quarta-feira, 28 de janeiro de 2009

The Dark Roots of the EU

Januari 17, 2009
y Paul Belien

Belgium was founded exactly 175 years ago, in 1830. The cover of A Throne in Brussels, the book I wrote for its anniversary, depicts the map of the European Union in the Belgian colours. This is no coincidence. As Belgian Prime Minister Guy Verhofstadt recently said: “Belgium is the laboratory of European unification. Foreign politicians watch our country with particular interest because it can teach them something about the feasibility of the European project.”


Two peoples live within the Belgian state: Dutch-speaking Flemings and French-speaking Walloons. In 1830 the country was part of the Dutch-speaking Netherlands. The Belgian revolution was the work of French-speaking rebels who wanted to have it annexed to France. The international powers stepped in and, by way of compromise, decided to make Belgium an independent kingdom with at its helm a German prince, Leopold of Saxe-Coburg, who was a member of the British royal family.

Leopold I of Belgium
The French diplomat Talleyrand described the new country as “an artificial construction, consisting of different peoples.” His Austrian colleague Count Dietrichstein said that the Belgian nationality was “a political attempt rather than an observable political reality.” These are descriptions that fit the European project today.

In 1865, the year of his death, Leopold I, the prince who had been given the crown of Belgium, told his son that “nothing holds the country together” and that “it cannot continue to exist.” To his secretary, Jules Van Praet, he said “Belgium has no nationality and […] it can never have one. Basically, Belgium has no political reason to exist.”

Belgium’s history is the dramatic search of its leaders for unifying elements which would be able to compensate for the lack of nationhood and the absence of genuine and generous patriotic feelings in their country. By the late 19th century the Belgian political elite developed the ideology of “Belgicism.” This “Belgicism” bears a striking similarity to contemporary “Europeanism.” Just listen to what the Belgicist ideologue Léon Hennebicq, a Brussels lawyer, wrote in 1904:
“Have we not been called the laboratory of Europe? Indeed, we are a nation under construction. The problem of economic expansion is duplicated perfectly here by the problem of constructing a nationality. Two different languages, different classes without cohesion, a parochial mentality, an adherence to local communities that borders on the most harmful egotism, these are all elements of disunion. Luckily they can be reconciled. The solution is economic expansion, which can make us stronger by uniting us.”
His words foreshadow the Europeanist project of the 1950s which aimed for political unification through economic integration. Apart from a Belgicist, however, Hennebicq was also a socialist. He did not attach importance to economic growth for its own sake – the creation of wealth which would benefit the people – but because Belgium needed economic expansion in order to be able to literally buy the adherence of the Flemings and the Walloons to their artificial state. The Belgicists were aware that Belgium could only become a viable country, if it was turned into a huge redistribution mechanism, a welfare state.

After the first World War the Belgicists imposed a social-corporatist system on Belgium. Since 1919, economic and social policies are no longer decided in parliament, but in consensus between the so-called “Social Partners.” These Social Partners include the Federation of Belgian Employers, which is the official representative of the employers versus the state. In addition it includes three specific trade unions (a Christian-Democrat, a Socialist and a Liberal one), which are recognised by the state as the only official representatives of the employees. The social partners are by nature Belgicist institutions: they operate in both Flanders and Wallonia and have huge financial and political interests in both parts of the country.

Henri Pirenne
Already at a very early stage, it dawned on the Belgicists that they could as easily apply their state-building experiment to Europe.

Between 1900 and 1932, the Belgicist historian Henri Pirenne published a seven volume history of Belgium. Pirenne claimed that Belgium was not a 19th century “artificial construction” as Talleyrand had said.

On the contrary, he described it as one of the oldest nations in the whole of Europe.

Indeed, Charlemagne, the 8th century Frankish leader, had been a Belgian, Pirenne said. In Charlemagne’s Frankish Empire, people of Latin and Germanic origin had lived together. According to the Belgicists, Belgium, this union of Germanic Flemings and Latin Walloons, was the very core of the state of Charlemagne which in 1830 had reappeared like a phoenix. In order to fulfil its destiny it would have to expand into a united Europe, with the Germans in the position of the Flemings and the French in that of the Walloons. Pirenne created the myth of Charlemagne as the first Belgian and the first European.

Paul-Henri Spaak
In the 1930s the idea of transplanting Belgicism to the European level, by creating a unified pan-European corporatist welfare state, was further elaborated on by Henri De Man, the leader of the Belgian Socialist Party, and by his deputy Paul-Henri Spaak.

De Man called himself a national socialist, but explained that this had nothing to do with nationalism at all. In fact, one of his major books was called “Au delà du Nationalisme” (“Beyond Nationalism”).

De Man knew that Belgium, as an artificial construct, did not really exist as a nation. The Belgian state was no more than the corporatist welfare system run by the “social partners.” All that being a Belgian nationalist meant was that one was attached to the Belgian welfare state. In a february 1937 interview De Man said: “What Spaak and I mean by national socialism is a socialism that attempts to achieve all that can be achieved within the national framework.” He went on to state that the Belgian welfare system could – and should – eventually be replaced by a pan-European or even a global welfare system. “I insist on being a good European, a good world citizen, as much as on being a good Belgian,” de Man said. He reckoned that if one had to live in an artificial welfare state, it would be better to live in one on as large a scale as possible. The Belgian model had to be applied at a European level.

Henri De Man
When Hitler invaded Belgium and France in May 1940, De Man saw this as a unique opportunity to establish a united Europe.

He asked his followers not to oppose the German victory because “far from being a disaster, it is a deliverance. The Socialist Order will thereby be established, as the common good, in the name of a national solidarity that will soon be continental, if not world-wide.”

In a speech in Antwerp on 20 April 1941 (Hitler’s birthday), De Man warned against Flemish secessionists who collaborated with the Germans in the hope that Berlin would abolish Belgium and grant Flanders its independence.

