Finally, when a delusion gains enough momentum, those who do not accept it are intimidated, ridiculed, and given derogatory labels by the true believers of pseudo-reality so that by their sheer numbers they cause even many clear thinkers to begin questioning themselves.

It then becomes possible that for a finite period of time, pseudo-reality can work with the same power and affect as reality itself by the control of perceptions. If enough people are convinced that markets are going up they invest in the markets and they do indeed go up, even if there is no physical foundation for it. However, this manipulation of reality will not be sustainable.

For although a pseudo-reality can bring forth a positive effect, that effect is often doomed, having no foundation in reality. More often than not, however, a pseudo-reality is likely to have a negative result, bringing a destructive end to what could have been a positive outcome.

“I believe it and therefore it is,” This seems to be the philosophy of the elitist media, those who regard them, and also many of those in high places of power today. They believe that if they can control perceptions by the manipulation of information that they can control the world and create reality. This is a folly of catastrophic proportions that has put the world on a collision course with the truth. When reality inevitably collides with false perceptions the end result shall be the devastation of that which is not. Reality always comes back to claim its domain.

Has the scientific community set itself up as the arbiter of truth? To a great extent, I believe it has.

In “science” there is a pretension not only to know, but to know what is unknown. There is an assumption that because something cannot be proven by science, it cannot be known as a certainty. However, the fact is, just because scientists don’t know something, that cannot be counted as proof that nobody knows it.

There are people who know things that science cannot know, because the information falls outside the realm of scientific experimentation or measurements. However, what the “scientific community” does not know is presumed by them to be an unknown. And it is by this designation of being an unknown, they think to ‘know’ things they have no knowledge of. Thus they categorize all things ‘known’ or ‘unknown’, and thus they ‘know’ all things.

“Science” cannot know what I am thinking all the time, but I do, and only I do. Nor by “science” can I prove all my thoughts or many experiences only I have had. Even if I reveal them it doesn’t prove them, it merely proves what I say they are. But that does not mean they did not happen or exist because only I know them.

It is absurd to say because something cannot be proven by science it therefore does not exist. It is presumptuous to assume that because something is not known by most that it is unknown by all. It is presumptuous to say that because a majority of people who profess a faith are deceived, all are.

By science, one may only assume there is no God–but again, by science one can assume there is. On the other hand, by a personal experience, one may be deceived, then again, one may know. That is something that may be beyond all others.

This is why I say that in “science”, the pretension is to know everything, by believing that things unknown to them are unknown to all. Thus, they establish “truth” by determining and categorizing everything as known or unknown. Not all scientists of course, but it is a common practice in modern science.

The “scientific community” can think to know what it does and does not know, but it cannot truly know what anyone else knows, personal experiences and knowledge are not subject to science. And, “the absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.”

O’ God, save us from our enemies and protect us from the compassion of evil doers. Deliver us also from those who are hell bent on helping us. Let not those who seek to save us succeed O’ Lord. Neither allow them to “bless” us with their great wisdom or prevail in making us all equal.

As an overflowing flood which destroys all before it, they have determined to quench our thirst. For our own safety they have promised to bind us tightly in chains of compassion, to wrap us securely in the swaddling cloths of a benevolent tyranny for our own protection. They have also vowed to rob our posterity and our posterity’s posterity to bring prosperity.

O’ Lord, let those coming to save us be confounded and confused. Let terror seize upon them like that of a bleeding sailor in shark infested waters. Cause them to go round and round in circles as a dog with ticks on his most hinder parts. Yea, let them melt away as a candle, beginning from the top down. As maggots upon a rock in the noon day sun let their power dry up and be no more. Like a slug lost in a salt mine, let them dissolve into nothing.

During Hitler’s rise to power in the 1930’s a great part the ideology he embraced was popular in intellectual circles, not only in Europe but internationally. Most of his thinking was not as original as one might imagine, but rather, were ideas derived from ancient philosophers, pagan and esoteric beliefs, while other tenants of what would become Nazi ideology were from a collection of worldviews and philosophies held by prominent thinkers of the day. In fact, many core beliefs upon which the Third Reich was built were part of, what at the time, was considered a widespread progressive worldview. There were a number of prominent individuals of great recognition, influence, and power who also shared similar views, of which, some merely sympathized with Hitler, while others supported him openly.

Proponents of fascist thought were not only found in Axis nations, but were also present in America, England, and throughout the world proliferating societies in both hemispheres. In their ranks were corporate giants, international bankers, academics and renown intellectuals, politicos and other celebrated individuals of great power and influence. Indeed, most of Germany’s international support structure before, and during the war remained intact after the war—some even continued aiding Nazi war criminals in the aftermath by providing escape routes, documents, and sanctuary to prominent Nazi war criminals. Even governments which fought Nazism took in and gave prestigious positions to German scientists and experts in order to obtain advanced knowledge and capabilities to stay on the cutting edge of technology and gain an advantage in a modern world.

After the Third Reich utterly collapsed, its global base of sympathizers which remained intact immediately set out recasting their image. They seized the day using the very catastrophic events they had help to create as a reason to establish what they hoped eventually would become an effectual world government with an elitist ruling class of philosopher-kings running the show.

