War and Culture

Congressmen Ron Paul has won adherents by long resisting expanded Federal authority and the taxes that support it. Taxes are about power: lower taxes prevent the American people from being further reduced to peonage while their lives, labor and capital are seized to build the pyramid of their oppressors. For opposing this, more power to the Congressman and those like him. Starve the beast-regime of its food, the lives and money of citizens, and it will shrink to proper size. As it is now, “arrogance raps its hips with fat [arrogance], its eyes bulge with fat.” They pronounce platitudes about oppression “and their tongue struts on earth” (psalm 73:6-9).

Rule by crisis-creation and management is a primary means of increasing taxes and governmental authority. Following Britain’s re-ignition of jihad in the 1920s and its persisting global ambitions, American involvement in Middle Eastern politics and the geopolitics they sub-serve has led us to a “War on Terror” and the engorgement of life by Homeland Security. Almost anything can be done in the name of security and government’s ability to foment or contribute to crises is enormous. In retrospect it appears that the Reichstag fire was the signature political event of modern times. Just as the Nazis used the odd mythologies of Ariosophists, so modern feminists have been powered by Rousseau and the Romantics, Marxist,sociology, even the CIA to transvalue and break down society. The black flag flies over the era in which the State has aroused and used feminist attitudes and policies to destroy the family: sovereignty dies with deference and patriarchy; the sequel is terror, a culture of terror, offspring of Aphrodite and Ares, lust and war [1]. That’s a related story for another day.

Some people, like Ron Paul would like America to withdraw its armed forces from the Middle East. America should get out of the inflammatory diplomatic-intelligence games of the “peace process” which is a major engine for regionalization and globalization. But would corporate powers allow the government to leave the field to Russian and German economic and military forces? Their power, slogans and categories of thought already pervade American culture from industry to academia. We could secure our borders but can, or will any President detach America from globalism? If the heads of the Departments of State, Defense, Treasury and the CIA were replaced, would anything change but the names? George Bush and Condoleeza Rice announce but do not make American foreign policy.

The National Security Council, led by the State Department has been prepping for its latest Middle East “Peace” Conference scheduled for Annapolis in late November. The goal is to implement the end game that, ostensibly, will resolve “the cycle of violence in the region.” This bromide is the opposite of the actual goals of the pressure session at Annapolis which will be more like the surrender to which Chamberlain summoned the Czechs in late September 1938. The goal then was not to end a series of border incursions — the Czechs were handling that themselves, but to prepare the region for a vast immersion in violence.

The Secretary of State typically is the point man for such initiatives in the era of American hegemony. With the goals of the Road Map being a massive ethnic cleansing of Jews from the most ancient part of their homeland and all their holiest sites, Colin Powell and even more, his successor Condoleeza Rice often is perceived as an enemy of the Children of Israel and Jewish sovereignty. In the case of Rice, this may well be true for she goes about her business with a zest like that of James Baker of the Carlisle Group and Reagan-Bush administrations. But Rice’s feelings are not relevant at this level: like Goneril’s Butler Oswald in King Lear she is a tool, “a serviceable villain,” an enforcer for policy-makers that do and will bend any president toward their own designs as may be seen by a recent public letter titled, “Failure Risks Devastating Consequences.”

The letter appears in Vol. 54, #177 of the New York Review of Books (11-08-07) and its list of signatories indicate the font of American policy: Zbigniew Brzezinski, Trilateral co-founder and author most recently of The Grand Chessboard; Lee Hamilton, co-chair of the Iraq Study Group also known as “the Baker Group” after its principle-member, that emphasized “dialog” with Iran and Syria and the need to partition Israel; Brent Scowcroft, former National Security Advisor to Gerald Ford and G.H.W. Bush; Paul Volcker, former Chair of the Federal Reserve System; Carla Hills, G.H.W. Bush’s trade coordinator; Thomas Pickering, State Department top cadre; Nancy Kassebaum-Baker and Theodore Sorenson. Even without the names of key figures like Richard Holbrooke, Henry Kissinger and Sam Nunn here is a section of America’s elite from the 1960s till today. If the Dulles brothers were alive, no doubt they would be represented, too and with them the ghosts, or more than the ghosts of all those Nazis the Vatican helped them disperse throughout the world [2].

The Washington Post tells us that Rice has “a spiritual passion about the need for peace overcoming pain and grievance” (10-17-07, A12), a passion she pursues by pressing to cleanse Judea of Jews. But her “spiritual passion” for expelling Jews doesn’t impress the writers of the above letter. Brzezinski, the head of the group states that “her legacy right now is really very poor” and that only “if she can pull this off,” a retreat of Israel to its 1949 armistice lines, from the Temple Mount, City of David, Hebron and more “will she be a real historical figure.” She probably understands that Z.B. is not referring only to living on in history books. If she fulfills their goals she will gain the approval and perks of the group by helping them sever the world from its roots and memory. They want humanity to drown [3].