De Man stressed that it was necessary to “transform Belgium, not abandon it”, through “an Anschluss to Europe.” What was needed, he added, “was as much federalism and as little separatism as possible,” so that “Belgium, exactly because it is not based on a unique national sentiment, can become the vanguard of the European Revolution, the principle on which the new European Order hinges.”

De Man’s deputy, Paul-Henri Spaak, who had fled to France in May 1940, tried to return to Belgium during the Summer, but was not allowed in by the Germans. Hence, against his wishes he ended up in Britain. At the time he deplored this. Later it would turn out to have been his good fortune. Otherwise, like De Man, he would have ended up as a Nazi collaborator. Instead, Spaak survived the war on the winning side.

Though Henri De Man is now forgotten by history, his political legacy is very much alive. Spaak remained loyal to De Man’s vision of Belgium as a multi-national social-corporatist welfare state that was to be elevated to the European level. Spaak became one of the Founding Fathers of the European Union. Though he was an arch-opportunist, with few loyalties, he did not betray De Man’s dream of one single European welfare state. According to Spaak’s 1969 memoirs, De Man was “one of those rare men who on some occasions have given me the sensation of a genius.”

In 1956, Spaak authored the so-called Spaak Report which laid the foundation of the Treaty of Rome the following year. It recommended the creation of a European Common Market as a step towards political unification. From the beginning the views of the people about all this was deemed unimportant. In his memoirs, Spaak admits that “political opinion was indifferent. The work was done by a minority who knew what they wanted.”

Given the roots of Europeanism in Belgicism, there is a lot to be learned from Belgium’s characteristics as an artificial non-national state. Verhofstadt is right when he says that foreign politicians watch his country with particular interest because it can teach them something about the feasibility of the European project. The European superstate shares more than just its capital with Belgium. If the so-called Europeanists have their way, it is also going to be a Greater-Belgium.

In my book I describe three characteristics of Belgium that have already infected Europe. Firstly, as there is no genuine patriotism, the state has had to buy the adherence of the people by literally corrupting them. The absence of the virtue of generous patriotism forces the political leaders to make hard-headed calculated self-interest the foundation of the state. It is not a coincidence that Belgium is plagued by corruption to a degree that is higher than in neighbouring countries. It is not a coincidence that corruption is plaguing the European institutions also.

A second characteristic of Belgium throughout its history has been the absence of the rule of law. If the existence of the state is at stake, laws and even the constitution will be ignored in order to secure the continued existence of Belgium. As the state is an artificial construct that is unloved by the people, this happens quite regularly. Many examples are to be found in Belgium’s 175 years of existence. In fact there never was a majority in the Belgian parliament to introduce the social-corporatist model of the Belgicists in 1919. About this episode the historian Luc Schepens wrote: “It is not inappropriate to state that the worst war casualties in Belgium were the Constitution and the parliamentary democracy – albeit out of necessity and in the name of the continuity of the State.” Today, out of necessity and in the name of the continuity of the European project, Europeanists want to ignore the rejection of the European Constitutional Treaty by the peoples of Europe.

The third characteristic of an artificially constructed state is its unreliability in international relations. A state that is not committed to the rule of law, is not committed to its friends and allies either.

Article from: The Dark Roots of the EU

More on the roots and Monarchy of Belgium of and King Leopold II: White King, Red Rubber, Black Death (Video)


Source: http://www.redicecreations.com

Mars Polar Water is Pure

Trailer - The Obama Deception

Alex Jones The Obama Deception will be the first hard-hitting film to expose Obama, his agenda & handlers cutting through all the media hype, side-issues and Left/Right rhetoric. Alex has made several films exposing the Bush agenda and will approach the Obama Administrations plans from the same non-partisan point of view looking past the frontman in the White House to the real owners on Wall Street, in the Bilderberg group and at the Federal Reserve.

Please help spread the word about this powerful new film. Make sure everyone you know whether they claim to be a Democrat, Republican, independent or none of the above sees this film before it is too late. The Obama Deception hits DVD on March 15.

Mandalas In The Ultrasoup

January 13, 2009

Contemplate replacing the concept of believing with the concept of holding. It’s hard to drop a belief but it’s not hard to drop something you are merely holding. Similarly, a belief can be a heavy thing to carry around, whereas something that is just held, without believing in it one way or the other, remains as light as a feather. No egoic investment = no weight.

Is belief necessary in the quest for wholeness, gnosis and integration? Is it a valuable tool for research and exploration?

Though I still fall into the linguistic habit of saying “I believe this”, or “I don’t believe that”, I have in fact ceased to believe or disbelieve anything.

I just stopped doing it.

“A warrior is never under siege. To be under siege implies that one has personal possessions that could be blockaded. A warrior has nothing in the world except his impeccability, and impeccability cannot be threatened.” Don Juan Matus

This applies equally to possessions of the non-physical kind. Beliefs are personal possessions. With no beliefs to carry, the speed, fluidity and expansion of the warrior’s spirit is greatly enhanced.

Glimpsed Artefacts

Can we prove the felt experience of the 4D plane of existence? Can we measure the reality of the life-forms encountered by entheogenically retuning consciousness? Can we substantiate the fact that Illuminist Control System elites are manipulating consensus reality? Can we account for the revelatory flashes of extreme gnosis that spontaneously download into the mind at highly synchronous moments? No, no, no and no. Should we care? No.

Consider that all form vibrations arising from the ultrasoup* do not exist independently or separately from each other. There are no fundamental building blocks at any level, no innate mass and no ultimate particle – there is just energy moving multi-dimensionally throughout the cosmos, configuring, dispersing and reconfiguring. If you feel this to be true, then there can be no objectivity; objectivity being something essentially mind-independent and not emanating from a conscious entity. There can be no such wholly external reference. The illusory nature of the subjective and the objective is revealed. The dichotomy collapses because there is only subjective. Only felt experience and individual interpretation.