The founding of the United Nations in 1945 was their attempt to do this by establishing international laws and controls; however, conflict over the extent of power the body should possess thwarted it having any real authority. Thus, the U.N. became a quasi-governmental institution serving only as a forum for discussion and coordination between sovereign governments, until state governments would gradually yield sovereignty to the international body. There was another unsuccessful attempt in 1946 under a proposal called the Baruch Plan which would have established the first international agency with actual global authority—to this end an agency was founded called the “United Nations Atomic Energy Commission.” This agency was to have global authority over all matters concerning the development and control of nuclear technology and materials. Although the Baruch proposal failed in a vote at the U.N. its failure did not deter proponents for a central controlling global authority, and they proceeded on with the process of bringing a New World Order into being in increments through the creation of inroads.

Internationalists realize that in order to establish international controls, the current power of the nation-state must be diminished—especially the power of the United States. However, attempting to undermine laws and governmental systems is an arduous task, therefore inroads are needed, and some of the most effective inroads are those outside of government which, nonetheless, promote political agendas. These groups in the form of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and private voluntary organizations (PVOs) are created as a power base to influence government and shape laws from the outside in. Likewise, by the creation of think tanks, tax exempt activist foundations, community organizations, teachers unions pushing manipulative curriculum, and the like, the mentality of society may be transformed. It is a lengthy process which takes generations, but, the most efficient way to overthrow a system of government is to gradually change the culture until the people change the system themselves or allow others to do so.

On the other hand, the transformation of society is not only left to NGOs and PVOs which are but tentacles of international corporations and activist billionaire philanthropists who create and fund them. Many corporate giants also actively work as change-agents and are openly involved in social engineering. They have a great affect directly on the culture being the owners and controllers of major media outlets, music, television and movie studios, production companies, publishing houses, major internet search engines, and a long list of many other entities, which not only have a tremendous impact upon society, but also make billions of dollars to further their agendas. One of the wealthiest and most predominant of these social-engineers is George Soros who funds the Open Society Institute (OSI) along with various other NGOs but besides Soros there are many others.

Determined to avoid another world war and wishing to micro-manage global social and economic conditions, these elitist individuals and organizations have engaged in a cultural revolution to overthrow traditional beliefs and systems. This culture war began decades ago and has gained momentum since, but particularly during the 1960s and ‘70s under the banner of world peace.

The current transformation of the world’s diverse cultures into the modern age of high technology is evidence that while humanity has come a great distance in some ways, in other ways it has remained in the same place. The progressive elitist warlords of today have evolved since the days of gaining dominion through brute force by way of the sword, to conquering subjects with ideology, propaganda, wealth, and even entertainment—enticing societies into submission, or satiating them through lust into apathy, thus bringing them into mental bondage by way of manipulation. But regardless of the ways and means between the past and present, the same aspirations of world domination remain constant, so in terms of objectives, the past is not merely yesterday, it is today and tomorrow. The engineered transformation of society today is but a continuation of the war for the world, as were all wars prior. And it may be said that somewhere, whenever we are not at war, someone is in the process of building up to it, either intentionally or in blind ignorance out of an attempt to create a World Order.

The United States has often been referred to as the world’s only super-power, but what does it really mean? The potential of a nation is only that. More often than not, the destiny of a nation is determined by will power and unity rather than potential or physical power. Potential will be realized only to the extent of the will and unity that exists among the people.

History shows that great nations often begin with a small group of determined people. Certainly in the case of America this is true. Many of the people who came to America’s shores were the poor persecuted and despised rejects of Europe. Still, what drove many of these these individuals was self-determination which in the end proved to be the greatest resource they brought ashore with them.

When the War of Independence broke out, approximately one third of colonists supported the revolution while the remaining two thirds were divided between those who were indifferent and those whose loyalties remained with the British crown. In the end the resolved minority not only prevailed over the other two thirds of their fellow countrymen but also against the world’s super power of the time.

There is more than one important lesson in this: first, a determined minority, although small, like a rudder on a ship can decide the course; second, a great power can be defeated by an inferior power under certain circumstances if a minority is unified and has the greater strength of will. America presently faces the fate of one or the other. If America prevails it will again be by strength of a minority within.

Rarely has it been the majority of a nation that initiated the greatness of that nation, even if the majority later enjoyed the benefits of that greatness. The inspiration for movements leading to greatness has always been initiated by a minority who persevered while enduring the vehement opposition of their antagonists, while the remainder of society largely in self absorption existed in a stupor of apathy.

Presently not only are there international threats posed by terrorist and state sponsors of terrorism, but there is also a resurgence of communistic socialism world wide—fascism to be more precise. Authoritarian governments and quasi-democracies through international treaties and organizations are seeking to consolidate the power of many to compete against a few by creating a global monopoly of power. However, for the United States threats are not limited to external elements, for the greatest threats today come from within our own system.

We grew from being a poor nation to a wealthy one, but we are still reviled, despised, and rejected by many other nations of the world. Because of this, there are some among us who willingly accept collective guilt on our behalf for everything that is wrong with the world today. They do this believing that because America is a super-power, not only is she responsible for all problems and their respective solutions, but she also holds an unfair advantage in terms of wealth and power.

Proponents of these views work to weaken America in every aspect and bring her under submission to prevailing world views in an attempt to create equality among nations. They hold that the road to world peace is only possible through capitulation by effectively surrendering our status as a super-power among the nations.

At the same time, the moral minority who reject capitulation are categorized and labeled among other things as: bigots, warmongers, dividers, unilateralists, fanatics, extremists, and cowboys. Even so, if this group will not only endure but be proactive, they will join in the greatness of those who came before them.

