - og muligvis en vis herre - om ikke at sige noget. Don't mention the war! Verden vil bedrages, siger et gammelt ordsprog.

Vi er for tiden vidne til nogle meget omfattende skuespil fremført på globale storskærme opsat for vores skyld. De viser os 24/7 designede og udtænkte virkeligheder i et gigantisk Laterna Magica. De største såkaldte demokratier i verden er for tiden hyperaktive på magiens scene. Men de viser os også - for dem der stadig har øjne at se med, ører at høre med og hjerner, der er i stand til at tænke selv, eller som måske for første gang i deres liv vover sansning og tænkning - at demokrati ikke længere er, hvad det giver sig ud for.

Vi skylder argumentationen at blive konkrete. Det mest toneangivende, trendsættende, forbilledlige - ifølge sig selv - demokrati: Amerikas Forenede Stater, USA, er ikke længere et demokrati. Og det er de ikke, selvom de fører den ene krig efter den anden overalt i Verden for - stadig ifølge dem selv - at forsvare dette såkaldte demokrati og generøst skænke det til denne verdens demokrati-underfrankerede undermålere. De vil os - ifølge dem selv - åh så godt, at de er nødt til for vores eget bedste, at hjælpe os af med det, der tynger os, vores ressourcer, vores besiddelser, vores selvbestemmelse og hvis det skulle være nødvendigt: vores liv.

I 'Guds eget land' findes der ikke længere folkestyre. Og hvad værre er: republikken er død. 'Res Publica' er 'folkets sag'. Det er den institution, der er udtænkt for at sikre, at demokratiet = flertalsstyret ikke begår overgreb på mindretallet og individet. Det er folkestyrets bedre halvdel. Skulle nogen være i tvivl om, at det forholder sig sådan, vil jeg opfordre kraftigt til at studere USA og dets institutioners forfald. Hvis man tør, for det er skræmmende og desillusionerende viden, der kommer frem.

I tidsrummet, siden denne blogpost i paradigmet.blogspot.com blev skrevet og nu, hvor den gennemskrives og revideres, er der rigelig med blogs og links til et sådan studie. USA har ikke længere en forfatning men befinder sig i en undtagelses- og krigslignende tilstand. Landet er lovløst og bliver kørt af high-level mafia i jakkesæt. Borgere kan tilbageholdes og aflives uden rettergang. Staten yder ingen beskyttelse af borgeren overfor kriminelle overgreb, og staten er i mange tilfælde selv forbryderen. Landet har, som ikke-demokratier har for vane, ført mellem 80-100 krigshandlinger, store og mindre store, åbenlyse og mindre åbenlyse, siden 2. Verdenskrig.

Hvorfor tale om USA og demokrati? Simpelthen fordi, vi alle er amerikanere. Simpelthen fordi hele verden har set op til dette land, der lovede godt, men gik så grueligt galt. Simpelthen fordi, vi i meget lang tid har rendt i røven på denne nation, fulgt dens bud og impulser, overtaget dens kultur, set dens film, købt dens produkter, kopieret dens slogans, beundret dets præsidenter, spist deres burgere, kopieret deres neuroser, investeret i deres dollars, købt deres kampfly, nedsænket os i Hollywood, lært os deres smartsprog med ekstra kraftig kartoffelrulning, meldt os under fanerne i deres krige, indtaget deres mytologi intravenøst ... kort sagt: på alle tænkelige måder identificeret os med dem.

USA har angivet tonen i Verden siden 2. verdenskrig. Og hvad er denne nation i dag? Hvordan er dens karakter trådt ind? USA er i dag et totalitært, semi-fascistisk regime. Som Hitlers tyskland, Mussolinis Italien, Francos Spanien, Stalins Sovjet, Mao's Kina er der en total sammensmeltning af stat og virksomheder. Republikkens garant mod den uhæmmede, grænseløse udnyttelse af individer, borgeren, folket er udraderet i disse regimer. I 30'erne slugte staten virksomhederne. I dag har virksomhederne slugt staten. Resultatet er det samme, blot mere sofistikeret.

Mussolini frabad sig at blive kaldt 'fascist'. Han ønskede at blive kaldt 'syndikalist' eller 'korpokrat'. So be it. Syndikaterne = den samlede virksomheds-struktur = korporatismen er et ligeså dækkende navn for det, vi i dag ser i USA: det købte og korrumperede demokrati. På overfladen er det et demokrati = skuespil for folket. På bagsiden er det et oligarki, et sofistikeret fascistisk diktatur, et kleptokrati, et sen-romersk slavesamfund, et militær-industrielt kompleks, en form for statsmonopoliseret gangstervælde. Ondt barn har mange navne.