Every widely accepted statement of fact, or body of evidence, is more accurately thought of as a subjective representation of a consensus belief. It may have achieved some form of accord because lots of people agree with it, like the Earth is flat or the Sun revolves around the Earth, which were realities for millions of people until very recently. However, whether in astronomy, a murder enquiry or an archaeological dig, the evidence to support a claim is always, in and of itself, neutral data. It is in the presentation of this data that the veracity of an assertion is expressed. Every mainstream academic, historian, lawyer, scientist and corporate plutocrat worth his salt knows this.

A set of data may look compelling for a long time, more than an individual’s life time, or even for entire generations. It may serve its purpose, to send a man to the gallows or to turn a speculative theory into received wisdom, but like everything else, evidence is always open to discussion and disagreement, and over time, it is usually expanded upon, reinterpreted and in some cases, completely revised. ‘Empirical facts proven beyond doubt’ are merely good working theories. Pixelated artefacts glimpsed within the undulating fractal mesh. They should be remembered as such. Everything is an individual configuration. True for one, not for another. For those who seek to expand awareness and distil gnosis to spiritually evolve, time expended in proving a theory is time thrown away into a black hole. Better to spend it crystallizing a vision and testing its lucidity and meaning experientially. There is no better measure.

If the filters through which incoming data passes are too rudimentary, i.e 'Yes or No', 'Fits my religious dogma or Doesn’t fit my religious dogma', 'Officially approved or Not officially approved', then the data will be processed equally crudely. Not much of any creative or spiritual value gets through. These basic filters (which come free courtesy of the Control System) are entirely useless. I suggest you discard them, if you have not already done so, and replace them with a more useful set. Examples include: 'Coherent or Incoherent', 'Harmonic or Dissonant', 'Gives energy or Takes energy', 'Dharmic or Karmic', 'Elegant or Inelegant', 'Clarifies or Obscures'. You get the picture.

We may choose to say, “Consciousness is a non-local phenomenon,” or we may choose to say, “In my view, consciousness is a non-local phenomenon.” It is implicit that it is my view by virtue of the fact that I am saying it. There is no standard empirical reference viewpoint. There is only opinion. So we can usually dispense with the “I think” and “in my opinion” prefixes. For those who dare not utter a word lest it be later found to be false, get over it. You can’t make an omelette without breaking a few eggs. Unless you are toiling in the lower echelons of some putrid scientific/technocratic/corporate dictatorship, I advise you to stop worrying about tripping up from time to time. Making mistakes is good for the inner journey. It stimulates development. This is the licence of mankind, to try stuff out. To create, experiment and transform. Eventually the initial vehicle of expression is transcended altogether.

This process can be accelerated by examining the most severely misunderstood aspect of the whole mind-psyche apparatus: the imagination.

Unconscious Imagineering

Imagination is the crucible of manifestation. With intent, and a combination of personal power and harmonic resonance (with complementary components), coherent imaginings become conscious experiences. Conscious experiences compose reality. Holding this concept, it follows that the contents of the internal imaginal palette construct reality. As the population remains unaware of the profound power of their imagination, with many not even consciously acknowledging its existence, hijacking this incredible holographic tool is made all too easy. All it takes is a little sorcery. Someone with the method, motive and opportunity.

Watching TV shortens the percipient’s attention span by conditioning short-term focus using constant rapid cuts and edits - no single image remaining on the screen for usually more than a few seconds. With the eye constantly flitting from one image to another, following the gush of audio-visual artefacts, awareness is unable to rest on anything long enough to form a view or develop an independent response. Ingeniously, the desired feeling/response, the prescribed configuration of emotional energy, is delivered with the images. No thought or reflection required. Here’s a McSnotburger and here’s what you think about it… Yummy! As techniques get slicker and the media itself gets richer and broadcast in higher definition, the effect becomes even more insidious.

Personal beliefs turned in on themselves to serve as conduits for Control System doctrine.

More than ever, the media you choose to imbibe from the screen should be as thoroughly moderated and scrutinized as if it is food being fed into your mouth.

Control System portals for imagination seeding do not just manifest in the mega blockbusters produced by avatars like Roland Emmerich (Independence Day, The Day After Tomorrow, and the forthcoming 2012, eugh). Home grown TV sludge is more than capable of distributing messages from Control System HQ and it reaches even more wide-open psyches.

Consider this from the BBC alone. To spare you all the odious details, I’ll just provide the name of the programme, tagline and plot summary. 'Flood' - It's Coming Straight For Us. London is consumed by water. Chaos, social collapse and personal drama. 'Survivors' - One virus. Millions dead. A few survivors. World population decimated by deadly virus. 'Apparitions' - A terrifying journey into a world of possession and satanic conspiracy. A Jesuit priest helps exorcise people tormented by various supernatural terrors.

Do these sort of productions have true value? Immense quality? Extraordinary beauty? Intelligent humour? Passionate art? No. None of the above. But they do induce trauma. Trauma fragments the mind. Themes are introduced into the defenceless fragments. Mind prep. Dis-ease and revulsion at ultra low frequencies. Control System psy-memes, triggers for pre-packaged scenarios and phenomena. The sleeping British population has ingested the flood seed, the virus seed and the supernatural seed. Alien invasion seed next. Unconscious fourth dimensional concurrence fully commissioned, demographically customized and ready to roll.

The Control System is manufacturing its own dark reality tunnels by requisitioning the collective holographic power of the sleepers, all with their blurred but willing consent. Clever.

Take The High Road

How does one combat a system which holds such unyielding dominion over the low frequency vibrations of fear, desolation and suffering? By re-tuning the individual expression of consciousness - self - to empower, awaken and heal (as dealt with in Way Of The Infinite Explorer). In this way, micro resonances are amplified at the macro level [higher frequencies embed higher resolutions of data], sending luminous emanations out into each individual’s quadrant of the ecosphere and the unreality matrix, both 3D and 4D. These act as attractors for other high frequencies, other conscious beings. When a critical mass of consciousness is attained, the Control System mechanisms, which can only operate effectively at low frequencies, cease to exert any influence. They stop working.