Because more than half of the nation is uninvolved and would rather exist in a stupor, battles are decided by the minority groups who do engage. During the next decade not only will the course of America be decided; but the course of the world. If America were to fail, virtually all of humanity will also fail for America is the stability of the world. She is the shinning city on a hill, the last best hope for mankind. Over forty years have past since the following words were spoken, but never have they been any truer than they are today:

“You and I have a rendezvous with destiny. We will preserve for our children this, the last best hope of man on earth, or we will sentence them to take the first step into a thousand years of darkness. If we fail, at least let our children and our children’s children say of us we justified our brief moment here. We did all that could be done.“ – Ronald Reagan, 1964

Will a minority rise to the occasion as in the past? I believe a minority will, and at the very least, they will retain their honor.

I believe we are living in an age [2006] of transition when the world as we know it today will see a radical change. This global transition is brought on by modernization and globalization combined with the unification and consolidation of powers. Unfortunately, although knowledge has been built upon from generation to generation, giving mankind more power than in any time in history, at the same time, mankind is reverting back morally, and tribal impulses are becoming the guiding force. These primitive impulses, although cloaked in sophistication and newly acquired knowledge, inspire ideologies that are eroding the foundation of our rights and freedoms. They also devalue individual rights and promote forced collectivism (fascism, communism, socialism, and almost all other “-isms”).

Collectivism has long been the rule in many cultures. However, the natural impulse for such rule is not exclusive to tribal cultures, undeveloped societies, or civilizations of the past. Moreover, regardless of how seemingly civilized, there is a natural tendency in all collective communities, regardless of ideologies, to become totalitarian. In the modern collective society for example, independent character development of individuals is replaced by mass social programming. The individual conscience is replaced by a contrived group-conscience of politically correct social decrees of the state. I believe that in a final analysis, these societies are every bit as barbaric and cruel as any other primitive tribal culture—even if only through sophistry and a charade of fastidious “compassion” and “goodwill”.

Other than an appearance of sophistication, the main difference between the neo-tribal modern society with advanced sciences, vis-a-vis primitive tribal cultures, is the amount of power the former is able to amass through wealth, knowledge, and science. Nazi Germany stands as a prime example where intellect was worshiped, while the focus on moral character and the value of life were disregarded or sacrificed for efficiency—the goal: assimilating the citizenry into a “superior” collective being—a godstate. The end result was scientific and educational advancement devoid of morality, which, in that case as always, was a human catastrophe.

Intellect, being perceived as the greatest power is a concept which holds in contempt the principle that good is the greatest power. However, the greatest and freest societies ever known to mankind were those which were built upon a foundation of righteous principles, not mere intellectualism. The words, “when America ceases to be good, America will cease to be great” are not without merit.

While there are many dangers facing the world today, the greatest threat is not posed by religious fanatics or terrorists threatening mass destruction. This statement is not to diminish the terrorist threat which is very real indeed, but to indentify the true source of most global dangers and magnify a threat that is much greater within the global economical system and governmental workings of the world’s most powerful nations today.

Adherents to radical Islam would have little wherewithal whereby to achieve their ambitions without sponsoring nations. To whatever degree terrorists succeed in the future it will have only have been made possible by state governments which harbored and supplied provisions whereby terrorists could exist. Moreover, nations sponsoring terrorists are also given their power by the most powerful nations in the world. It is therefore that Islamic fanaticism could be defeated if the will of the nations were to do so.

Notwithstanding, the will of the nations to seriously confront the dangers posed by Islamic extremists does not exist for various reasons. In Western democracies, capitulation is founded upon the fear of global crises and economic disruption which would ensue at home and abroad in a full scale confrontation with extremists. In some other nations the reason for supporting hostile regimes is much more nefarious. Some governments with malevolent ambitions have found it to their advantage to use Islamic extremism to their advantage. By proxy they hope to displace American influence globally and assert themselves as global powers. This is true of Russia and China which both profit financially off rogue entities and are fighting an asymmetrical war against the West in general, but primarily against the United States. These ambitions, which are all but ignored by the West are harder to deny in the case of Venezuela where Hugo Chavez is much more blunt about his beliefs and goals.

Russian and Venezuelan economies are based primarily on energy resources; both reap greater profits form higher oil prices due to a Middle-Eastern crisis and global terrorism. Both work to corner the market on supplies. This alliance, however, between these nations and other hostile regimes goes beyond economics and establishing global control of energy supplies for financial gain. There is also the tactic of confronting the West through Islamic proxies. This not only drains the resources of the West, but also offers a means diverting attention away from the rising threats of their own nations which have totalitarian underpinnings and global ambitions.

American wealth through global enterprise has built and empowered much of the world. Nations such as Russia, China, and others who have been empowered by the West are now to the point they can together readily challenge the West. Although these nations are often alluded to as though they are aspiring democracies, the political and economic reality is that the structure and philosophies of these formally so called communist nations now resembles the fascist regimes of the 1930’s.

The West currently [2006] is faced with an intense asymmetrical war which involves economics, technology, politics, and confrontation by proxy. Nevertheless, Westerners in large choose to live in denial. There will come a point however, when these nations which oppose U.S. hegemony openly assert themselves in a challenge to U.S. power. What takes place between now and then on their part is merely positioning and maneuvering in order to gain an insurmountable advantage.

Possible scenarios

Russia and China are emerging global powers. They have no aversion to formation of a world order on their terms; the main obstacle in their view has been the United States and to a lesser degree Europe. On the other hand, there are also elitists in the West who have no aversion whatsoever to formation of a world order with these totalitarian countries, insomuch, that they have set about dismantling and condemning Western sovereignty and power from within at every opportunity. Many proponents of a global order believe so fool-heartedly in it, they disregard any risk involved and would be pleasured to see a world order regardless of the initial cost to humanity.