One stated goal of the group is a “two-state solution.” This cliché has been a misnomer since 1922 when Britain’s Foreign Ministry under Churchill severed the eastern 77% of the Mandate from the Jewish National Home, thus creating two states. They also banned Jewish settlement there although the Emir Abdallah, their puppet, and leading sheiks were eager for Jewish settlers to develop the land and already had signed leasing agreements for that purpose. The British intervened to block them in their drive toward “an Arab Federation” from Baghdad to Cairo and Aswan. The British wanted conflict leading to the synthesis of an Arab Federation under its hegemony. The third state, Hamastan, was seeded in 1948 when Egypt seized and held the Gaza strip which the Bush-Sharon-Quartet cleansed of Jews in 2005. It now is a launching pad for missiles that require another “peace” conference and agreement to create a four-state solution heading toward an Arab Federation under NATO suzerainty.

The Brzezinski group’s letter is an interesting stick with no carrots, at least for Israel (though emoluments for the Israeli puppets who will sell out their people will include ‘get out of jail free’ cards for the compromised). One of these brandished sticks is the warning that “the Quartet” will take over direct management of the created crisis if the Annapolis conference fails to divide Jerusalem, create a “Palestinian” capital there, and bring “Palestinian refugees” west of the Jordan. (UNRWA counts and militarizes these “refugees” while Arab states refuse to settle them. Saudi Arabia and Kuwait, for example, accept none. Read chapter two of Samuel Katz’s Battleground to learn what Arabs were saying and writing about this issue in the 1940s and ‘50s) [3]. The letter writers state that Israel must “remove unjustified checkpoints, dismantle Israeli [i.e. Jewish] outposts” and “freeze Israeli settlements” to assuage the Arabs’ “deep sense of injustice” with which Secretary Rice is said to identify deeply. Her experience with the dissolving mists of segregation apparently whetted her appetite to expel Jews.

This letter illustrates how false issues and managed crises cloak real goals: Jewish settlement (though not illegal Arab building) was effectively frozen by the Road Map late in 2001. Jewish buildings, even sheds serving as homes or makeshift synagogues have been regularly demolished since then. The checkpoints prevent attacks on civilian populations. Whenever some are removed, murders follow. All Israelis stand on line in public places: that’s what happens when your nation’s victories are aborted: eventually even the right to fight and win is suppressed, so get in line to be ‘wanded.’

It’s an outcome-based process: the Group signals that murders will follow unless there is total Israeli capitulation: unless Syria and Hamas are included in “the genuine dialog [sic] …there could be escalating violence from the West Bank and Gaza.” That’s a threat that Western and Russian arms will help fulfill just as the British armed their artificial Arab states beginning in 1920. As far as escalating violence goes, since Washington’s puppet, Mr. Olmert declared a unilateral Israeli ceasefire as rockets rained from the Gaza Strip, cleansed of its 20 Jewish villages by Ariel Sharon in August 2005 rocket and mortar fire have increased, half-emptying nearby Jewish towns and cities within the 1949 armistice lines. Yet America continues to arm Hamas via Fatah as disclosed, inter alia, by the predictable if not pre-arranged Hamas takeover of Gaza last winter. Having encouraged this, the great powers will provide the synthesis, a regional group, overt or de facto, Britain’s “Arab Federation.” Peace and prosperity or endless attrition, contested borders and population control?   

That the synthesis is as explosive as the Fatah-Hamas “unity government” serves the Group’s greater goals of eternal crisis, disease, death and burial of the integrated nation that testifies to the Creator not the “New World Religion” or “Alliance of Civilizations,” the new Babel.

PM Ehud Olmert’s approval ratings have ranged from 3 – 15% since the summer 2006 rockets from Hezbollah taught Israelis to live in bomb shelters because their State would not fight to protect them (could it happen here?). Still PM, he stated last week that he does not need the Israeli parliament to make agreements at Annapolis: his supporters are in Foggy Bottom. The growing irrelevance and dereliction of our own Congress is exemplified by many supposedly representative governments that actually serve regional groups. An example is “nationalist” leader Avigdor Lieberman who took the votes of Israelis who want an intact nation that asserts and defends its borders and then brought his party into the ruling leftist-internationalist client-regime. Although this destroyed his party in the polls, Lieberman cares about this no more than Olmert or Ehud Barak: he got a Cabinet seat and his constituency too is overseas. He has been calling for NATO forces to patrol Judea and Samaria; the Labor party prefers EU forces. As we have shown in “Web upon Web” there is much overlap between them and though the EU rapidly is developing an independent military, NATO remains the main military arm of the “European-American space, a united humanitarian space [which] will come to building a united military space as well…based on the principles of collective security” [4]. Collective Security about which Russian and American diplomats and media pretend to bicker is being put into place to police the enemies of “peace” like the Jewish settlers of Judea and Samaria; like the Serbs; like Americans in the Southwest.

Since April 1999, NATO’s principle, as enunciated by Tony Blair in Washington that year for its 50th anniversary has been an aggressive policy of “humanitarian intervention” for the “united humanitarian space which is a united military space as well…based on collective security.” East and West join hands, as Julian Huxley wished, to put the world on a grid (see www.fina.org).