Still, millions of minds continue to evade their own inner truth, reflexively pouring emotional, financial and psychic investment into the yawning jaws of regressive political and military-industrial systems. Republican, Democrat, Conservative, Labour, Liberal, Capitalist, Socialist, Fascist, Communist. Simply different angles of a single Control System product. Puppet shows for the plebs. This is becoming increasingly self evident. In England, Tony Blair (Labour) was constitutionally even more destructive than the egregious Margaret Thatcher (Conservative). On paper, very different ideologies and principles, in practice they are identical. Both hell-bent on dismantling the better part of England’s self-governance, personal freedoms and national autonomy. Now all gone. England blurs into a European state. Is any of this worth investing in?

What keeps people dutifully repeating the same futile investments? Why endow what one knows instinctively to be untrue with one’s very own lifeblood? It is a matter of high strangeitude indeed.

A neophobe is someone who resists new ideas and chooses to suspend their own conscious evolution. Neophobia often sets in with the perceived responsibilities and social expectations of adulthood and parenting. Robert Anton Wilson employed the word in his book ‘Prometheus Rising’ to classify this ubiquitous phenomenon of self-imposed cerebral short-circuiting. The deep rooted compulsion to trudge and slave within the industrial matrix factory tends to induce an internal spiritual vacuum that arrests emotional, intellectual and spiritual development. Despite the explicable nature of such a psychic malaise, the neophobe is nevertheless consenting to a distinct and conscious disavowal of authentic being. It is a choice to sleep.

The neophobic gravitation towards old systems, particularly in valuing the protestant work ethic and the incongruous pronouncements of government and scientism (the new Abrahamic religion), effectively disconnects the human mind from the greater universal field of consciousness. Unchecked, the neophobe automatically and comprehensively dampens all external novelty and spiritual insight. This is not the natural way for humans to live.

The Control System reinforces the neophobic impulse in humans by binding warm, nostalgic fantasies of a fictional golden era to a bygone age. The repeated association creates a powerful thoughtform linking happiness to the past. By inference, the new brings disquieting uncertainty when viewed through such a horribly distorted super-reductionist lens. Another erroneous belief implanted.

A friend of mine, after speaking to a neophobe, would walk back over to me shaking his head and say, “It’s no use, the shutters have come down.” Like a shop closed to new business, the steel shutters of the mind keeping the inside in and the outside out. Nothing new here, please stay away.

Territories Of The Mind

So it is that the neophobe imposes microscopic territories of mind upon himself. Mind always seeking delineation and division. A small square plot of mind with a picket fence all around. A garden with flowers, very nice. But don’t talk of venturing into the deep forests, the ice covered mountains, the vast sparkling oceans or the endless sapphire skies. They bring the unknown and the indeterminate. They evoke feelings that diminish the square plot of certainty. The presence of the infinite glimmering through the mirage of the finite.

Fear transforms one’s own inner darkness into an external enemy. Appropriated beliefs can conjure this false adversary into being. At super dense levels, ordinarily quite invisible to the isolated mind, we are imaginatively complicit in the existence of such demons and their elaborate conspiracies. It is only by going within, into the unfathomable depths of one’s own mysterious caverns, that we can indentify and disperse the stagnant energies that fuel this counterfeit foe. This is the game of the grand spiral.

Stop consuming. Reject hype. Stop watching mainstream news. Educate yourself. Read. Talk. Relax. Connect with and support like-minded souls. Go into nature. Have a big heart and be impeccable in your truth and your integrity. Bring deeper and clearer consciousness into every part of your life. Doing these things undermines the Control System unreality matrix more aggressively than by any other means, both personally and collectively.

Words can darken the mind (the third eye portal, deep blue light). The heart is harder to deceive (the heart portal, green light). Words of integrity and intent can be felt. Their energy resonates clearly. There is no cunning, no persuasion. Just sincerity and natural meaning. Deep inside the ultrasoup, there is no differentiation between one form and another. All temporarily discrete components of the universe are facets of ourselves, of each other. In the face of every personal challenge, in both suffering and joy, the truth of this should be brought to mind.

The integral growth of consciousness is not measured in volume, it is measured in resolution. The number of humans who understand what is occurring will perhaps always necessarily be few. Not all configurations of consciousness are ready to upgrade the bandwidth so radically. Not all are meant to. Furthermore, the Earth possesses a rich and diverse spectrum of consciousness; the human expression is but one of them. There are others. Many timelines, dimensions and destinies to unfold.

For those who choose to cast off the shroud of inertia, those souls who would rather live outside the city gates, the privilege of the outsider is unbounded discovery.

References & Footnotes

*Ultrasoup; my shorthand term for an ancient mystical observance, that of the divine undivided whole, the oneness, from which all things emanate and to which all things return. If you’re not mystically inclined, just remove the word divine. It’s physics too.

Source: http://thecleaver.blogspot.com

terça-feira, 27 de janeiro de 2009

The USA Isn’t a Country, It’s a Corporation!

January 15, 2009
By Lisa Guliani

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.” — Preamble of the original “organic” Constitution.

“We hold these truths to be self-evident. That all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; that to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed; that whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles, and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.”

— Excerpt from the Declaration of Independence of the original thirteen united states of America, July 4, 1776.

Fourth of July 2002 has come and gone, and Americans honored the holiday with a renewed patriotic fervor that reminded me of the Bicentennial celebrations of 1976. As is customary, traditional fireworks displays took center stage and scores of people turned out to witness the dazzling show in the summer sky. With mixed feelings, I sat with friends on a crowded Pennsylvania sidewalk beneath a glittering, mesmerizing explosion of color, pondering the keen sense of sadness and betrayal that overwhelmed my spirit. Looking around at the huge crowds gathered for the annual events, I thought silently, “We are not free.” In truth, we have not been a free people for a very long time.

