Skull and Bones

Skull and Bones 2

 

From: holderlin66
Date: Wed Apr 28, 2004 1:08 pm
Subject: Re: Skull and Bones

Dear friends;

The following article in the public eye is all about Kerry and Bush and "The Code of the Bones". But please note. Here is someone who would have sensed the Michael School and has unconsious perceptions into the research of the Michael School. Instead of his use of Luciferian we would need to replace his concepts of Luciferian with Ahrimanic. But you see, here is another example of how culture would like to approach what is buried in the soul life from experiences they had before birth, but cannot find Michael Language to express these buried concepts.

Here is where the failures of the Michael School to be coherent and carry some of the burden and share reality with them meet failed and stunted educational interpretation. Research that Spiritual Science has presented, bringing Ahrimanic history on-line and dividing the perception in the soul life into a trinity, not a duality has been 'Lost in Translation'. It is our job to spot such things and assist in the translation. Spiritual Science has laid great emphasis on Milton's duality/Goethe's failures on the issue of duality and every walking fundie or Islamic or christian are living in a blanket failure of soul perception.

On other lists we had a running perception of how Michael thoughts, even those on many Anthro lists, were listening in the ethers and by overnight sleep rhythms were able to hear the mighty wings of the Archai and Time Spirit Michael, whispering in their hearts. These are ZeitGeist wars between Ahrimanic and Michaelic pivots based on the treasure of Michael wisdom falling like rain into the hearts of humanity. But it is our ability to meet the tangled impressions that people attempt to formulate with clearer and updated Michael thoughts and Steiner's Michael Letters that reveal stunning facts. Just unravel for yourselves some of the insights that the author is trying to formulate.

The Skull and Bones is obviously associated with active Brotherhoods playing out behind the scenes of Political Spin Doctors of Nominalism. Kerry vs the strong Dean and how Kerry and Bush are tied to Skull and Bones, has never even been examined by the press, but note here how the author tries to find a way to express this and, to our amazenment, Kerry is an easier defeat and is fouled in the ropes because Ahrimanic not Luciferic brotherhoods working in the system behind the scenes. But we fiddle and diddle with these things and fail as the Michael School to see their hidden relationships. The press hasn't paid any real attention to the flaming issue of the tie in to the Skull and Bones, but follow this article carefully and you can see the threads.

Note with Interest:

http://www.lewrockwell.com/white/white50.html

"I long ago adopted the scheme of the Russian writer Dmitri Merejkowski (1865–1941) dividing all religions into two basic ones. I may have mentioned it on LRC before and well may again. M. (Merejkowski) extracts from the apparently irreconcilable diversity of ancient religions a central theme, a single tendency. In all the "shadows" that ultimately turn real in the primary figure of Western religion and history, the Lord Jesus Christ, carpenter of Galilee, he discerns the original "Atlantean" and now "Western" religion, the religion of the suffering God, God self-sacrificed for man.

There is, in the eleven or twelve thousand years of history of what he calls the "second (post-Atlantean) humanity," widespread evidence of another religion, the obverse or diabolical double of the true universal religion. As to that true and universal religion, M. cites approvingly Augustine's well-known mention of "Christianity before Christ."

The religion in opposition to it, the "second religion" (recall that the devil's number in the Pythagorean system is two), is the religion of man sacrificed to the "gods." And we know from the Bible that the gods men make for themselves are evil, of the devil. The one religion is addressed to God (Tolkien's term for God in the Trilogy was "The One.") The second religion addresses Lucifer [Bradford adds - AHRIMAN in place of Lucifer] or one of his stand-ins; and the requirement laid on the worshippers is human sacrifice.

Think of the Moloch of Carthage and the immolation of infants the god required, so vividly presented by Flaubert in his Salammbo. Our Molochian thing is abortion. As well as war. A Luciferian [AHRIMANIC] beatitude: "Blessed are the warmakers for they shall inherit the earth." (Can it possibly be that another one is: "Blessed are the warmakers for they shall be raptured"?)

Atlantis went down, M. indicates, because it abandoned its true religion ("Christianity before Christ") and adopted the murderous "second religion." Noah's ark was the bridge from the first to the second humanity. That is, the Bible story is the condensed record of the salvation of a remnant of first humanity. You may consider this, as to history, truth or fiction; M. is by no means furnishing a detailed factual account of anything; but in my view it is precise psychological and spiritual truth. And we are still dealing with the same two fundamental religions. [TRINITY OF FORCES, CHRIST-LUCIFER-AHRIMAN]

I take religion to mean the understanding of man and the cosmos and the purpose of life one holds at the root of one's being, no kidding. It is not a matter of labels and shouting, of loud claims of having been born again. It is not merely crying Christ ("Lord, Lord!") and then ignoring his mandates. It is very much connected with what one wants out of life and what one thinks it is appropriate to do to get it."

SKULL AND BONES ISSUES: Title: CODE OF THE BONES

"I am of course making the point that our two Bonesmen are Hasnamuss men. You may well say that it takes more than a colon to make the one condition the equivalent of the other as I did when I wrote "The Code of the Bones: The Ethos of the Hasnamuss." Let me argue this a little further. My "Code of the Bones," on examination, is little different than the de facto stance of a run-of-the mill egotist, a stance that can in some minority of cases evolve into what people nowadays called psychopathology or sociopathology. That condition has been superbly defined in Cleckly's The Mask of Sanity.