I have a premonition [2006] that the world is on the verge of a two part catastrophe. It arises out of the attempt to merge nations with incompatible ideologies into a global system and it is further compounded by the adopted solutions to rectify the discord. It is very possible that in the aftermath of an event or chain of events, such as global economic upheaval, international terrorism with WMD or a nuclear devise, or some other catastrophe, the catalyst may exist to form a multi-polar global society. In any case, the end result will be catastrophic.

The West has been the stabilizing force in the world for decades. Over time, however, western civilization has been sold out by its politicians, international elitists, and global corporations. Media-elitists have worked to condition the citizenry to accept this or to be ignorant of it. This shall manifest itself in no small way. The erosion of the power of free nations is evident; and, at this point irreversible. Once US hegemony ceases from being the stabilizing force, conflicts and global chaos will follow; world stability today as we know it will cease.

I have, however, another premonition also, for there has always been a people somewhere, some place, who arise to stand for Good. And the children of Light shall be drawn unto them; for Good will sustain them. In the end it always does. Keep an eye on Israel.

The above link in the caption will take you to a youtube video of the presentation Lord Christopher Monckton gave in St. Paul, MN on October the 14th of this year. At the time of this blog post 12 days later, it had been viewed over 1,100,000 times. The subject of his speech was global warming and the United Nations Climate Change Treaty which is scheduled to be signed in Copenhagen in early December of this year. The seriousness of the threat of this treaty cannot be understated. It effectively creates a global government, supposedly preempting the U.S. Constitution by making US sovereignty subject to international law.

As the news spreads of the December meeting in Copenhagen and the potential consequences of ratifying such a treaty, it is now being reported that Obama is unlikely to attended. From the UK Timesonline today we get this headline:

President Obama won’t talk climate change in Copenhagen
Quoting from the article:

President Obama will almost certainly not travel to the Copenhagen climate change summit in December and may instead use his Nobel Peace Prize acceptance speech to set out US environmental goals, The Times has learnt.

With healthcare reform clogging his domestic agenda and no prospect of a comprehensive climate treaty in Copenhagen, Mr Obama may disappoint campaigners and foreign leaders, including Gordon Brown and Ed Miliband, who have urged him to attend to boost the hopes of a breakthrough.

The White House would not comment on Mr Obama’s travel plans yesterday, but administration officials have said privately that “Oslo is plenty close” — a reference to the Nobel ceremony that falls on December 10, two days into the Copenhagen meeting.

The White House confirmed that the President would be in Oslo to accept the prize. . .
Article

Here is my concern: Are articles like these a ruse? Being that Obama will be in Europe when he goes to Oslo to receive his Nobel two days before the meeting, he could easily jaunt over to sign the treaty. Indeed, if there is a “last minute decision” to attend on his part, he avoids a fight until after the treaty is signed. The benefit of having stories put out like this one in the Timesonline, stating he “likely will not attend”, preempts debate and stymies scrutiny. But, the Obama administration wouldn’t feign he is not going, then at the last moment have him go stating that circumstances had changed. . . would they? They are not that cunning or low down. . . are they?

Still, any such treaty would require ratification by a two-thirds majority in the Senate. Although, the United States House of Representatives would not have a vote on it at all. Even so, the requirement for Senate advice and consent to ratification makes it considerably more difficult in the US than in other democracies to ratify international treaties. Nonetheless, considering the current crop of politicians currently in Washington, there is less comfort in that now than in times passed.

Still, this is not the first attempt at this type of maneuver. In 2000, another treaty relinquishing US sovereignty was signed, as time expired, by then US President Bill Clinton.

Clinton Signs Treaty Just Before Deadline
Tuesday, January 02, 2001

US President Bill Clinton on Sunday signed the Rome Statute establishing the International Criminal Court (ICC), just hours before the 31 December signature deadline. The action is seen as a tactical maneuver to keep the United States involved in negotiations over the court’s potential establishment, the Washington Post reports. Sunday was the last day nations could sign the treaty without first having ratified it.

“We do so to reaffirm our strong support for international accountability,” Clinton said in a statement. “We do so as well because we wish to remain engaged in making the ICC an instrument of impartial and effective justice.”

Clinton added, however, that his administration still has “concerns about significant flaws in the treaty,” in particular that the Hague-based court could claim jurisdiction over citizens from countries that do not ratify the treaty, which may include the United States. These were the same concerns that had been expressed by US conservatives and the Pentagon in their objections to the US signing the treaty. . .”

UNWIRE

Fortunately, The Rome Statute never came before the US Senate for ratification and the incoming Bush administration opposed the treaty.

Be advised America, this is the means by which the US Constitution is being proposed to be overthrown.

To further compound the fact that Liberal Utopia is a fanciful delusion existing in the mind only as an unattainable dream—each one of its adherents, inside their little liberal heads has a different vision of what this Liberal Utopia looks like. But they don’t know that until they finally get together after they have power and try to make it work.

That is why when they finally obtain power they always begin falling apart. Many of them don’t really agree on details, even though they thought they would because they agreed on the surface of the issues. Many of them never really thought through the details. Why should they have? It all sounded good and those making it sound good also sounded like they had it all figured out. Still, when it comes time to bring everything into being, the visions they each have inside their heads collide, first with each other, and ultimately with reality.

From then on, all the components for chaos are present. You have the radical activists factions: gay rights, peacenicks, environmentalists, animal rights, socialists, ethnic activist groups (racists), etc., etc.—they all demand that their agendas be catered to first and foremost. However, their dilemma is that they had to unite with moderates, independents, etc., etc. to take power in the first place. Most of these people had no clue they were signing up for a fascist/communist revolution. They don’t want the totalitarian policies that it takes to try and make a radical socialist wet dream come true.