We celebrate this day in honor of our “independence”. We call ourselves a free people in a land of liberty. Our anthems proudly sing the praises of this nation, and we raise our voices, wave our flags and join in song — but how many Americans realize they are not free? This is a myth perpetuated by the powers-that-be in order to avoid any major civil unrest, and to keep us all living under the thumb of a militaristic corporate Big Brother within the illusions that have been created for us. The truth of the matter is this: what freedom has not been stolen from us, we have surrendered willingly through our silence and ignorance. As Americans, most of us have no idea how our freedoms are maintained — or lost. Apparently, our ancestors didn’t have a good grasp of this either. It is sad, but it is also very true.

Don’t point to that beloved parchment, the Constitution, as a symbol of your enduring freedom. It is representative of a form of government which seemingly no longer exists in this country today. The Constitution has been thrown out the window, the Republic shoved aside and replaced with a democracy. The thing is; most people in this country remain unaware that this is so because they simply do not know the truth — what lies beyond the myths. Your so-called government is not going to tell you, either.

To even begin to understand what has happened to the Republic, we must look backward in time to the period following the Civil War. We must go back to the year 1871, which was the beginning of the decline of the Republic. When we examine what happened during that time in our history, we begin to piece together this troubling, perplexing puzzle that is “America” — only then should we answer as to whether we are indeed a “free” people or not.

So, let’s roll backward into the past for a moment. It is time we learned what they didn’t teach us in school. It is far more interesting than what they DID tell us. I think you’ll stay awake for this lesson.

The date is February 21, 1871 and the Forty-First Congress is in session. I refer you to the “Acts of the Forty-First Congress,” Section 34, Session III, chapters 61 and 62. On this date in the history of our nation, Congress passed an Act titled: “An Act To Provide A Government for the District of Columbia.” This is also known as the “Act of 1871.” What does this mean? Well, it means that Congress, under no constitutional authority to do so, created a separate form of government for the District of Columbia, which is a ten mile square parcel of land.

What??? How could they do that? Moreover, WHY would they do that? To explain, let’s look at the circumstances of those days. The Act of 1871 was passed at a vulnerable time in America. Our nation was essentially bankrupt — weakened and financially depleted in the aftermath of the Civil War. The Civil War itself was nothing more than a calculated “front” for some pretty fancy footwork by corporate backroom players. It was a strategic maneuver by European interests (the international bankers) who were intent upon gaining a stranglehold on the neck (and the coffers) of America.

The Congress realized our country was in dire financial straits, so they cut a deal with the international bankers — (in those days, the Rothschilds of London were dipping their fingers into everyone’s pie) thereby incurring a DEBT to said bankers. If we think about banks, we know they do not just lend us money out of the goodness of their hearts. A bank will not do anything for you unless it is entirely in their best interest to do so. There has to be some sort of collateral or some string attached which puts you and me (the borrower) into a subservient position. This was true back in 1871 as well. The conniving international bankers were not about to lend our floundering nation any money without some serious stipulations. So, they devised a brilliant way of getting their foot in the door of the United States (a prize they had coveted for some time, but had been unable to grasp thanks to our Founding Fathers, who despised them and held them in check), and thus, the Act of 1871 was passed.

In essence, this Act formed the corporation known as THE UNITED STATES. Note the capitalization, because it is important. This corporation, owned by foreign interests, moved right in and shoved the original “organic” version of the Constitution into a dusty corner. With the “Act of 1871,” our Constitution was defaced in the sense that the title was block-capitalized and the word “for” was changed to the word “of” in the title. The original Constitution drafted by the Founding Fathers, was written in this manner:

“The Constitution for the united states of America.”

The altered version reads: “THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA”. It is the corporate constitution. It is NOT the same document you might think it is. The corporate constitution operates in an economic capacity and has been used to fool the People into thinking it is the same parchment that governs the Republic. It absolutely is not.

Capitalization — an insignificant change? Not when one is referring to the context of a legal document, it isn’t. Such minor alterations have had major impacts on each subsequent generation born in this country. What the Congress did with the passage of the Act of 1871 was create an entirely new document, a constitution for the government of the District of Columbia. The kind of government THEY created was a corporation. The new, altered Constitution serves as the constitution of the corporation, and not that of America. Think about that for a moment.

Incidentally, this corporate constitution does not benefit the Republic. It serves only to benefit the corporation. It does nothing good for you or me — and it operates outside of the original Constitution. Instead of absolute rights guaranteed under the “organic” Constitution, we now have “relative” rights or privileges. One example of this is the Sovereign’s right to travel, which has been transformed under corporate government policy into a “privilege” which we must be licensed to engage in. This operates outside of the original Constitution.

So, Congress committed TREASON against the People, who were considered Sovereign under the Declaration of Independence and the organic Constitution. When we consider the word “Sovereign,” we must think about what the word means.

According to Webster’s Dictionary, “sovereign” is defined as:

1. chief or highest; supreme.

2. Supreme in power, superior in position to all others.

3. Independent of, and unlimited by, any other, possessing or entitled to, original and independent authority or jurisdiction.

In other words, our government was created by and for “sovereigns” — the free citizens who were deemed the highest authority. Only the People can be sovereign — remember that. Government cannot be sovereign. We can also look to the Declaration of Independence, where we read: “government is subject to the consent of the governed” — that’s supposed to be us, the sovereigns. Do you feel like a sovereign nowadays? I don’t.

It doesn’t take a rocket scientist or a constitutional historian to figure out that this is not what is happening in our country today. Government in these times is NOT subject to the consent of the governed. Rather, the governed are subject to the whim and greed of the corporation, which has stretched its tentacles beyond the ten-mile-square parcel of land known as the District of Columbia — encroaching into every state of the Republic. Mind you, the corporation has NO jurisdiction outside of the District of Columbia. THEY just want you to think it does.