But a Hasnamuss is evidently something beyond even that. Ouspensky also said, ". . . you have nothing to do with such people; but you meet with the results of their existence." What did he mean? I have my own answer. The Hasnamuss has been thrown by fate or by accident, which is a species of fate, to the top of the heap, where the ordinarily limited ability of an egotist to do much harm is greatly enhanced. Think of an officious minor military or police person. Then think of Napoleon (a Hasnamuss if there ever was one). Bush – the most ordinary of save-your-own-skin fellows – is suddenly catapulted by family connections and by the sort of Nominating Committee I will discuss shortly into Ruler of the Free World, Supreme Commander of the Forces of Freedom, President of the United States, etc. Petty officer changed into Napoleon, and doing a pretty good job in the role at that. Lots of mayhem.

Now look at this election scene. It would almost seem that Kerry was fingered (as was Bush before him) by some invisible World Rule Nominating Committee, which has a list of politically prominent people "who might do." It would surely have been against Kerry that he, too, was a Bonesman (Hey, let's not be too obvious!), but that objection had to be overruled finally as things shaped up in the Democratic primary campaign. One sometimes has to make do with less than the ideal, and Kerry was obviously sufficiently brainwashed, compromised, and manageable (as Dean was not) to be otherwise in all ways acceptable to my (admittedly somewhat occult) Nominating Committee members, whoever they are.

The trouble with Kerry is that he smells like a loser. At least that is my impression, although I am surely not willing to place any money on the contest at this point. Bush is clearly the more upstanding Hasnamuss of the two, but Kerry would probably grow in office, as the saying is.

Bush seems at present to be positively thriving on his situation. He is the better looking of the two, the more confidently assured, the more physically vigorous. He out and away wins on natty shirts and ties, and as Norman Mailer noted, he is almost absurdly photogenic. Pictures of him striding across the WH lawn to his helicopter or doing the furrowed-brow thing in the Oval office, routinely wow the camp followers. Long-faced and bushy-haired Kerry is a distant second in all this. But you never know.

It is a measure of the frivolity inherent in our selection process that the Wall Street Journal Online suggested the other day that Kerry's VP search committee needs to find someone with less hair.

Maybe it will come down to religion in the end. Of course I don't mean real religion, rather, the curious alignment of so-called religious voting blocks. Maybe Bush's fundy-Zionist Christians (latest label heard on a C-Span panel discussion: "Christian fascists"), and his assorted knee-jerk Republicans can overpower Kerry's yellow-dog Democrats and Catholics. As to Catholics, Kerry seems to be doing his best to convince them that no Catholic is he. But creedal orthodoxy seems to matter less and less to anyone.

The Democrat party is where, since FDR's time, an awful lot of Catholics have shoaled up for want of a home elsewhere (unless, like me, they have given up on the whole lot of pols, all so greedy for the spoils of office). But Catholics are no longer, en masse, a sure thing for anyone; they have been splintered by abortion, the sex revolution, the "modernization" of the Church, and by the failure and disappearance of the tremendously influential religious orders that used to staff Catholic schools and hospitals. As one Catholic writer has said, imagine Cardinal Spellman, back in the 40s, calling FDR. He was put through right away. Imagine (if you can) New York's late Cardinal O'Connor calling Clinton some years ago. Not likely to be available in any big hurry. The whole story of the decline of Catholic political clout is in the difference.

But leave aside this dreary talk of "religious voting blocks." The thing is more or less contemptible. Rather let us ask what is the real religion of a Bonesman and by extension of a Hasnamuss, if I am right that the code of both is essentially the same."

...................................................................................................................................

From: holderlin66
Date: Wed Apr 28, 2004 2:00 pm
Subject: Re: Skull and Bones/Merejkowski

"Russian writer Dmitri Merejkowski (1865–1941)"

When we discover clues that we had missed in our understanding of the struggle and output of writers to define the New Age that the Michael School and Fifth Gospel represented, we encounter both mistakes and truths. In brief some indications:

http://www.riseofthewest.net/dcmiscell/dm04.htm

"Between 1896 and 1905, DSM published a trilogy of historical novels entitled Christ and Antichrist, which became European best-sellers. It was composed of Julian the Apostate (1896, translated 1899), Leonardo da Vinci (1902, translated 1902), and Peter and Alexis (1905, translated 1905). With this trilogy Merezhkovsky revived the historical novel in Russia. Its three parts, set in widely separated epochs and geographical areas, reveal historical erudition and serve as vehicles for the author's historical and theological ideas."

"From his exile in Paris, DSM lambasted Bolshevism in The Kingdom of Antichrist (1922, translated 1922) and other works. He published two more historical novels under the general title Rozhdenie bogov (1924-25; Birth of the Gods) the first Tuthankamon in Crete and the second The Messiah. The novels centered around Egyptian pharaoh Akhenaton, the founder of one of the first known, and short-lived, monotheistic religion. They depicted Akhenaton as a messiah, in the Christian sense, that is, as an ancient manifestation of the Christ. Both novels share the central idea of continuity and integrity of pre-Christian and Christian world.

The turning point of 1919-20 proved critical for DSM and his wife, since their exile out of Russia turned out to be definitive this time. From then on, Gippius produced very bitter, angry works against the Bolsheviks. Her later works were so subjective and capricious that they were noted more for their form than for their content. Similarly, DSM became very pessimistic. Exit the happy coming of a Third Age of freedom and Holy Spirit of his dandy life in St. Petersburg. Instead he became a prophet of doom, foreseeing the imminent end of the world in Atlantis-Europe, The Secret Of The West (1930, translated 1931).