I hele den vestlige verden ses den samme dekadence. Dekadencen har været USA egentlige eksportvare. Den Europæisk Union er gjort af samme stof. USA var eksperimentet, Europa er virkeliggørelsen, Verden er en lille gruppe menneskers våde drøm om det totale herredømme. Rom blev som bekendt ikke bygget på en dag. Rom, Imperiet, bygges hver eneste dag for vores øjne, og alle veje fører derhen.

Solon

Demokratiets store achilleshæl er, at det er korrumperbart, manipulerbart og forførbart. 'Demos', folket kan styres 'kratos'. Manden der undfangede den demokratiske tanke i Grækenland, Solon, filosoffen Platon's lærer, havde noget andet i tankerne. Demokrati betød for ham: 'folket styrer for folket'. Ikke som i dag: eliten styrer for eliten via folket vha. illusoriske storskærme, så folket tror, at det selv har noget at skulle ha' sagt. I oldgræsk terminologi: oligarki (de 'bedste', aristokratiet, eliten styrer). Man kunne også kalde det illusorisk demokrati.

Egentlig er noget historisk vrøvl, at det var grækerne, der opfandt demokratiet, og i øvrigt havde de ligeså meget oligarki og aristokrati i deres bystater. Forfædrene til dem, vi plejer at kalde vikingerne, de nordiske folk, havde et udbredt og langt mere sofistikeret demokrati, og deres ting-styre er verdens første demokratiske organ, hvor i øvrigt både mænd og kvinder, høj og lav havde adgang. De moderne demokratier har fx. stadig en ombudsmand, og ordet bliver ikke engang oversat. Men dette stykke historie er udraderet af Romerrigets arvtagere, den katolske kirke, hvis indædte og i århundreder uovervindelige pain-in-the-ass var disse stædige stammer mod nord. Nordboerne var indbegrebet af foragt for Imperiet. Romerne beundrede til gengæld grækerne, som i stedet fik æren, hvorimod nordboerne blev portrætteret som en slags Nordens mongoler, der med horn på hovedet plyndrede og voldtog uden mål og med.
se Vikingerne - det kristne karaktermord

Platon havde i øvrigt ikke den store tiltro til demokratiet. Han havde set, hvordan denne lynch-hob havde dømt hans lærer Sokrates til døden. Det var en barbarisk handling, men det var samtidig en 'demokratisk' beslutning. I hans afhandling 'Staten' beskriver han den ideelle leder som den oplyste, 'filosofiske' konge. En slags 'oplyst enevælde'. Først skal man lære at styre den indre stat, så kan man styre den ydre. Levebrødspolitikere duer ikke, de bør kun tillades at bruge halvdelen af deres liv på politik for ikke at blive korrumperet af magt. Og det sker uundgåeligt, vi behøver ikke at studere historie for at opdage. Vi skal bare åbne en tilfældig avis. Solon fik ret 2.380 år senere, hvor det højt besungne demokrati er sunket ned til et absolut nulpunkt.

Det kaldes 'det repræsentative demokrati'. Som dumme, dovne, besnærede eller bare naive borgere sætter vi et kryds på en stemmeseddel og mener, at den hellige grav er vel forvaret. Vi mener herefter, at en person, der lever af at bedrive politik, og som er afhængig af at blive genvalgt 4 år senere, har det fulde overblik og fremsyn til at træffe beslutninger, der gavner både os og vore børn. Vi aner ikke, eller ønsker ikke at vide, at denne person er ligeså dum, doven, besnæret eller bare naiv som os selv. Og at det bliver værre dag-for-dag efter valget, og til sidst har vi et fuldt udviklet amoralsk individ, som vi på underlig vis stadig mener må være kompetent til at træffe beslutninger på vores vegne. Vi har de politikere, vi fortjener - de er et spejl og en projektion af os selv. Vi råber på at blive bedraget.

Et hovedproblem med disse folkevalgte er, at de har en horisont på max 4 år. Altså frem til deres næste genvalg. Et andet problem er, at de villigt eller nødtvungent lader sig fodre af lobbyister, embedsmænd og medier, der filtrerer og tilrettelægger al viden og alle grundlag for beslutninger. Et endnu større problem er, at disse medier, lobbyister og embedsmænd selv har deres viden fra det store vidensfiltrer. Medierne og journalisterne bliver fodret af de virksomhedsejede nyhedsbureauer. Hvis man spørger sig for hos videnskaben, spørger man en tilfældig person i en fragmenteret videnstruktur. Videnskabsfolk taler ikke med andre videnskabsfolk. De ægte eksperter siger fra, og dem, der udtaler sig, ved ikke nok - de vil bare gerne i medierne og ses for at fremme deres karriere. Egentlig vil de bare gerne have lidt kærlighed og anerkendelse. Medier og politikere har gennem årene udviklet en uhellig alliance, hvor de 'går i seng med hinanden'. Det er gensidig parasitvirksomhed med medierne som den 4. instans i staten - uden denne instans' egentlige bagtanke: at være vagthund for misbrug og korruption. For det har de i mellemtiden glemt.