It seems apparent; the left can unite in hatred of the right to obtain power. But unity ends there. Every time they come to power they fragment right back into their separate special interests groups and attack each other. It always ends in chaos, and it will not be any different this time. They hold ideologies and employ means that doom themselves. Thus, the only way to prolong their days is by a radical takeover and tyranny.

A Liberal Utopia is a figment of the mind. Notwithstanding, when it becomes physical policy, it is an extremely destructive and futilely hopeless cause, wreaking widespread havoc upon all as it goes down in flames.

It seems that a number of people are confounded by the choice of Obama as this year’s recipient for the Nobel Peace Prize. No one can clarify just exactly what he did to receive the prestigious award which is given to the individual who is considered to have contributed the most to world peace. For me the reason is clear.

Obama won the Nobel Prize because he is destroying America—plain and simple. Seriously, that is exactly what it is all about. Of course it won’t be stated in those words. But the bottom-line is that the people who make the decision despise the U.S. and for years have blamed all of the world’s woes on American greed and power. Obama shares their views, and he is in the position to do something about it. He is in a place where they believe he can bring the American people back down to earth. This of course will make all the people of the world more “equal.” He is also the first U.S. President to promise radical change in our Middle-East policy—a change that will not bode well for Israel and which will be a direct threat to the future and existence of the Jewish State.

So as you see, it should really come as no surprise that the same organization who awarded Jimmy Carter (an anti-Semite) and Yasser Arafat (the father of terrorism) the same award, would now give the award to Obama. Even though he has yet to do anything. It is a show of faith. No more Israeli oppressors! No more American hegemony. And presto-change-o, world peace! We’re all Marxists now.

Thus, the Nobel Peace Prize!

This award is a bad omen for America and the world. This is an omen that the whole earth will have Hell to pay.

ONE: An Abstract of History – The Words in the Stone.

I will be the first to say that there are parts of this book that may present a challenge and be a difficult read for some, being that the writing is cryptic and abstract. Even so being, everything does have a meaning, represents, or relates to something most of us are familiar with. Then too, there are some parts that are by design thinly veiled.

The book may be broken into two distinct parts. The first lays a philosophical foundation with an overview of biblical and world history that reads as much like an abstract history book as it does a story. About midway, the book merges into a modern age. From this point the intensity increases as the story develops. It also begins taking on a more political aspect detailing various movements, governmental and non-governmental groups, agencies, organizations, and individuals. Here, the book becomes confrontational, and in some places, controversial. This part of the book moved me to add the afterword as a preemptive against any misrepresentations or misinterpretations of what is intended to be conveyed. You may do well to read the afterword beforehand to remove any doubt as to what is being said.

Lastly, this is a thinkers’ book. Again, for some it may pose a challenge, being that the writing contains numerous symbols, idioms, and obscure scriptural references which may confound those who are not familiar with them. It is an enigma (ainigma – Greek) written in the abstract to be deciphered. Although the story is comprehensive, not many readers are likely to grasp the depth of every single part. It is certainly a cryptic and unusual book; still, it will definitely intrigue some. I foresee three basic reactions to this writing: “I love this,” “I hate this,” and in some instances, “What is this?

Available now at Amazon

Within the book ONE is an expression of the innate tendency of civilizations to descend into tyranny. The story is philosophical, written in allegory with parables and riddles. It begins with a “Tower of Babel,” and it ends with a “Tower of Babel.” In between is a shadow of world history. It is for this reason, the storyline is not contrived as much as it is comprehended, conceptualized, and then communicated in the abstract. The book ONE is also no less than two stories told with one set of words. It is a writing that must be deciphered, and which, in many instances contains multiple meanings.

The objective of the story is to present a picture of invisible principles by bringing them into mental imagery through physical representations. This is done with an array of diverse beasts and creatures; which, although they are endowed with human like attributes, at the same time, they reflect the animalistic nature of humanity.

As for the title, ONE represents a total consolidation—the united plurality of a totalitarian system. It is a monopoly of power on top and the subjugation of all beneath. It is the cord binding the axe with the rods to create a fasces consisting of masters, servants, and slaves. It is a synthesis of all and the suppression of nonconformity.

Throughout history, civilizations, societies, and cultures have endeavored to achieve oneness. Within them all, regardless of their time or appearance, the same motivators were at work, often causing conflicts between them. These motivators remain unchanged by time even as societies, cultures, and civilizations come and go; it is only faces that change. What remains is the ambition of ONE: to rule without challenge—and the seduction of ONE: the willingness to empower a supreme ruling authority out of insecurity, hoping to find sufficiency in servitude and some reward in bondage.

Today also, the same forces drive those who seek the complete surrender or total demise of all others who stand contrary to them. They may present themselves as cruel and fearless conquerors, or as caring humble servants. They may come in the name of love or hate. They may be practitioners of barbarity or the artists of sophistry. Their rhetoric may either threaten with destruction, or seduce with promises of hope and change. Regardless, this is the nature of the totalitarian.

On the side opposing the totalitarians reside those who are committed to resisting tyranny at any cost. They are almost always outnumbered; yet, they are never broken. This aspect of an unfaltering faith and a love for Truth is the crux of the story ONE. If it is not the most prolific component throughout the book, it is still the fundament.