DSM wrote biographical studies of Napoleon, Jesus Christ, St. Augustine, St. Paul, St. Francis of Assisi, Joan of Arc, Dante, and many others; most of these have been translated into English.

In later life, Merezhkovsky regarded Mussolini and Hitler as leaders capable of eradicating communism. D.S.M. was in 1933 on behalf for his Trilogy Christ and Antichrist (1901-1904) nominee for the Nobel Prize for Literature."

Bradford comments;

Look ye and learn: 1933 the rise of Hitler and Merezhkovsy mistake this event for the true Rise of the Etheric Christ in 1933 and the intuited advent of the Michael School. Events like these in the currents of Time reveal how great souls can be mistaken, however Steiner's Spiritual Science held a true and steady course. (Note my Ahrimanic Cliff Notes.) Here was someone who understood Atlantis and outshone the likes of a P.S. as a flashlight outshines a firefly, yet still made mistakes in in the 1933 period by understanding a world change but not able to fully grasp it.

Even when Soloviev was deeply grasped by Steiner, Merezhkovsy was so close and also would have fully understood Spiritual Science and obviously had encountered it. Here we can encounter the early Gordienko and Prokofiev esoteric unfoldings and the complications of Europe.

And Further:

"Merezhkovsky and Gippius divided the history of humanity and its future in three phases. The realm of God the Father, i.e. the realm of the Old Testament; the realm of Jesus Christ, i.e. the realm of the New Testament, the present phase which was now closing, and the realm of the Holy Spirit, i.e. the era of the Third Testament, which was now dawning, gradually disclosing its message to humanity. In this revealing, the 1905 events were a mailstone of the transformation. The kingdom of the Old Testament had divine authority as supreme; the kingdom of the New Testament had love as supreme; and the kingdom of the Third Testament would reveal inner freedom as supreme... One could argue that this blissful worldview mirrored Merezhkovsky's happiness in life: he was a handsome young man, author of bestsellers, famous all over Europe, and wealthy enough to freely dispose of his life.

Just as the previous kingdoms symbolised a change in human consciousness, so the final Kingdom of the Third Testament was to usher in a new religious consciousness, the genesis of a New Humanity. The Third Testament would resolve all present antitheses – sex and asceticism, individualism and society, slavery and freedom, atheism and religiosity, hatred and love. The enigma of Earth and Heaven, the flesh and the spirit, would be solved in the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit would redeem the world, giving humanity a new life in peace, harmony, and love. The Three in One would be realised, and Spiritual Christianity – long ago driven underground – would be brought into the open.

In propagating their 'Cause of the Three in One' Gippius and Merezhkovsky hoped for a religious revolution, a spiritual metamorphosis of man to prepare him for the Third Kingdom. According to Gippius the aim of all universal-historical development is the end of humanity and the world in their present forms through the Apocalypse. Only the coming of Christ would unite humanity in brotherly love and harmony as one living family. At this point in the spiritual evolution of mankind the apocalyptical Church would be established, not as a temple, but as a new experience of God in human consciousness and in the human soul."

...................................................................................................................................

From: holderlin66
Date: Wed May 5, 2004 9:41 pm
Subject: Skull and Bones/Wm R. Pitt

CALLER: It was like a college fraternity prank that stacked up naked men --

LIMBAUGH: Exactly. Exactly my point! This is no different than what happens at the Skull and Bones initiation and we're going to ruin people's lives over it and we're going to hamper our military effort, and then we are going to really hammer them because they had a good time.

http://mediamatters.org/items/200405050003

Limbaugh on torture of Iraqis: U.S. guards were "having a good time," "blow[ing] some steam off"

"Hours before President George W. Bush announced plans to address the Arab world to condemn the abuse of Iraqi prisoners by U.S. military personnel at the Abu Ghraib prison, Rush Limbaugh justified the U.S. guards' mistreatment of the Iraqis, stating that they were just "having a good time," and that their actions served as an "emotional release."

As reported by Wonkette.com, Limbaugh's comments can be found on his website. From the May 4 Rush Limbaugh Show, titled "It's Not About Us; This Is War!":

CALLER: It was like a college fraternity prank that stacked up naked men --

LIMBAUGH: Exactly. Exactly my point! This is no different than what happens at the Skull and Bones initiation and we're going to ruin people's lives over it and we're going to hamper our military effort, and then we are going to really hammer them because they had a good time. You know, these people are being fired at every day. I'm talking about people having a good time, these people, you ever heard of emotional release? You of heard of need to blow some steam off?

The day before, on his May 3 show, Limbaugh observed that the American troops who mistreated Iraqi prisoners of war were "babes" and that the pictures of the alleged abuse were no worse than "anything you'd see Madonna, or Britney Spears do on stage."

LIMBAUGH: And these American prisoners of war -- have you people noticed who the torturers are? Women! The babes! The babes are meting out the torture.

LIMBAUGH: You know, if you look at -- if you, really, if you look at these pictures, I mean, I don't know if it's just me, but it looks just like anything you'd see Madonna, or Britney Spears do on stage. Maybe I'm -- yeah. And get an NEA grant for something like this. I mean, this is something that you can see on stage at Lincoln Center from an NEA grant, maybe on Sex in the City -- the movie. I mean, I don't -- it's just me."

Bradford comments;

This smirking monkey called George Bush and his lackey Rush and all the ditto heads out there supporting the illegal, immoral, lie infested, greed motivated, self serving invasion of Iraq and the Orwellian monster they want to maintain; That is Terror, Evil and an Eternal War on Terror funded by our gas guzzling price fixes with the Saudi's and the blood and money of Americans are an infested blight on the soul life of humanity. Look ye into the Eye of the Ahrimanic Decption grown again to beast in America by 2004.