Nyheder defineres udfra slagkraft og salgbarhed. Det tvinger politikere til at ytre sig afstumpet. Mainstream-medier leverer i dag ikke længere varen, men har i stor udstrækning svigtet deres pligt til at forfølge sandheden, hvorved de i stigende grad mister troværdighed. Som demokratiet befinder de sig nu på et nulpunkt. Det er et kæmpe problem for det, der er tilbage af demokratiet. Folk har udviklet en blanding af ugebladsfacination og lede ved politikere og politik i takt med disneyficeringen af den politiske 'arena', i særdeleshed i de stærk vanedannende og potentielt manipulerende visuelle medier, hvor det spektakulære senromerske skuespil foregår. Vi er daglig vidne til menneskeofring for underholdningens skyld i det elektroniske Colloseum.

Demokratiet er blevet en mellemting mellem et reklamebureau og et bordel. Nogle har ladet sig ansætte, resten er blevet kunder i etablissementet. Vi bærer alle ansvaret, også selvom vi fraskriver os det. Sofavælgere er det mindste problem. Hvad meget værre er det omfattende apati, der hersker i tilskuer-demokratiet, det egentlige sofa-vælgerkorps. De sætter et kryds på en fedtet, halv meter lang seddel og synker herefter ned i sofaen, hvilket er meget værre end aldrig at lette røven fra sofaen, da man nu har parfumeret sofaismen med illusionen om aktiv deltagelse og reel indflydelse.

Det højeste, vi herefter kan mande os op til, er en gang imellem at heppe på dem, der bliver flået af løverne. Eller måske på løverne. Eller på vores ynglingsgladiatorer, der er i gang med at smadre et eller andet 'ondt' regime ude i den del af verden, hvor vi aldrig har sat vores ben, hvis folk og ledere vi intet kendte til før de pludselig figurerede som bussemænd på et eller andet medi. På storskærmene fremgår det, at det er 'humanitære' krige, og at det er for de lokale staklers eget bedste, at vi kommer og smadrer deres infrastruktur, bomber deres byer og hjælper dem med bagefter at administrere deres naturressourcer, som de er for umodne til selv at tage vare på. Det fremgår også at onde mænd med langt skæg og kalashnikov'er i ørkener og bjerghuler truer vores samfund og vores demokrati, som de i øvrigt bare er misundelige på. Krig bliver solgt som et forsvar for og en udbredelse af demokratiet, mens det bag skærmene er regulær plyndring og nedslagtning.

Dette omfattende misbrug minder i ganske uhyggelig grad om den rolle, kristendommen har spillet. Det var den storskærm, som det romerske imperium, senere den romersk-katolske kirke holdt op for folk for at passivisere dem. Pax Romanorum hed det. Det var med korset i hånden, at missionærerne banede vejen for udplyndringen af verdens folk. Lige bag dem kom soldaterne i rustninger og skibene, der fyldte deres lastrum op. Så kom skriverne/bureaukrater og optegnede og opregnede. I dag synger mediemissionærerne salmer om demokrati før der sendes kamphelikoptere, hvorefter olieselskaberne ankommer. I begge tilfælde fortælles folket, at det er for deres egen skyld.

Det er blevet meget svært at kende forskel på det afdankede demokrati og det sofistikerede tyranni i dag. Det er også svært at kende forskel på de feudale samfund, hvor kongerne og kirken bestemte alt og det 21. århundredes udhulede demokratier, hvor koncernerne og korrupte kongresfolk gør det samme. Der er ved at danne sig billedet af et ny-feudalt verdenssamfund, hvor den nye verdensordens elektron-genetiske slaver befolker den globale landsby.

Der hersker en tilstand, vi kan kalde post-demokrati, hvor magthavere med teknokratiske fif er i stand til at manøvrere udenom om de besværlige menneskemasser, der blot i deres optik står i vejen for deres vej frem. EU som eksempel. Alle væsentlige beslutninger vedtages i EU-kommissionen, der består af folk, der ikke er valgt med udpeget af deres forgængere eller af oligarker-teknokrater, der sidder i baglokalet. EU-parlamentet har stort set intet at skulle have sagt. Til gengæld river de sig dagligt i håret over at skulle tage stilling til 40 nye lovforslag, hvilket for det første er menneskelig umuligt og dybt uforsvarligt og for det andet som effekt indebærer et kvælende lovsediment, et bureaukratisk mudderlag, der lammer de europæiske samfund. Vi har ved flere lejligheder post-demokratiet i funktion, fx. manipuleringen af de pseudoafstemninger, der fandt sted i forbindelse med ny traktat og udvidelse. Behandlingen af fx. Irland fortalte en historie. EU er i de seneste år oven i købet trådt i karakter som plyndringsinstitution (seks sydeuropæiske lande, nu også Frankrig, Irland, Island) og krigsførende magt (Ukraine).