At first glance, the impression may be that the allegorical story of ONE is intended for a younger audience. The fact is, while certain characteristics of the book may be presented in a fashion that would appeal to a younger set, it will often be the experienced and more knowledgeable reader that will grasp obscurities and the deeper bits contained in the writing. Regardless, the hope is that anyone who reads the book will be able to take from its story as much as they are able and walk away with a better understanding of life, human nature, and of our world. I would also hope that in light of the present darkness, inspiration and hope may be imparted to strengthen, encourage, and reassure in the days ahead those who read it.

Webpage:
ONE: An Abstract of History – The Words in the Stone

R.A. Sprinkle

O’ Lord, let those coming to “save” us be confounded and confused. Let terror seize upon them as a bleeding sailor in a pool of starving sharks. Cause them to go round and round in circles as a dog with ticks on his most hinder parts. Yea, let them melt away as a candle, beginning from the top down. As maggots upon a rock in the noon day sun let their power dry up and be no more. Like a slug lost in a salt mine, let them dissolves into nothing.

A spokesman for the incoming administration defended the pick saying, “No one has been convicted yet, and, in any event, there is nothing here that a pardon cannot remedy.”

Other critics were quick to point out the role of Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich as an adviser in the selection process, expressing fears that money may have changed hands for the appointment.

Rahm Emmanuel, who also worked with Blagojevich in the selection process, dismissed the criticism as partisan, citing Madoff’s experience as a primary factor for the choice.

“No one, and I mean, no one, has more expertise or understands the system better than Madoff – And I think he has the record to prove that!” Emmanuel said.

He continued by pointing out that if  Madoff was able to keep his organization afloat for so long, relying solely on the money of investors, “Imagine what he can do in a system where he will have access to an almost unlimited supply of tax dollars and everything is perfectly legal.”

Emmanuel also went on to say that no other candidate had worked a system that had so much in common with the way social security worked, and that any differences actually worked in Madoff’s favor.

The White House refused to comment on the appointment.

Some who agree with this assessment are now referring  to the new leadership as the elephant in the living room. I tend to think a rat with a megaphone to be a better comparison.

America started becoming a fascist nation more than a century ago – to clarify – not Nazi – but fascist – with a small f.

Unfortunately, freedom’s life blood has slowly been draining out and the country has been surviving on artificial life support for quite some time. Vital signs are fading. At best, all the great physicians can do is keep the machines running, and feed the system intravenously – but the republic is basically all but a vegetable.

Life will go on – Yes – but not the life that was breathed into the nation by the founding fathers. There is little, if any – cognizance.

Rather than dying a bloody and brutal death at the hands of European fascists as some did last century, we’re going out in a comatose state – thanks to a slow but steady overdose of socialist morphine – Assisted suicide I believe they call it.

Oh! – The “compassion” of our “progressive” guardians who have taken charge of our very lives and well being.

R.I.P. America as we have known it.

p.s.
As an afterthought – I do not believe that people of principle and values should give up the fight. It is time to fight harder and take courage rather than roll up in a fetal ball and die in a hospital trash bin like the left would have us do.

However, you must realize what you truly face to be able to endure and overcome it. When a radical ideology becomes so pervasive in society that it seizes control, it will run its course until it becomes unbearable and is destroyed. We saw this with fascism in Europe last century. It is happening with Islam now. But it is also happening with Progressive Liberalism. It will not be destroyed until it runs its course and becomes undeniably and unbearably evil.

The socialists who have taken control in the US and around the world will not be overthrown until they fail completely and miserably -  But this is inevitable. Their policies have always failed, and are failing now. The difference now is that they have such control they will only be able to blame others for so long. At some point, everything becomes their baby.

Until then, they will make gains; they shall not long endure.

Therefore, remain not silent. Those who loudly proclaim the truth while few will listen, will have their words reverberating for generations afterwards.

Anti-capitalists wish to destroy the system in order to remake it into a global economic system.

Buffet and Sorors aren’t selling they are offering to buy!!!!!

WARREN Buffet, according to the Forbes list, is the richest man in the world. He has an estimated wealth of about $62b or more than the size of the East African economy. He has made his money by first investing on the stock exchange and later own-buying whole companies. The 77-year old billionaire made his first stock purchase when he was 13.

Buffet’s success has come from buying good companies selling at a discount. When the market is generally overvalued, he has the discipline to refrain from buying because everyone is buying.

In the run up to the current financial crisis, Buffet has been out of the markets accumulating up to $40b in cash in the process.

Since the crisis begun last year, Buffet has been in the market, his latest deals have been multi-billion dollar share purchases in investment bankers Goldman Sachs and US conglomerate GE. Share purchases in good companies heavily discounted by the investing masses.

Buffet is famously quoted as saying, “We are fearful when others are greedy and greedy when others are fearful.”……..

http://www.newvision.co.ug/D/8/220/654007

Soros too.

These monopolists work to create panic, then when it crashes they come in and buy up as much as they can as cheap as they can. At the same time, their socialist counter parts in the political arena use the crisis as an opportunity to make news laws and gain a choke hold on society and business.

If you have not heard of the Cloward-Piven Strategy. read about it here:

Cloward – Piven

It describes their agenda, tactics, and long-term strategy.

The Strategy was first elucidated in the May 2, 1966 issue of The Nation magazine by a pair of radical socialist Columbia University professors, Richard Andrew Cloward and Frances Fox Piven. David Horowitz summarizes it as:

The strategy of forcing political change through orchestrated crisis. The “Cloward-Piven Strategy” seeks to hasten the fall of capitalism by overloading the government bureaucracy with a flood of impossible demands, thus pushing society into crisis and economic collapse.