You see, you are presumed to know the law. This is ironic because as a people, we are taught basically nothing about the law in school. We are made to memorize obscure factoids and paragraphs here and there, such as the Preamble, and they gloss over the Bill of Rights. But we are not told about the law. Nor do our corporate government schools delve into the Constitution in any great depth. After all, they were put into place to indoctrinate and dumb down the masses — not to teach us anything. We were not told that we were sold-out to foreign interests and made beneficiaries of the debt incurred by Congress to the international bankers. For generations, American citizens have had the bulk of their earnings confiscated to pay on a massive debt that they, as a People, did not incur. There are many, many things the People have not been told. How do you feel about being made a beneficiary of somebody else’s massive debt without your knowledge or consent? Are we gonna keep going along with this??

When you hear some individuals say that the Constitution is null and void, think about how our government has transformed over time from a municipal or service-oriented entity to a corporate or profit-oriented entity. We are living under the myth that this is lawful, but it is not. We are being ruled by a “de facto,” or unlawful, form of government — the corporate body of the death-mongers — The Controllers.

With the passage of the Act of 1871, a series of subtle and overt deceptions were set in motion — all in conjunction and collusion with the Congress, who knowingly and deliberately sold the People down the river. Did they tell you this in government school? I doubt it. They were too busy drumming the fictional version of history into your brain — and mine. By failing to disclose what THEY did to the American People, the people became ignorant of what was happening. Over time, the Republic took it on the chin to the point of a knockdown. With the surrender of their gold in 1933, the People essentially surrendered their law. I don’t suppose you were taught THAT in school either. That’s because our REAL history is hidden from us. This is the way Roman Civil Law works — and our form of governance today is based upon Roman Civil Law and Admiralty/Maritime Law — better known as the “Divine Right of Kings” and “Law of the Seas”, respectively. This explains a lot. Roman Civil Law was fully established in the original colonies even before our nation began and is also known as private international law.

The government which was created for the District of Columbia via the Act of 1871 operates under Private International Law, and not Common Law, which was the law of the Constitutional Republic. This is very important to note since it impacts all Americans in concrete ways. You must recognize that private international law is only applicable within the District of Columbia and NOT in the other states of the Union. The various arms of the corporation are known as “departments” such as the Judiciary, Justice and Treasury. You recognize those names? Yes, you do! But they are not what you assume them to be. These “departments” all belong to the corporation known as THE UNITED STATES. They do NOT belong to you and me under the corporate constitution and its various amendments that operate outside of the Constitutional Republic.

I refer you to the UNITED STATES CODE (note the capitalization, indicating the corporation, not the Republic) Title 28 3002 (15) (A) (B) (C). It is stated unequivocally that the UNITED STATES is a corporation. Realize, too, that the corporation is not a separate and distinct entity from the government. It IS the government. YOUR government. This is extremely important. I refer to this as the “corporate empire of the UNITED STATES,” which operates under Roman Civil Law outside of the Constitution. How do you like being ruled by a cheesy, sleazy corporation? You’ll ask your Congressperson about this, you say? HA!!

Congress is fully aware of this deception. You must be made aware that the members of Congress do NOT work for you and me. Rather, they work for the Corporation known as THE UNITED STATES. Is this really any surprise to you? This is why we can’t get them to do anything on our behalf or to answer to us — as in the case with the illegal income tax — among many other things. Contrary to popular belief, they are NOT our civil servants. They do NOT work for us. They are the servants of the corporate government and carry out its bidding. Period.

The great number of committees and sub-committees that the Congress has created all work together like a multi-headed monster to oversee the various corporate “departments.” And, you should know that every single one of these that operates outside the District of Columbia is in violation of the law. The corporate government of the UNITED STATES has no jurisdiction or authority in ANY state of the Republic beyond the District of Columbia. Let this sink into your brain for a minute. Ask yourself, “Could this deception REALLY have occurred without the full knowledge and complicity of the Congress?” Do you think it happened by accident? You are deceiving yourself if you do. There are no accidents or coincidences. It is time to confront the truth and awaken from ignorance.

Your legislators will not apprise you of this information. You are presumed to know the law. THEY know you don’t know the law, or your history for that matter, because this information has not been taught to you. No concerted effort has been made to inform you. As a Sovereign, you are entitled to full disclosure of the facts. As a slave, you are entitled to nothing other than what the corporation decides to “give” you — at a price. Be wary of accepting so-called “benefits” of the corporation of the UNITED STATES. Aren’t you enslaved enough already?

I said (above) that you are presumed to know the law. Still, it matters not if you don’t in the eyes of the corporation. Ignorance of the law is not considered an excuse. It is your responsibility and your obligation as an American to learn about the law and how it applies to you. THEY count on the fact that most people are too uninterested or distracted or lazy to do so. The People have been mentally conditioned to allow the alleged government to do their thinking for them. We need to turn that around if we are to save our Republic before it is too late.

The UNITED STATES government is basically a corporate instrument of the international bankers. This means YOU are owned by the corporation from birth to death. The corporate UNITED STATES also holds ownership of all your assets, your property, and even your children. Does this sound untrue? Think long and hard about all those bills you pay, all those various taxes and fines and licenses you must pay for. Yes, they’ve got you by the pockets. Actually, they’ve had you by the ass for as long as you’ve been alive. In your heart, you know it’s true. Don’t believe any of this? Read up on the 14th Amendment. Check out how “free” you really are.

With the Act of 1871 and subsequent legislation such as the purportedly ratified 14th Amendment, our once-great nation of Sovereigns has been subverted from a Republic to a democracy. As is the case under Roman Civil Law, our ignorance of the facts has led to our silence. Our silence has been construed as our consent to become beneficiaries of a debt we did not incur. The Sovereign People have been deceived for hundreds of years into thinking they remain free and independent, when in actuality we continue to be slaves and servants of the corporation.