Post-demokratierne EU og USA adskiller sig ikke væsentligt fra måden, man kørte USSR på. Som Philip K. Dick skrev: 'The Empire Never Died'.

Filosoffen Solon, den græske udgave af demokratiets fader, vender sig i sin grav og ser op mod stjernehimlen. Demokratiet er på afgørende punkter værre end monarkiet, for monarken var ikke paranoid overfor sit genvalg og behøvede ikke at lefte og forstille sig overfor undersåtterne, som de ansatte i reklamebureauet, politikerne + medierne gør i dag. Demokratiet er grundlæggende et tabt projekt i sin nuværende form, og verden venter på, hvad der rejser sig af dets aske. Det kan gå to veje. Enten træder det globale tyranni i fuld karakter. Det vil uden tvivl ske i forbindelse med en ny og 'total' krig, tredje verdenskrig. Eller også falder hele maskineriet til jorden og giver plads et nyt direkte form for demokrati, der ikke kan oligarkiseres.

I Imperiet morfologi - vi taler om den europæiske version - har det altid vokset til det revnede, hvorefter det flyttede sig til et andet landområde eller tog andet tøj på. Romerriget blev til den katolske kirke, Charlemagnes Frankiske Rige, det Tysk-Romerske Kejserige, Napoleons Kejserrige, det Britiske Imperium, det Tredje Rige, den Amerikanske Stormagt og nu EU-superstaten. Tzarens Rusland lå altid i periferien af Europa. Osmannerne var ikke mere europæiske end Istanbul. Og Kina lå bare langt derude.

Imperiet ønskede dengang som i dag at blive et Globalt Imperium. I dag har Imperiet omsider fået et globalt modspil, hvilket i Imperiets misundelses-optik kun kan være ensbetydende med krig. Hele dets tankesæt er darwinistisk, alt gennemsyres af krig, alt er 'last man standing'. Ingen må være på højde med Imperiet, ligeværd er utænkelig for ekseptionister. Pax Romanorum er dybest set noget vrøvl, da den forudsætter underkastelse og menneskets sande natur er ikke underkastelse og slaveri men frihed.

Demokratiets historie er derfor historien om en civilisation, der er ved at ankomme til sin afslutning. Der er blot et spørgsmål om kort tid historisk set, før vi kan mere end ane konturerne af, hvad der rejser sig af asken. I øjeblikket kan det ligne de sorte dobbeltørn i det banner, der synes at have fulgt det morfende Imperium et par tusinde år. Den ser både mod øst og vest, den besidder alt. Men det kan meget vel tænkes, at dens tid er omme, og at de næste par tusinde år er tiltænkt et venligere dyr, der ikke misundeligt, nidkært og paranoidt med næb og kløer vogter på verdenshjørnerne.

A Hundred Years - WW1 In Replay

[scroll for at læse på dansk]
 

Either we are a few weeks late, or we are a few weeks early, but it is by no means neither too late or too early to make a brush-up on the most traumatic event in 20th century, World War II's black mother: First World War.

On June 28, 1914, a group of Serbian terrorists from an organization called 'The Black Hand' liquidated the two royal figures from the Habsburg emperial family. After the murders there went 30 days where people did not not notice enything significant happening. Diplomacy is often under the radar, but what people knew was that Austria-Hungarians gave the Serbs an ultimatum to let an investigation team into Sarajevo, for they did not trust the Serbs will to clarify the incident. And just briefly to hint the parallelism later to be expanded here, this is exactly what we see with the crashed Malaysia Airline in Ukraine.

A month later, on July 28th, the war started. The British were the first to mobilize. It mobilized the fleet and not the army. Mobilising these days was tantamount to war, the British mobilization an was under the table declaration of war. 


World War 1 was available to readers digestion and pleasure in British history books with the headline 'One incident lead two another' - which is the usual historical coincidence theories to be presented before-during-after a war. It was not us who started, we knew nothing, we could not have done anything, happened has happened. The war was carefully planned though by elite groups in Britain and France, whose whereabouts or meeting forum were a freemasonic lodge named Grand Orient. We see similar groups of freemasons performing in the Russian Revolution.

An English journalist named Clarence Henry Norman was in London on Sunday 28th June. He described an incident in his book 'A Searchlight on the European War'. He was on his way to work in Downtown London, and in The Strand he meets an eager man who asks him: 'Any news from Sarajevo, any news from Sarajevo?' Norman did not even know where Sarajevo was located, and the man had to explain to him that it was a city in Bosnia, after which the man muttered: 'Is it possible that they screwed up ...?'