Oil is at an all time high, the dollar diving to new lows against the Euro and other foreign currencies. Gold meanwhile continues its surge despite attempts from the power brokers, Feds, and banking institutions to keep the price down.

I have realized for years that the global economy which has been built largely upon mere trust in the value of US dollar was one based on illusion. As long as almost everyone believes in the illusion it is perpetuated. It becomes apparent, however, when the cracks appear and the walls bow and begin to show signs of stress that something is horribly wrong.

For years the framing inside the walls and under the floor has been eaten away by termites while the keepers have continued to cover them over with layers of plaster, sheet rock, and particle board.

Why is the dollar worth anything? The feds print paper at will, why should it keep its value? It is only worth what most people believe it is; for years now that has been enough. The value of anything, however, is a perception. Even those things which have intrinsic value under certain circumstances may be worthless – A prospector dying in the desert of thirst may very well go in the direction of water rather than gold. What then is all that paper worth, much of which exists merely electronically and is never even printed?

The dollar has survived so long merely on the basis of trust. That trust was embraced by the world. However, in case you haven’t been paying attention, greedy people in the banking and financial institutions have destroyed that trust globally by making loans that were worthless and luring investors from around the world to buy them up and get burned.

At present the politicians and financiers are trying to simply put another layer of plaster on the walls, but the walls have become too heavy and there are no studs in them to hold them up.

What happens now? What happens is what is happening; people are getting out of the house before it comes down. At some point everyone else will notice how many people are leaving and panic will set in – when they stampede for the door the vibration will bring it all down.

Will another FDR arise to save us? FYI, politicians are all controlled by the the same systems, powers and people; there is no hope or salvation in any of them; FDR did not save us.

And what happened in the 1930′s after the depression set in? There was another world war because there was a global power vacuum. What do you think will happen if the US leaves a power void in the world today?

I really hate to be the bearer of such tidings, but this is what I see – I speak as I see.

I will venture to make a few predictions here.

The US economy will collapse.

This will create a global power vacuum in which Russia, China, and others will position themselves to take as much advantage as they can. They will work together to hurt the US and make sure the US does not recover as the major economic power.

Eventually China will move to take Taiwan.

Because of the waining power of U.S. there will be a surge in outbreaks of violence, conflicts, and war among countries. Within the US lawlessness will prevail.

There will be another war waged to eliminate Israel.

Europeans, who are dependent upon Russia for much of their energy will pragmatically determine that it is in their best interest to play ball with the Russians and will work to appease the ever-threatening Russian bear which will have reverted back completely to the ways it operated when it was the USSR. It is, therefore, possible that the Euro may replace the dollar for global trade.

Due to the failure of the global community and the US to confront terrorism adequately, there will be major terrorist attacks involving the use of WMD. Furthermore, the world will again experience use of nuclear weapons.

A leader will arise, who with his politico groupies and other world leaders will unite with promises of peace and to “save us” with global socialism – but socialism will not likely be called socialism – it will be called by other names, and acronyms and compassionate sounding slogans to sell government systems and programs which take power and rights away from the people.

Now, for those who have followed me this far, it may seem that I am not the most optimistic person you have encountered having fore casted economic disaster, global chaos, lawlessness, and world war. I would, however, take issue with the tag of “pessimist”, for, as I wrote previously, I speak what I see.

It is, therefore, that my last prediction is one of optimism: In the end, the good guys win, they always do.

RAS – 3-15-2008

John Bolton understands this and has already come out calling the report ‘a quasi-coup against the president.’

“Too much of the intelligence community is engaging in policy formulation rather than “intelligence” analysis, and too many in Congress and the media are happy about it,” Bolton said Thursday in an article published in the Washington Post.

The EU is lost; the US is paralyzed by political polarization; Israel is alone and without leadership. I pray I am wrong, but it appears that the situation may deteriorate until a large scale of death and destruction presents itself. There then may be a strong surge of self defense but by that point the situation will be very critical. Why are the black looming clouds always disregarded in mass before the storm?

Tribalism has always been the rule in some cultures, however, these natural impulses are not exclusive to undeveloped societies. The modern collective society where individual character development is replaced by social programming, and the conscience replaced by decree, can become every bit as barbaric and as cruel as any other primitive culture.

The main difference between tribal societies with advanced sciences and primitive tribal cultures is the amount of power the formal is able to amass. World War II is an example where the intellect was worshiped while the focus on morality and the value of life were disregarded. The result of scientific achievement combined with moral degradation was, in that case as always, catastrophic.

Intellect is perceived as power, a concept which alone holds in contempt the principle that good is the greatest power. The greatest societies are those which were built upon a foundation of good and just principles, not mere intellect. The words “when America ceases to be good, America will cease to be great” are not without merit.

While there are many dangers facing the world today, the greatest threat is not posed by terrorists. This statement is not to diminish the terrorist threat which is very real, but to magnify a threat that is much greater and is to be found in the governmental workings of the world’s most powerful nations today.

Radical Islam would have little wherewithal whereby to achieve their ambitions without sponsoring nations. Moreover, the nations sponsoring radical Islam are also enabled, either actively or passively, by the most powerful nations in the world. It is, therefore, that militant Islam could be defeated if the will of the nations were to do so.

The will of the nations to seriously confront the danger posed by Islamic extremists does not exist for various reasons. In western democracies capitulation is founded upon the fear of global disruption which would ensue at home and abroad. In some other nations there is another reason which is more nefarious. Nations with malevolent ambitions have found it to their advantage to use Islamic extremism to their advantage by proxy in order to displace the West and assert themselves as global powers. This is true of Russia and China which both are fighting an asymmetrical war against the West in general, but primarily against the United States.