In other countries you don't have to have the audacity and idiocy of this loud mouth Rush Limbaugh to listen to. You are lucky. These Men of Sin are guilty of War Crimes and atrocities and failing their own and our own higher selves.

Now Michael Moore with his "Farenheit 911" is going to get the same publicity boost that was given to Mel Gibson, via adverse publicity. Just because pockets of total luciferic/Ahrimanic liars have grabbed at this Western world, infected with ChristLess Militarism and Arabistic Christless Science and Education.. we naturally, normally and need Torture and defy all laws, because the Ends Justifies Means. The utter stupidity and criminal behavior of the vast military complex, Rush Limbaugh, Rumsfeld and that unique smirking, arrogant pimp called George Bush revealed in his Arab, non apology, the glint in the eye and the recognizable smirk of Ahriman's darkened pawns.

Remember the dead have been through all this before with Nazi Germany and Stalin. They died, many fouled in their failed understanding of Spiritual Reality and tangled in Nationalism and military group soul activity. Those who now are finally waking up, have carried with them the seeds of a higher transformation. They learned from Angels and the Etheric Christ upon their deaths and they bring with them the faintest sense that they are being led to the King of Liars once again. But also the rejected and corrupted dense souls who Ahriman owns, have brought down into incarnation the propensity for full mental deception and piggishly and wantonly clinging to the food of lies, spin and deception that Ahriman sustains them with.

Every one of these Military midgets who fain ignorance of the techique of interrogation and torturein our U.S. Good Guy image is an out and out liar. Plus hired mercenaries, outside the law, and outside military courts or Justice have been hired and trained with Israel's worst torture methods that go all the way down to Cartels in Central and South America and Gitmo in Cuba, and up to the current plague in the White House and the Imperial West.

Anyone, anyone who dares give this President and this Neocon gambit a vote or lends spiritual support to the works of their inhumanity to the very name of humanity is under Ahriman's deluded sway. That is at least currently nearly 1/2 of the voting American population. When we are ready to take our new soul into incarnation, what do we carry with us and when does the courage of our deepest humanity awaken? If anytime and place, it should, for us, awaken now.

http://truthout.org/docs_04/050504A.shtml

Tin Soldiers and We are Coming
By William Rivers Pitt
t r u t h o u t | Perspective

Tuesday 4 May 2004

This is sacred ground. It was in this place, one of many, that ordinary Americans stepped forward to say no to a government that was sprinting towards disaster. That action was met in this place with deadly force, force that took the lives of those who marched, along with the lives of those who happened to be passing innocently by when the bullets began to fly.

Last night, in the candlelight procession which crossed the campus and ended where those four students died, I was honored to carry the light of Sandy Scheuer, who was killed 34 years ago today. I have a promise for those of you who are here today in her name. I will keep that light I was privileged to hold last night with me for the rest of my days.

I've spent the last several weeks trying to decide what, exactly, to speak about today. For much of that time, I've been stuck. It wasn't that I didn't have anything to talk about. Quite the opposite. There is too much, much too much, that we need to discuss here today. I was stuck. Should I limit my remarks to the events which took place here on this day?

Would I offend those who were there when it happened, those who lost loved ones, if I chose to speak of other things as well? I hope you will forgive me, but I decided that I must do more than mark this time, this place, and the blood shed on this day. I mean no offense. The wheel has come around again, you see. A day when ordinary Americans must stand forth and say no to a government sprinting towards disaster has come again.

I feel, oddly enough, a little like Abraham Lincoln, after Lincoln was given the name of a Mrs. Bixby, who lost five sons on Civil War battlefields. How does one properly react to such news? "I feel how weak and fruitless," Lincoln wrote to Mrs. Bixby, "must be any word of mine which should attempt to beguile you from the grief of a loss so overwhelming." That is how I feel standing here today.

I am overwhelmed with grief, not just for those who were killed and wounded on this ground 34 years ago, but for this whole nation, which has so clearly and catastrophically lost its way, again. The essence of that catastrophe? We. Never. Learn.

As managing editor of truthout, I get a lot of email and letters. In the last several months, dozens of these letters have come from the mothers, fathers, wives, husbands, brothers, sisters, children and friends of soldiers who have been killed in Iraq. One such letter reads as follows:

"Dear Mr. Pitt, I must share with you the obituary I wrote for my son, Sgt. Evan Ashcraft, who was killed July 24 near Mosul. I often think of the contributions my intelligent, sensitive wonderful son could have made. He had so much potential. He told us that when he came back from Iraq he wanted to help people. He said he had seen so much hatred and death that the only way to live his life was through aid to others. Look at what we've lost. The loss is not just mine, it's the world's loss. Evan will always be alive in my heart. He and all the other victims of this heinous action in Iraq must be more than mere numbers emerging from the Pentagon's daily tally. His death is a crime against humanity" - this is a mother speaking, remember - "and the fault lies with the war criminals who inhabit our White House. Please share his story so that he may come alive to your readers."

Here, again, is that grief from a loss so overwhelming. I have shared the story of Evan Ashcraft with people from one side of this country to the other, because the story of Evan Ashcraft is also our story. In telling this story, I have felt time and again the grief his mother has endured, have felt time and again the grief endured by more than 750 families which have lost loved ones in this invasion, have felt the grief endured by the 20,000 other families who have had loved ones returned to them from this invasion missing an arm, a leg, a face, a future. I cannot speak for these families, or for any of you here, but only for myself when I say that my grief, my sorrow, my horror at all of this has turned to the deepest, darkest rage.