What happened here? Later in the day went Norman over to a tea party with a friend who worked at Northcliff, which was a large newspaper chain at that time. When the news came in. the female hostess explained that '... there were some guests who had to leave early because they were going over to the newspapers to update the news. And by the way this incident was important, because it was the start of the Great European War! '

What did she just say? It was very few people who in thosedays had the sense that a major war imminent. But the German emperor obviously knew something, he stated that '... he could not say when the war would start, but he could say where. It would be after some stupid incident somewhere in the Balkans.'His intelligence had apparently infiltrated the Masonic groups from the Grand Orient. We can once again remind ourselves that the mind-fucking newspeak word 'conspiracy theorist' today has become so intensely marketed precisely because world history is governed by exactly this kind of conspiracies!, And because it is not intended that people should talk about it.

But how could this happen. Well, in the decades before the war, we have the reign of Edward VII of England, son of Queen Victoria, who as Prince of Wales had to wait ages before the shriveled mummy of a mother finally died off. In the 10 years he was king, he organized the so-called 'Triple Entente', which should contain Germany and Austria-Hungary. A subject in itself this figure is one of the most frightening characters of World History. The British empirical envy did not allow anyone to be their equal men, and the French wannabe-opportunist-imperialists were then as now quick to jump on the bandwagon. The Entente consisted of Britain, France and Russia - with Japan as the Far Eastern backup. Germany and Austria-Hungary knew very well what was going on, so they created a 'Triple-Alliance' with Hungary and Italy. Italy quickly dropped out and was replaced by the Turks, the Ottoman Empire. All this and much more the work of Edward VII.

With this frontal structure any incident could set off a European war. So we have a medieval castle (the Alliance), who witnesses the arrival of siege troops (the Entente). Do you surround a castle unless you intend to attack it? Hardly. And the attack happens at the earliest expediency.

On the other hand, the level of fear - and as mentioned before everlasting envy - from the British side was extremely high. They saw Germany mobilize and the German army surpass the British. They imagined everything that could happen. The Germans mobilized to defend themselves, the English mobilized to attack. But it might not be called that one attack, as they lost their grip on society and may discourage potential cannon fodder. Back then - as now - an attack had to appear as a defense. Before-under-after, just read your schoolbooks (or rather don't, because you already digested that shit years ago!).

Back to the present

The parallel today to the Empire of Envy is the the Wall Street oligarchy that is constantly loaded with a sense of threat from China and Russia. They scream, howl and and makes scenes. And since the agreement of the BRICS finance bank just has been signed, so they also feel threatened by Brazil, India and South Africa. As hysterical women they always confuse their feelings with reality. Moreover they feel threatened beforehand by a number of smaller countries around the world - and there are surprisingly many that now stand in line to join this BRICS initiative, which is the very result of America's arrogance and brutal, cynical assertion of their supremacy financially since the Bretton-Woods deal , by the IMF, which is triggered by just the Bretton-Woods, through the World Bank, militarily through their perfidious intelligence agencies, their aggressions / wars, culturally through their decadent cultural imperialism, and governmentally through their ridiculous / childish relation to the pampered baby called Israel , their lies and manipulations and their 'British' contempt for the rest of the world. The world out there has had enough.

War is psychosis. In Washington right now, there is a pre-war psychosis. The brain-damaged politicians are right now looking high and low for ways to crack down on Putin, Assad, Iran, China, BRICS ... countries and people all over the world who will not toe the line. How dare the world, this cheap rubbish, not complie?! Are we are now in a long-July-1914 mode? Is the world once again entered the state of sleepwalking that led to WW1? Dominating American politicians like John Kerry and Condeliza Rice and the entire neo-con gang think of this particular way: 'If we do not turn first, then the enemy - 'we do agree that the enemy is out there, right...? - becomes stronger than us! Therefore ... '

The British and now Anglo-American Empire was and is a paranoia culture, and their creation, Israel is paranoid to the point that breaks all bounds. You have to remember to ask yourself: when did Russia, Germany, China, Brazil, Iran, India ... unsolicited and without declaration of war attack and assault a neighboring country? Never! Please compare: how many times did the United States, the muscular dog in post-British-Empire, do exactly this since WW2? Over A Hundred 100 times!

The psychotics, that have made a coup d'Etat of the decaying empire, are right now looking for a pretext. The question is: what will be the new Sarajevo?