These ambitions which are all but ignored by the West are harder to deny in the case of Venezuela where Hugo Chavez is much more blunt about his beliefs and goals.

Russia and Venezuela whose incomes are based on energy resources reap great profits form higher oil prices due to a Middle-Eastern crisis and global terrorism. The alliance, however, between these nations and others including hostile Islamic nations goes beyond economics and establishing control of energy supplies. There is an advantage to confronting the West through Islamic proxies in that resources and attention are diverted away from the rising threat of nations which have totalitarian underpinnings.

Western powers have through global enterprise built and empowered nations such as Russia, China, and others, to the point they are now ready to challenge the West. Although these nations are often alluded to as though they are aspiring democracies, the political and economic reality is that the structure of these formally communist nations resembles the fascist regimes of the 1930’s.

The West currently is faced with an intense asymmetrical war which involves economics, technology, politics, and confrontation by proxy; nevertheless, westerners in large choose to live in denial. There will come a point however, when these nations openly assert themselves, what takes place between now and then on their part is merely positioning and maneuvering in order to gain an insurmountable advantage.

Possible scenarios

Russia and China are emerging global powers. They have no aversion to formation of a world order on their terms; the main obstacle in their view has been the United States and to a much lesser degree Europe. On the other hand, there are elitists in the west also who have no aversion whatsoever to a world order with these countries, insomuch that they have set about dismantling and condemning Western power at every opportunity.

Many proponents of a global order believe so fool heartedly in it that they disregard any risk involved and would be pleasured to see it irregardless of the initial cost to humanity. It is very possible that a catastrophic event such as global economic upheaval, terrorism with a nuclear devise, or some other man made cataclysm may provide the catalyst to form a multipolar global society. In any case, the end result will be catastrophic.

The West has been sold out for decades by its politicians, elitists, and global corporations; this shall manifest itself in no small way. Chiefly the United States and Britain have been the stalwarts of freedom and democracy, and a number of smaller democracies still rest upon US strength for what freedom they do enjoy. Once US power ceases from being the predominate world power global chaos will follow and world stability will cease.

The threat from Russia on the other hand is different. It is more strategic in nature and is directed at giving Russia more influence and control in the Middle-East. In past wars between Israel and Arabs states Russia has not remained neutral; Arab re-supply lines have always lead back to the Soviets. Not that much has changed since the fall of the USSR; in the most recent conflict in Lebanon between Hezbollah and Israel, Hezbollah was armed with sophisticated weaponry supplied by Russia via Iran and Syria.

Thus, Israel now faces two types of threats, the threat of war from the east, and the threat of peace from the west. These two threats combined create a an even greater threat which is the true danger Israel faces today.

To underscore the peril is this Debka report, Moscow Releases Nuclear Fuel for Iran’s Bushehr Reactor

“Russian president Vladimir Putin put teeth in his threats and his cynically helpful alternative suggestions regarding the deployment of US missile defenses in Poland and the Czech Republic.
DEBKA-Net-Weekly 304 disclosed on June 8 that the week before the G8 opened in Germany, Moscow released the long-withheld nuclear fuel for Iran’s atomic reactor in Bushehr. It was delivered 24 hours before Israel launched its new military imaging satellite Ofeq-7, bringing forward the Iranian threat to Israel, …..read more….

Israel’s enemies have been fighting a war of attrition using asymmetrical tactics to weaken the Jewish state. Russia is interested in power, the US and Europe are interested in peace and stability, the Islamic and Arab nations are all interested in war. This is volatile mix.

No doubt, if achieved, this will be yet another control enacted by government to manipulate and confuse information in the free market place of ideas.

By why would they stop there; and just where will they stop?

In pondering those questions and the effects of laws which control or manipulate free speech, my imagination got the best of me — or, maybe not. What follows is a piece I have put together for the purpose of making a point,

Democrats: Bibles must contain Satan’s side

Democratic majority leader Nancy Pelosi revealed a proposal for a bill today that would require Bibles carry an opposing view.

As Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and Reps. Steny Hoyer (D-MD) and Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) prepare to push the return of the Fairness Doctrine to the front burner, language is being discussed which not only targets talk radio, but the Bible also.

“No book has been so dominating, sold more copies, or been read more than the Bible, however, the bible is very divisive and only presents one point of view. In the name of all fairness, it’s time for that to change” Pelosi said.

The bill, if enacted into law would require bible publishers to provide, at their expense, an equal number of pages for Satan and his disciples to present their side of the story.

“For too long this book of hate has been allowed to spew one side unopposed, there must be a voice of reason to create an equilibrium of good and evil” Pelosi stated to loud applause before a group of activists from Democrats for Equal Voice In Literature and Scripture, also known as DEVILS.

On the Senate side, Hillary Rodham Clinton said that while she supported legislation which would require equal access for Satan to readers of the Bible, a conflict of interests may keep her from voting on an issue that would obviously benefit her lifetime employer.

When the senator was asked why Satanist don’t write their own bible, Clinton responded, “This is about a monopoly. There is no other book that is so widespread and with so many readers that has been the best selling book in the world for so long. If we are going to be fair about this, the only solution is to include an opposing view in the scriptures.”

While Satanist have in the past written many books, all of them have failed in comparison. “The fact is, scripture has been controlled for centuries, whenever anyone tries to add or take away anything, bigoted religious fanatics rise up to censor any diversity” Lou Seffer, founder of DEVILS, said in an interview.

House Democrats did not respond to a question on whether they will be able to find enough bipartisan support to pass the bill.