There is a page on the White House's website - right now, at this moment, in May of 2004 - entitled 'Disarm Saddam Hussein.' This page correlates exactly with the information disgorged by George W. Bush in his 2003 State of the Union address. To wit: Iraq is in possession of 26,000 liters of anthrax, 38,000 liters of botulinum toxin, 500 tons of sarin, mustard and VX nerve agents (for those here without calculators, 500 tons = one million pounds...hide that), 30,000 munitions capable of delivering chemical agents, several mobile biological weapons labs, and operational connections between Iraq and al Qaeda. This page also states quite clearly - right now, today, at this moment - that Iraq was seeking uranium from Niger for use in a nuclear weapons program.

The vast quantities of anthrax, botulinum toxin, sarin, mustard gas and VX, along with the munitions to deliver them, as well as any connections between Iraq and al Qaeda terrorism, have completely failed to show up in the 16 months since they were first described in tones of fearful doom to the American people. The 'mobile weapons labs' - termed "Winnebagoes of Death" by Colin Powell - have been shown to be weather balloon launching platforms sold to Iraq by the British in the 1980s.

The claims about Iraq seeking uranium from Niger have been exposed as lies so deep and profound that America stands humiliated before the world. Those lies have also led to a federal investigation into this White House for, basically, treason: Because Ambassador Joseph Wilson - who investigated and discounted the uranium claims in the first place - Because Ambassador Joseph Wilson dared reveal these lies to the public, his wife, Valerie Plame, was exposed as a CIA agent in an act of revenge perpetrated by officials within the Bush administration.

Note well. Wilson blew George W. Bush and his people right out of the water by exposing their Iraq uranium claims as fiction. In response, some members of the administration let it be known that his wife was a CIA agent. There are two vital points to understand in this. One: Valerie Plame was not an analyst, a secretary, or a low-level staffer. Valerie Plame was a NOC, which stands for "non-official cover." It designates an agent operating under such deep cover that they cannot be publicly tied to the American intelligence community in any way, shape or form.

Valerie Plame was a NOC running a network dedicated to tracking any person, nation or group that might put weapons of mass destruction into the hands of terrorists. Let me say that again. Valerie Plame was a NOC running a network dedicated to tracking any person nation or group that might put weapons of mass destruction into the hands of terrorists. The Bush administration trashed her out after screaming for a year about the dangers of letting weapons of mass destruction fall into the hands of terrorists. I heard somewhere that weapons of mass destruction in the hands of terrorists was a matter of concern. Like I said: Treason.

The second vital point to understand is this: The Bush administration outed Valerie Plame, deliberately and with intent, as a warning to Joseph Wilson, and to threaten any other insiders who might desire to speak the truth about what this administration has been doing. They did it to shut people up who were saying things they didn't like. As we stand here today, in this place where violence was brought down upon people who were saying things the government didn't like, the parallel is chilling. Our government is once again in the business of silencing its critics by any means necessary. The wheel has come round again.

Make no mistake, and do not be fooled by refashioned rhetoric. We did not go to war to 'liberate' the Iraqi people, as the new rhetoric would claim. We did not go to war to bring democracy to Iraq, as the new rhetoric would claim. That State of the Union speech in January 2003, scant weeks before the invasion, made it very clear why we were going to war. Iraq was an imminent threat to the safety and security of the United States, we were told.

The usage of the words 'imminent threat' has led to some uncomfortable moments for the Bush administration once it became clear that all of their dire warnings were utter balderdash. They have many times denied ever describing Iraq as an imminent threat. The words 'imminent threat' and the administration's denials led to some of the best television I have ever seen. A recent edition of the news program Face the Nation had Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld defending the invasion. This is a portion of that interview, and please note that I am reading here from the transcript as best I can:

BOB SCHIEFFER (the host): Well, let me just ask you this. If they did not have these weapons of mass destruction, why then did they pose an immediate threat to us, to this country?

RUMSFELD: Well, you're the -- you and a few other critics are the only people I've heard use the phrase `immediate threat.' I didn't. The president didn't. And it's become kind of folklore that that's -- that's what's happened. The president went...

SCHIEFFER: You're saying that nobody in the administration said that.

RUMSFELD: Not -- if -- if you have any citations, I'd like to see 'em.

Mr. FRIEDMAN: We have one here. It says `some have argued that the nu' -- this is you speaking --`that the nuclear threat from Iraq is not imminent, that Saddam is at least five to seven years away from having nuclear weapons. I would not be so certain.'

RUMSFELD: And -- and...

Mr. FRIEDMAN: It was close to imminent.

RUMSFELD: Well, I've -- I've tried to be precise, and I've tried to be accurate. I'm s--suppose I've...

Mr. FRIEDMAN (quoting Rumsfeld again): `No terrorist state poses a greater or more immediate threat to the security of our people and the stability of the world than the regime of Saddam Hussein in Iraq.'

RUMSFELD: Mm-hmm. It -- my view of -- of the situation was that he -- he had -- we -- we believe, the best intelligence that we had and other countries had and that--that we believed and we still do not know-- we will know.

Hovering over all of all of these dire warnings in the months before the invasion was one unifying theme, an image hammered home to the American people day after day after day. Burning towers, innocent people leaping to their deaths. In every way possible, the Bush administration connected the immediate need to attack Iraq with the horror of September 11. We have to get them, they said, because Iraq is connected with al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden, because Iraq has WMDs which they could give to bin Laden and bring forth a day which makes September 11 look like a picnic by comparison.