However, we must recognize that even though we in several ways still are detained in a state similar to 1914 - our retarded energy system based on oil started in those years, the sickness industry aka the pharmaceutical-medical complex started in those years, the privatization of the U.S. national economy started just with the Federal Reserve Act, the Titanic sank and big-scale insurance fraud was organized in those years ... just to name a few things - we now have a global situation is marked by a shift that does is not to be underestimated: the Internet. What in fact has taken place is a continual accumulation of knowledge about actual history. It has become considerably more difficult for the paranoid psychopathic elite to get away with their wars and their lies.

We live in the swell of WW1.

The war gave rise to communism, fascism, Nazism, WW2, the Cold War, and then we are only a few decades from our time. Germany paid war debts for the 1st World War right up to the 1990s - completely ludicrous! The cold war is currently being revived in Ukraine, and the events here have deep tracks left in the century. Nazis / fascists have occupied a government with the consent of the United States and the EU as a perfidious spearhead into Russia itself. The Warshaw Pact closed down under the agreement after the Cold War and the fall of the wall, but NATO never kept their end of the bargain and has now worked its way through Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Bulgaria. They attacked from Turkey via Chechnya (they always hire terrorists). Now they do it via Ukraine, Georgia and Moldova. The goal is Russia's annihilation, the old British-imperial agenda. Does it look like the alliances of 1914? 

So what are the Sarajevo moment? A plane crash in Ukraine? At that time, the agent terrorist groups for the Empire were those in Serbia. Ukraine is now flooded with terror agents, nazis funded by American think tanks and their funds. The recent plane crash is also deeply suspicious, and talking about 'replay' we now see yet another (remotely controlled or shot down?) Malaysian aircraft. But just as Bismarck did not say who or what but rather where they would trigger the war, we cannot say today for sure. Merely that the false flag will be designed to provoke either Russia or Iran. It could happen in Ukraine or even more likely in the Middle East. Self inflicted attack on Israel? Why not, Netanyahy will be on vacation that day, for sure.

And 'long July' is today a perfect time to wreak havoc in the peripheral world. People are drinking canned beer staring at either the World Cup, the Wimbledon or the Tour de France. In Europe anyway, the Americans are probably glaring af some stupid baseball event. And would they in general recognize the moment when it came up in the mainstream media? Hardly, the media has already shot their interpretation of life in a cross, and in the example Russia / Ukraine there is an ongoing massive information war against the Western citicens - which in itself is too large to be identified by people with a TV-brain.

You need to get unplugged, man!

The war elite is in a race with time. If they don't succeed this time in destroying the Western Civilisation, they may have had their last chance. As one of the master manipulators of geopolitics, Zbignew Brzezinski, recently said - it slipped his mouth at a meeting -'We are in a hurry, because more and more people are waking up'.

International Freemasonic Networks Created by British King Edward VII Primarily Responsible for Outbreak of World War I — Tarpley’s Landmark 1995 Lecture

This lecture of the American historian Webster Griffin Tarpley cannot be recommended highly enough. His explanation of one of the main cores of evil in Western history is a must for our understanding of our past - and why we still live in the tyranny of this past. 

100-året - Første Verdenskrig i replay

Enten er vi er et par uger for sent på den, eller også er vi et par uger for tidligt på den, men det er under ingen omstændigheder for sent eller for tidligt at foretage et brush-up på den mest traumatiserende event i det 20. århundrede, verdenskrigenes sorte moder: Første Verdenskrig.

Den 28 juni 1914 foretog en gruppe serbiske terrorister fra en organisation kaldet 'Den Sorte Hånd' en likvidering af to royale personer fra den habsburgske kejserslægt. Efter mordene gik der 30 dage, hvor folk ikke så noget særligt ske. Diplomati er ofte under radaren, men hvad folk vidste var, at Østrig-Ungar'erne stillede serberne et ultimatum om at lukke et undersøgelseshold ind, for de stolede ikke på serbernes vilje til at klarlægge hændelsen.

En måned senere, den 28 juli, startede så krigen. Briterne var de første til at mobilisere. De mobiliserede flåden og ikke hæren. Mobilisering i disse dage var ensbetydende med krig, så briternes mobilisering var en under bordet krigserklæring.

1. Verdenskrig var ikke, som der står til læsernes fordøjelse og fornøjelse i britiske historiebøger (Readers Digest) 'One incident lead to another' - altså de gængse historiske tilfældighedsteorier, der lægges frem før-under-efter en krig. Det var ikke os, der startede, vi vidste intet, vi kunne intet have gjort, sket er sket. Krigen var nøjeplanlagt af elitære grupper i England og Frankrig, hvis tilholdsted eller mødeforum bla. var frimurerlogen ved navn Grand Orient.