Treason was committed against the People in 1871 by the Congress. This could have been corrected through the decades by some honest men (assuming there were some), but it was not, mainly due to lust for money and power. Nothing new there. Are we to forgive and justify this crime against the People? You have lost more freedom than you may realize due to corporate infiltration of the so-called government. We will lose more unless we turn away from a democracy that is the direct road to disaster — and restore our Constitutional Republic.

In an upcoming article, we’ll take a closer look at the purportedly ratified 14th Amendment and how we became “property” of the corporation and enslaved by our silence.

I am saddened to think about the brave men and women who were killed in all the wars and conflicts instigated by the Controllers. These courageous souls fought for the preservation of ideals they believed to be true — not for the likes of a corporation. Do you believe that any one of the individuals who have been killed as a result of war would have willingly fought if they knew the full truth? Do you think one person would have laid down his life for a corporation? I think not. If the People had known long ago to what extent their trust had been betrayed, I wonder how long it would have taken for another Revolution. What we need is a Revolution in THOUGHT. We change our thinking and we change our world.

Will we ever restore the Republic? That is a question I cannot answer yet. I hope, and most of all — pray — that WE, the Sovereign People, will work together in a spirit of cooperation to make it happen in this lifetime. I know I will give it my best shot — come what may. Our children deserve their rightful legacy — the liberty our ancestors fought so hard to give to us. Will we remain silent telling ourselves we are free, and perpetuate the MYTH? Or, do we stand as One Sovereign People, and take back what has been stolen from the house of our Republic?

Something to think about — it’s called freedom.

My heartfelt thanks goes out to the following people for their gracious and generous assistance in researching this subject: Ken S. of American Revolution II Online News, Paul Walker of RMN News, Bob Taft, Stanooch, and Willy Whitten — true Patriots, one and all.

Source: http://www.wariscrime.com

segunda-feira, 26 de janeiro de 2009

Not Rivals but Culturally United


Sensational discoveries by a Polish mission in the Nile Delta have revealed that far from being hostile regions as previously supposed, Upper and Lower Egypt were politically united in predynastic times, says Jill Kamil

Recent discoveries by a Polish archaeological mission at Tel Al-Farkha (literally "the chicken hill") in the north-eastern Delta about 120 kilometres north-east of Cairo are remarkable and sensational. Remarkable in that they reveal that the "Two Lands" of Upper and Lower Egypt were not rivals in predynastic times but culturally united. Sensational in the material objects discovered. They include numerous statuettes and amulets carved of hippopotamus tusk, and several dozen golden plate fragments came to light, the latter arduously reconstructed into figurines of exceptional beauty. Although a mere 60 centimetres in height, these naked standing men have eyes made of lapis lazuli, while various details such as sticking out ears, large phalluses, and detailed fingers and toes reveal characteristics of later Pharaonic art.

"From almost the very beginning of our work it became obvious that the scientific value of the site was tremendous, and might lead to a completely different view on the processes resulting in the emergence of the pharaonic civilization," wrote M. Chlodnicki and K. Cialowicz in Ivory and Gold, a photo-documentation of the Polish excavation of the site in the 2006 and 2007 archaeological seasons. The mission uncovered an extensive settlement and they were thrilled to find, in a large pottery vessel, the above objects "which have no counterparts in finds from the other sites with early Egyptian architecture and art". They have been dated to the time of Dynasty "O" and the beginning of the First Dynasty (c. 3100 to 3000 BC).

One figurine of a man is noteworthy because he is wearing a cloak which might be the earliest representation of a leader wrapped in a long robe associated with the Heb Sed festival, one of the very oldest ceremonies, alluded to in many of the inscriptions at Abydos dating to the First and Second dynasties. This was a festival during which the leader or king would prove his vigour and competence to rule the nation. Another figurine has one foot forward in a pose that is almost identical to that of later high royal officials. Also found were beautifully carved but curious looking dwarfs in realistic poses that have their counterparts in predynastic discoveries made at Aswan, as well as seated figurines with the finger to mouth pose -- which indicates childhood.

The deposit included miniature vessels of faience, pottery and stone, and the Polish mission gave special attention to representations of baboons, cobras, and a figurine depicting a prostrate man (probably a captive) wearing nothing by a penis sheath; his hair and beard are long and his facial features clearly archaic. Worth mentioning also were the discoveries of pottery rattles, decorated rattles, pear-shaped mace-heads, miniature vessels, faience beads and gaming pieces.

The discovery is important, because one of the key issues of modern archaeology, and indeed one that is central to an understanding of the political and social development of ancient Egypt, is the formative period of the ancient Egyptian civilisation and the origin of the concept of the "Two Lands" -- a term used by the ancients themselves to describe their own country. Until relatively recently it was believed that the predynastic communities in Upper and Lower Egypt gradually coalesced until two independent kingdoms emerged, Nekhen in Upper Egypt and Pe [Buto] in Lower Egypt, and that the formation of these federations was a step towards unification.

Subsequent discoveries changed this concept, and scholars in the latter part of the 20th century hypothesised that the two "kingdoms" were actually parallel institutions, artificially created by the early kings who wanted to establish a single, unified state in a country that did not easily lend itself to unification. Consequently they gave each part of the country a distinctive name, thereafter treating Nekhen in Upper Egypt, and Pe in the Delta, as though they were once independent kingdoms. The learned pre-historians admitted that the period just before the crucial political unification was still clouded in mystery because unification was accompanied by the establishment of a strong centralised government, a new approach to the perennial problems of river-control and irrigation, and Egyptian artists developing new ways of depicting things -- all apparently appearing out of the blue.