Scary stuff, that. But when it became clear that the WMD threats had been grossly overblown, and when no connections could be made between Hussein and al Qaeda, the Bush administration backed away from the 9/11 connection claims as quickly as they had backed away from the 'imminent threat' claims. We never said Iraq and al Qaeda were connected, they complained. Why would anyone ever say we did such a thing?

September 2002: Rumsfeld said he had five or six sentences of "bulletproof" evidence that "demonstrate that there are in fact Al Qaeda in Iraq." Asked "Is there any intelligence that Saddam Hussein has any ties to Sept. 11?, Rumsfeld replied, "You have to recognize that the evidence piles up." Asked to name senior Al Qaeda members who were in Baghdad, Rumsfeld said, "I could, but I won't."

In his February speech to the United Nations, the one in which he revealed the existence of the "Winnebagoes of Death," Secretary of State Powell warned of the "sinister nexus between Iraq and the Al Qaeda terrorist network."

In arguing for the Iraq invasion, Bush on March 18 delivered a letter to the House and Senate that said, in paragraph two: "The use of armed force against Iraq is consistent with the United States and other countries continuing to take the necessary actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations or persons who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001."

And then there was May 1st, a little more than one year ago today, when Bush announced the end of "combat operations" underneath the soaring banner which read MISSION ACCOMPLISHED. On that day, Bush proclaimed: "The battle of Iraq is one victory in a war on terror that began on Sept. 11, 2001. The liberation of Iraq is a crucial advance in the campaign against terror. We've removed an ally of Al Qaeda. "

There are two crucial points to consider here. First, the reality is that, though Saddam Hussein was certainly a bloody wretch, he was also a secular leader who spent thirty years killing every Islamic fundamentalist he could get his hands on. He was particularly fond of killing practitioners of Wahabbism, the sect of Islam practiced by Osama bin Laden and his al Qaeda fighters. Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden have been blood enemies for years; bin Laden has called for Hussein's death on many occasions.

The idea that Hussein would arm bin Laden with a pea shooter, much less weapons of mass destruction, is laughable. Saddam Hussein did not last in that neighborhood by being suicidal. Arming Osama bin Laden would have been suicide, because bin Laden would have used those weapons on Hussein. Period. End of story... and never mind the fact that there were no WMDs in Iraq to arm bin Laden with even if he wanted to.

Beyond that is the simple fact that Saddam Hussein, for the last several years, was little more than the Mayor of Baghdad. Vast areas in the north and south in Iraq were totally beyond his control because of the no-fly zones. These, by the way, are the areas where al Qaeda fighters had reportedly been sighted. Those fighters had nothing to do with, and had no allegiance to, Saddam Hussein. A lot of them, in fact, wanted to kill him. To say that Hussein had al Qaeda connections because those guys were in his country at one time is to say that George W. Bush has al Qaeda connections, because they were in America before the September 11 attacks.

The second, and most important thing to consider, is simply this: They used September 11 against you. To this very day, they are using September 11 against you. Deliberately and with intent, they used September 11 to inspire fear and loathing within the populace, in order to gin up support for a war that should not have happened. How many of you know someone who has plastic sheeting and duct tape tucked away somewhere in their home? Those are souvenirs of that fear, delivered to you by the same government that should have stopped the September 11 attacks in the first place. But it happened, one way or another depending on what you believe, and here we are. They used September 11 against you.

I can think of few greater crimes than that which has been committed against us all, and against the world entire, by this administration. Make no mistake, it is a crime. It is a crime, and by God in heaven, there will be a reckoning for it.

And what of the people of Iraq? More than 10,000 of them have been killed in the invasion and occupation. What of the people of Iraq, who did no harm to us and were never, ever a threat to us? Do they pine in the darkness of their nights for the democracy and freedom we promised them? If they do, then woe unto them, because there will be no freedom, no democracy for them. The Hussein bootheel which stood so long on their necks - a bootheel, by the way, marked 'Made in the USA' - has been replaced by another American bootheel worn by Hussein thugs.

Not so long ago, we were told by the Bush administration that it was Hussein loyalists and Ba'athist Party holdouts that were organizing and implementing the attacks against our forces. Now, we are reconstituting Hussein's army to do the fighting for us. Now, we are opening doors of opportunity to Ba'athist holdouts. Now, we are putting a former Hussein general in charge of the besieged city of Fallujah. He returned days ago in triumph to that city, wearing his old Republican Guard uniform. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

Here is what the people of Iraq know. There will be no democracy for them, because it has been made clear that this farcical June 30th handover date, which will purportedly mark a new dawn of Iraqi sovereignty, is a crude whitewashing of an ugly truth. Whatever this new Iraqi government will look like, it will have no power to make laws of any kind. It will have no command over the security of Iraq. It will have no power over the foreign troops occupying Iraqi soil.

Here is what the people of Iraq know. They have seen the gruesome pictures of fellow Iraqis tortured and humiliated at the hands of their American captors in the Abu Ghraib prison, which was for so long a home to torture by the hand of Saddam Hussein. They have seen the pictures of men forced to masturbate in front of each other, forced to simulate sexual acts upon each other, forced to stand naked with electrodes attached to them, forced to endure attacks by dogs. The American media has made much of these photos, but there is a darker aspect to them which has not been examined properly, an added layer of humiliation which must be understood.