En engelsk journalist ved navn Clarence Henry Norman befandt sig i London søndag d. 28 juni. Han beskrev hændelsen i sin bog 'A Searchlight on the European War'. Han var på vej til sit arbejde i Downtown London og i The Strand møder han en ivrig mand, der spørger ham: 'Er der noget nyt fra Sarajevo, er der noget nyt fra Sarajevo?'Norman anede ikke engang, hvor Sarajevo lå, og manden måtte forklare ham, at det var en by i Bosnien, hvorefter manden mumlede: 'Er det muligt, at de fuckede det up ...?'

Hvad skete der her? Senere på dagen gik Norman over til et teselskab hos en ven, der arbejdede ved Northcliff, der var en stor aviskæde dengang. Da nyheden tikkede ind, forklarede den kvindelige værtinde, at '...der var en del folk, der måtte gå tidligt for de skulle over på aviserne for at opdatere nyhederne. Og i øvrigt var denne hændelse vigtig, for den var jo starten på den Store Europæiske Krig - The Great War!'

Hvad sagde hun lige der? Det var meget få mennesker, der på det tidspunkt havde den mening, at der en storkrig på trapperne. Men den tyske kejser vidste åbenbart noget, for han udtalte, at '... han ikke kunne sige, hvornår krigen startede, men han kunne sige hvor. Det ville blive efter en eller anden tåbelig hændelse et sted på Balkan.' Hans efterretningsvæsen havde åbenbart infiltreret disse frimurergrupper fra Grand Orient. Vi kan endnu en gang minde os selv om, at det mind-fuckende newspeak-ord 'konspirationsteoretiker' i dag er blevet så intenst markedsført, netopfordi verdenshistorien er styret af den slags konspirationer!, og fordi det ikke er meningen, at mennesker skal tale om det.

Men hvordan kunne det finde sted. Well, i årtierne forinden regerede Edward VII i England, søn af dronning Victoria, der som Prins af Wales måtte vente evigheder før den indtørrede mumie af en mor endelig kreperede. I de 10 år, han var konge, organiserede han den såkaldte 'Tripple Entente', der skulle inddæmme Tyskland og Østrig-Ungarn. I det hele taget er denne figur en af de mest skræmmende personer i verdenshistorien, overhovedet! Det britiske misundelsesimperium tillod ikke nogen at være deres ligemænd, og de franske wannabe-opportunist-imperialister var dengang som i dag ikke sene til at hoppe med på vognen. Ententen bestod af England, Frankrig og Rusland - med Japan som fjernøstlig backup. Tyskland og Østrig-Ungarn vidste meget vel, hvad der var i gang, så de skabte en 'Tripple-Alliance' med Ungarn og Italien. Italien droppede hurtigt ud og blev erstattet af tyrkerne, det Ottomanske Imperium. Alt sammen og meget mere Edward VII's værk.

Med denne frontale konstruktion kunne enhver hændelse udløse en europæisk krig. Altså vi har en middelalderborg (Alliancen), hvor der ankommer belejringstropper (Ententen). Omringer man en borg, medmindre man har tænkt sig at angribe den? Næppe. Og angrebet sker ved førstkommende belejlighed.

På den anden side var niveauet af frygt - og som før nævnt misundelse - fra briternes side extremt højt. De så Tyskland mobilisere og den tyske hær overgå den britiske. De forestillede sig alt muligt, som ikke måtte ske. Tyskerne mobiliserede for at forsvare sig, Englænderne mobiliserede for at angribe. Men det måtte ikke hedde sig, at man angreb, for så mistede man grebet om befolkningen og den potientielle kanonføde. Dengang - som nu - skulle et angreb fremstå som et forsvar.

Tilbage til nutiden
Parallellen i dag er Wall-Street-oligarkiet, der er konstant loaded med en følelse af trussel fra Kina og Rusland. De skriger, hyler og skaber sig. Og siden aftalen om BRICS-finansieringbanken lige er underskrevet, så føler de sig også truet fra Brazilien, Indien og Sydafrika. Som hysteriske kællinger forveksler de altid følelse med virkelighed. Dernæst føler de sig på forhånd truet af en række mindre lande - og der er forbløffende mange, der nu står i kø for at tilslutte sig dette initiativ, som er affødt af USA's arrogance og brutale-kyniske hævdelse af deres overherredømme finansielt siden Bretton-Woods, via IMF, der er affødt af netop Bretton-Woods, via Verdensbanken, militært via deres perfide efterretningsvæsener, deres interventioner, deres aggressioner/krige, kulturelt via deres dekadente kulturimperialisme, og statsligt via deres latterlige/barnagtige relation til det forkælede spædbarn kaldet Israel, deres løgne og manipulationer og deres 'britiske' foragt for resten af verden. Resten af verden har fået nok.