Now, thanks to the Polish discoveries, it is fairly certain that there were indeed two predynastic capitals of Upper and Lower Egypt, but that far from being rival and hostile regions as suggested in mythological tradition they may have been culturally and politically united for a long period of time. Also significant is that the incentive behind unification may have been trade .

The question of a predynastic union between the Two Lands remains a hotly debated issue because there are no written records to confirm such a union. However, archaeologists excavating at Abydos have found historical proof of the order of succession of the earliest kings of Pharaonic Egypt (inscribed on a clay seal), and also, in a predynastic and already heavily excavated cemetery, evidence of a possible 15 kings before Narmer (Menes/Aha), who stands at the beginning of recorded dynastic history.

During the long predynastic era, different settlements (identified with totems) appear to have expanded their boundaries and begun to coalesce. Maybe some tribal groups gravitated towards larger ones and started to trade and barter with them. A process of assimilation took place. They became more dependent on one another, and there was a natural fusion into larger social units. Gradually the affairs of various villagers became tied to a major settlement, which undoubtedly represented the richest and most powerful of them. This is especially apparent at Nekhen near the modern town of Edfu, where there are five unusually large graves among the burials, and, as we now know, at Buto in the Delta.

The thrust for expansion, and ultimate unification, came from the south. About 3400 BC, when Egypt entered the last stage of its pre-dynastic experience, there is evidence of the late stage of what is known as the Naqada culture (Naqada III), which has been identified at numerous sites in Upper Egypt. In contrast to the slow pace of earlier development, rapid advances were made. The Naqada III people were skilled in the execution of slate palettes for grinding paint, which were carved in the shape of decorative fish, birds and animal designs. Amulets were produced in larger assorted stones and in different designs. Ivory statuettes were carved with exaggerated sexual characteristics. And toys like small stone balls, game pieces, and a kind of chessboard were sometimes found buried with children. Decorated ware included small boxes of ivory or wood inlaid with ivory to hold a woman's possessions, and at the more practical level tools such as axe-heads, adzes, hoes, daggers and knives of beaten metal were produced. As for pottery, vases were produced from a variety of hard and brightly-coloured stone: basalt and alabaster, white limestone, red breccia, marble, diorite and granite, the stone shaped by skilled artisans using stone drills.

These objects were made to serve a burgeoning Upper Egyptian elite, whose tombs were lined with matting, wood or mud-brick, with extra chambers added to accommodate grave goods. As a result of the rapidly developing upper class, there was a demand for imported raw materials for the development of industries and an acceleration of trade -- not only along the river but also overland. The movement of Upper Egyptians northwards can be traced to settlements at Omari (north of Helwan at the mouth of the Wadi Hof in the Eastern Desert, which gave on to mineral rich areas), and various sites in the eastern and central Delta, including Tell Ibrahim Awad, Tell Samara, Tell Al-Kabirm and Tel Al-Farkha, where there is evidence of early trade with the Levant and the Far East.

When the Upper Egyptians arrived on the Delta scene they were anxious to trade further, and archaeological evidence at Tel Al-Farkha indicates that they were at first accommodated by the local inhabitants, to their mutual advantage. The authors of Ivory and Gold, point out that "there are no traces of war or destruction" at the site, but rather "assimilation and acculturation". The Delta inhabitants appear to have accepted the southerners, and only when the latter slowly gained an advantage did a process of colonisation, the south of the north, take place.

Based on the present state of research, the stages towards establishing a unified state was much more complex than hitherto supposed. Cialowcz points out that before Upper Egyptians entered the Delta, there were at least two centres that rivalled them in every field. "Cultural unification [which is observed in archaeological materials all over Egypt, from Elephantine to the Mediterranean] was not equal to political union. Contemporary rulers using the same language, writing or tools, competed for power and influence, and important in this struggle was the desire to conquer the Delta and its vital trade routes to the east."

In other words, high-ranking officials of the leading elite in Upper Egypt, desirous of obtaining luxurious imported material objects from the Levant, moved inexorably northwards. And the inhabitants of the Buto, at first attracted by the more advanced and modern "southerners", accepted them. Over time, this enabled the latter to control trade between the Delta and the Near East in addition to Upper Egypt and Nubia.

Tel Al-Farkha by no means supplies all the answers. Nevertheless, it now seems certain that several kings were rivals in trade, and culturally united long before Narmer ascended the throne. New avenues of research have been opened up.

Important clues in Delta sites

THE REASON why the important site at Tel Al-Farkha was not excavated earlier was that, until the second half of the 20th century, the Delta was largely unchartered territory. One reason was that there were not many monuments visible above the surface. Another was because traces of the oldest settlements and cemeteries, if any, were covered with a thick layer of alluvial soil and it was concluded that any archaeological remains would have been adversely affected, if not totally destroyed, by underground seepage.

The introduction of modern archaeological techniques following the Nubian Salvage Operation in the 1960s changed all that. Complex geophysical prospection and geological drilling techniques have enabled serious investigation of Delta sites, and there was an upsurge of interest following a symposium at the Netherlands Institute in Cairo in 1986 when several papers described rewarding excavations at various Delta sites.

One of the sites was Tel Al-Farkha. An Italian archaeological mission worked there for over four seasons between 1988 and 1990, excavating mud-brick buildings which enabled them to make important scientific observations. But when they failed to come up with any spectacular discoveries -- and like it or not it is difficult to raise funds for continued work at an "unproductive" site -- they moved on to other areas. Too bad for them that they abandoned the site too soon, because when work was resumed by the Poles they dug wider and deeper and made the above-described spectacular discoveries on the "eastern kom". The lowest (i.e. oldest) strata revealed that people lived there from about 3600 to 3300 BC, which confirmed earlier assumptions that the site was Pe (Buto), the traditional counterpart of Nekhen (Greek Hierakonpolis near the modern town of Edfu), the predynastic capital in Upper Egypt.

Source: http://weekly.ahram.org.eg