The Iraqis who were tortured were Muslims, and the humiliations they endured were specifically intended to strike to the heart of their faith. This was not just physical torture, but spiritual torture as well. The Muslim prophet Mohammed outlawed homosexuality, and so these men were forced to pantomime homosexual sex upon each other. According to Islam, the saliva of a dog is Najis, or impure, and any place on the human body or clothing touched by this impurity must be cleansed immediately, and so a dog was sicced upon these men.

Here is what the people of Iraq know: These grave humiliations were not accidents. The investigation into the Abu Ghraib torture is also looking into thirty - thirty - similar cases as bad or worse which have taken place over the last year. Not only were the bodies of Iraqi people tortured, but their very souls were tortured as well. Their God, and their religion, with deliberation and intent, was spit upon. Combine this with the siege of Najaf, holiest of cities for Shi'ites around the world, and you have before you an openly deliberate attempt not only to take possession of the nation of Iraq, but to undermine and offend the most fundamental religious underpinnings which define the very lives of the people there.

This is what the Iraqi people know, and so they fight. If your home, your country, your religious faith were under deliberate assault, would you do any less? I'll tell you this much. If Canada were to lose its mind and invade Maine to 'liberate' its people, and to grab Maine's timber resources as a nifty little side bonus, you can bet your bottom dollar that I'd be on a train to Portland with a rifle in my hand. You can bet on one other thing as well: The Canadian press would call me an 'insurgent.' They might even call me a 'terrorist.' But in truth, I'd be a patriot, willing and ready to lay down my life to hurl back across that border any invader who would dare attempt to take my country away from me.

How dare I say such a thing in the light of day. How dare I use the word 'patriot' in the same sentence in which I describe the people who have killed more than 750 American soldiers. I will dare much in the name of truth, because I have read the letters from the family members of those American dead, I know the name of Evan Ashcraft and too many others, and in singing his song I must speak of these things. My grief for this loss is overwhelming, but I cannot in my grief sidestep the facts. The Bush administration has taken to labeling anyone on earth who would raise arms against this insane global aggression as 'terrorists.' If you're not an American, you're a terrorist... and according to certain portions of the Patriot Act, a good many Americans are also terrorists. Some of you here are terrorists. Welcome to the club.

The truth is that it is all too convenient to use tricks of language to blame Iraqi 'terrorist insurgents' for the deaths of all those Americans. Trade places with them, however, and face an invading army commanded by leaders whose goals and motives are fully criminal, face an invading army that would kill and torture and humiliate, and think about what you would do. Language is a funny thing. It can be used to reveal, and to disguise. Even today, 34 years later, you can find a similar argument right here. Were the people shot down here insurgents? Were they terrorists? Were they patriots?

There is language, and there is truth. The truth, for me, is this: Those who fell here on this day were patriots, and the wheel has come round. The truth, for me, is this: I blame George W. Bush for our wretched estate today. I lay the bodies of our dead, and all the Iraqi dead, at the doorstep of this White House. This war, conceived in darkness and doomed to fail from the beginning, has been lost. All we are doing now is stirring the ashes. We. Never. Learn.

The truth, for me, is this: We have gathered here today to mourn the loss and celebrate the lives of those who fell here 34 years ago. This is sacred ground. 34 years ago, some very ordinary Americans rose up to strike a blow against a disastrous war, and the price paid for this decision to speak up and speak out was fearful and mortal. The wheel has rolled, and has come around once more.

We must rise again on this sacred ground, we must enter again into the valley of the shadow of death, and we must fear no evil, because this must be stopped, and we must be the ones to stop it. Patriots once marched here, and must march here again. We. Must. Learn.

This is your wake up call, Mr. Bush. Your 15 minutes are just about over. Tin soldiers and we are coming.

Thank you.

...................................................................................................................................

From: Gisele
Date: Sat May 8, 2004 3:27 am
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Skull and Bones/Wm R. Pitt

holderlin66 wrote:

CALLER: It was like a college fraternity prank that stacked up naked men --

~He means: "it was like a Brotherhood satanist ritual where in order to pass we must play the sodomy game, and enjoy it"

LIMBAUGH: Exactly. Exactly my point! This is no different than what happens at the Skull and Bones initiation

~he left out: "of the 4th degree, where human sacrifices are used"

and we're going to ruin people's lives over it

~meaning: "we'll have to ruin some perfect mind-control specimens"

and we're going to hamper our military effort, and then we are going to really hammer them because they had a good time.

You know, these people are being fired at every day.

~...with stunguns by their handlers

I'm talking about people having a good time, these people, you ever heard of emotional release? You of heard of need to blow some steam off?

~He obviously know what he's talking about! Did he also practice the same 'pranks' on American children to release his emotions?

LIMBAUGH: And these American prisoners of war -- have you people noticed who the torturers are? Women! The babes! The babes are meting out the torture.

~notice this satanist pig's excitement

LIMBAUGH: You know, if you look at -- if you, really, if you look at these pictures, I mean, I don't know if it's just me, but it looks just like anything you'd see Madonna, or Britney Spears do on stage. Maybe I'm -- yeah. And get an NEA grant for something like this. I mean, this is something that you can see on stage at Lincoln Center from an NEA grant, maybe on Sex in the City -- the movie. I mean, I don't -- it's just me. "

~Yeah, completely overtaken

...................................................................................................................................