Krig er psykose. I Washington lige nu hersker der en præ-krigs-psykose. De hjerneskadede politikere søger lige nu med lys og lygte efter måder at slå ned på Putin, Assad, Iran, Kina, BRICS ... hele den verden, der ikke vil makke ret. Hvad bilder Verden sig ind, det billige skidt?! Lever vi lige nu i en lang-juli-1914-tilstand? Er verden endnu engang gået ind i den søvngængertilstand, som førte til WW1? Dominerende amerikanske politikere som John Kerry og Condeliza Rice og hele neo-con-slænget tænker på netop denne måde: Hvis vi ikke slår først, så vil fjenden - vi er jo enige om, at de derude er fjenden, ikke? - blive stærkere end os! Derfor ...

Det britiske og nu britisk-amerikanske imperium var og er en paranoia-kultur, og deres kreation, Israel, er paranoid i en grad, der sprænger alle rammer. Man skal huske at spørge sig selv: hvornår har fx. Rusland, Tyskland, Kina, Brazilien, Iran, Indien ... sidst uopfordret og uden krigserklæring angrebet/overfaldet et naboland? Aldrig! Sammenlign venligst: hvor mange gange har USA, muskelhunden i det post-britiske-Imperium, gjort det siden WW2? Over 100 gange siden WW2!

Psykotikerne i det afdankende Imperium søger altså lige nu efter et påskud. Spørgsmålet er: hvad bliver det nye Sarajevo?

Vi må dog erkende, at selvom vi på flere måder stadig er tilbageholdt i en tilstand, der minder om 1914 - fixeringen af vores retarderede energisystem baseret på olie startede lige netop der, sygdomsindustrien aka det medicinal-lægevidenskabelige kompleks startede lige netop der, privatiseringen af den amerikanske nationaløkonomi startede lige netop der med the Federal Reserve Act, Titanic forliste og big-scale forsikringssvindel blev sat i system lige der ... for blot at nævne et par ting og sager - så er vor tid kendetegnet ved et skift, der ikke bør undervurderes: internettet. Der er sket og sker fortfarende en akkumulering af viden om faktisk historie. Det er blevet væsentligt sværere for den paranoid-psykopatiske elite at slippe afsted med deres krige og deres løgne.

Vi lever i dønningen af WW1.

Krigen affødte kommunismen, fascismen, nazismen, WW2, den kolde krig, og så er vi kun et par årtier fra vor tid. Tyskland betalte krigsgæld for 1. Verdenskrig helt op til 1990'erne - fuldstændig grotesk! Den kolde krig bliver lige nu genoplivet i Ukraine, og hændelserne her har dybe spor tilbage i århundredet. Nazister/fascister har okkuperet en regering med billigelse fra USA og EU som en perfid spydspids ind i selve Rusland. Warshavapagten lukkede ned ifølge aftalen efter den kolde krig og murens fald, men NATO holdt aldrig deres del af aftalen og har i dag arbejdet sig frem via Estland, Letland, Litauen, Polen, Rumænien, Bulgarien. De har fra Tyrkiet angrebet via Tjetjenien. Nu gør de det via Ukraine, Georgien og Moldavien. Målet er Ruslands udslettelse, den gamle britisk-imperiale agenda. Ligner det ikke alliancerne fra 1914?

Så hvad bliver Sarajevo-øjeblikket? Et flystyrt i Ukraine? Dengang var agenten terrorgrupper i Serbien. Ukraine er oversvømmet med terroragenter. Styrtet er i øvrigt dybt mistænkeligt, og talking about 'replay', så er der tale endnu et (fjernstyret?) malaysisk fly. Men ligesom Bismarck ikke kun sige hvem og hvad med derimod hvor, man ville udløse storkrigen, kan vi heller ikke i dag sige det med sikkerhed. Blot at det falske flag vil være beregnet på at provokere enten Rusland eller Iran.

Og 'lang juli' er også i dag et perfekt tidspunkt at lave ravage i udkantsverden. Folk sidder og drikker dåleøl og glor på enten VM i fodbold, Wimbledon eller Tour de France. Og ville de i det hele taget genkende øjeblikket, hvis det kom op i mainstream medierne? Næppe, for medierne har allerede skudt deres fortolkningslag indover, og i eksemplet Rusland/Ukraine ruller der for tiden en massiv informationskrig over Vesten - som i sig selv er for stor til at blive identificeres af folk med TV-hjerne. 

You need to get unplugged, man!

International Freemasonic Networks Created by British King Edward VII Primarily Responsible for Outbreak of World War I — Tarpley’s Landmark 1995 Lecture

Denne forelæsning af historikeren Webster Griffin Tarpley kan ikke anbefales højt nok. Hans fremlæggelse af et af omdrejningspunkterne for den ondskab, vi har set i Europa og resten af verden i de forløbne 150 år er et must både for en forståelse af vores fortid, men også en forståelse af, hvorfor vi stadig lever i fortidens tyranni.