From: Gisele
Date: Sat May 8, 2004 3:46 am
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Skull and Bones/Wm R. Pitt

~~~~Dear Bradford, please allow me to pick these excerpts from your excellent post, because they deserve repeating.

Let the Spiritual Powers all hear it. Let them know, in the East and South and West and North - we are awake.

Gix

Bradford comments;

This smirking monkey called George Bush and his lackey Rush and all the ditto heads out there supporting the illegal, immoral, lie infested, greed motivated, self serving invasion of Iraq and the Orwellian monster they want to maintain; That is Terror, Evil and an Eternal War on Terror funded by our gas guzzling price fixes with the Saudi's and the blood and money of Americans are an infested blight on the soul life of humanity. Look ye into the Eye of the Ahrimanic Decption grown again to beast in America by 2004.

The utter stupidity and criminal behavior of the vast military complex, Rush Limbaugh, Rumsfeld and that unique smirking, arrogant pimp called George Bush revealed in his Arab, non apology, the glint in the eye and the recognizable smirk of Ahriman's darkened pawns.

Those who now are finally waking up, have carried with them the seeds of a higher transformation. They learned from Angels and the Etheric Christ upon their deaths and they bring with them the faintest sense that they are being led to the King of Liars once again. But also the rejected and corrupted dense souls who Ahriman owns, have brought down into incarnation the propensity for full mental deception and piggishly and wantonly clinging to the food of lies, spin and deception that Ahriman sustains them with.

Every one of these Military midgets who fain ignorance of the techique of interrogation and torturein our U.S. Good Guy image is an out and out liar. Plus hired mercenaries, outside the law, and outside military courts or Justice have been hired and trained with Israel's worst torture methods that go all the way down to Cartels in Central and South America and Gitmo in Cuba, and up to the current plague in the White House and the Imperial West.

Anyone, anyone who dares give this President and this Neocon gambit a vote or lends spiritual support to the works of their inhumanity to the very name of humanity is under Ahriman's deluded sway.

...................................................................................................................................

From: Deborah
Date: Sun May 9, 2004 5:00 pm
Subject: Re: Skull and Bones/Wm R. Pitt

Conspiracy theories:

An observation that I've gradually built up is that once people surrender to becoming a conspiracy theory "true believer" all careful, methodical, critical thinking goes out the window. All phenomena become part of the "conspiracy." I don't know what can be done about this problem, because I think it quite likely that their are indeed brotherhoods and other behind the scenes manipulators out there, but I feel the need to tread very carefully in using this possible reality to explain anything. It feels like a temptation and a cop-out.

Some of the problems:

Scapegoating-seeing bad guys everywhere and judging people as fundamentally evil on scanty evidence. There is a great big conspiracy hiding all the evidence, so you just have to take it on faith, etc., etc.

Giving up hope-not bothering to vote, or be politically active. It is all hopeless because everything is run from behind the scenes by the evil conspiracy. A self-fulfilling prophecy?

Lazy thinking-feeling that "conspiracy" actually constitutes an explanation, when it is actually no such thing.

I have to say, sadly, that I am no great shakes at loving or thinking so I can't put myself forward as a winner on either side of the current debate. I'm just sharing the above fruits of experience in the hope of spreading the understanding that conspiracy theory is a non-explanation. A fake answer. A trick. And yes, I know Steiner spoke of the brotherhoods. I don't think he would like the nonsensical way this stuff is spread around, though. Just my wild supposition of the day.

Deborah

...................................................................................................................................

From: Mike Helsher
Date: Sun May 9, 2004 6:20 pm
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Skull and Bones/Wm R. Pitt

Hi Deb, you wrote:

Conspiracy theories:

An observation that I've gradually built up is that once people surrender to becoming a conspiracy theory "true believer" all careful, methodical, critical thinking goes out the window. All phenomena become part of the "conspiracy." I don't know what can be done about this problem, because I think it quite likely that their are indeed brotherhoods and other behind the scenes manipulators out there, but I feel the need to tread very carefully in using this possible reality to explain anything. It feels like a temptation and a cop-out.

Some of the problems:

Scapegoating-seeing bad guys everywhere and judging people as fundamentally evil on scanty evidence. There is a great big conspiracy hiding all the evidence, so you just have to take it on faith, etc., etc.

<snip>

Mike:

I've been a member of a list that has a whole lot of what you are describing going on all the time: http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/12-step-free/

There are 775 members and the basic theory that gets repeated is that twelve steps groups are evil "to the core." Sound familiar? I'm finding many similarities to some of the rants that I used to read on the WC list. It's interesting also because there is a very dominate atheistic bias doing it's usual anti-religion crusade under the guise of Kantian morality or logical empiricism.

It's the same old "us and them" thing. Dualistic thinking extraordinaire. Neurotically absolute cynicism.

I like to play ball on one side of the coin occasionally, but it's nice to swing back to center every now and then.

Thanks

Mike

...................................................................................................................................

From: Deborah
Date: Sun May 9, 2004 7:05 pm
Subject: Re: Skull and Bones/Wm R. Pitt

Mike,

Thanks. Yeah, that is the kind of thing I'm talking about. To look at evil requires more rigorous and disciplined thinking, healthy imagination, rich intuition. The temptation to just declare things as evil and then feel like something great has been accomplished... what a heffalump trap! And yes, that is a big part of my frustration with PLANS: their tendency to see anthroposophy and waldorf as this big conspiracy. They don't have to actually prove anything...it is enough to just declare a conspiracy...and there they are, all set. It is enough to make me want to take up nice Ahrimanic, abstract, academic thinking!

Deborah

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Click to subscribe to anthroposophy_tomorrow
 

April/May 2004

The Uncle Taz "Anthroposophy Tomorrow" Files

Anthroposophy & Anarchism

Anthroposophy & Scientology

Anthroposophical Morsels

Anthroposophy, Critics, and Controversy

Search this site powered by FreeFind