Saturday, March 19, 2011

USA Takes Lead In Strikes At Libya: Chossudovsky Explains

The UN Security Council adopted a resolution establishing a no-fly zone over Libya. Michel Chossudovsky, director of Centre for Research on Globalization, says western nations are interested in Libyan oil and other resources, not protecting the people and that is why they care more about the fight in Libya, than elsewhere in the Arab world.


At this time, the bombing has already started and the USA claims to have taken the lead. into this attack. CLICK FOR MORE INFO AND COMMENTS AT THE BABYLON OBSERVER FORUM

Friday, March 11, 2011

Obama PERSONALLY Approves Of The Torture Of PFC Bradley Manning


Japan under Tsunami Disaster: Nuclear Power Plants Leaking Radioactivity!

In the aftermath of the Japanese earthquake, a nuclear reactor was fractured and radioactive material has been leaking into the atmosphere. Author Harvey Wasserman believes the radiation spewing into the air from the Japanese nuclear power plant could blow deep across western Asia and might even lead to the apocalypse.


Tuesday, March 8, 2011

9/11 BBC Conspiracy

There is an abundance of scientific and forensic evidence to support alternative theories, yet the BBC and other mainstream news corporations have continued to dismiss this information as conspiracy theory.

‘The Conspiracy Files’ and the BBC in general have failed to objectively present the detail of this evidence.

9/11 and the British Broadcasting Conspiracy – new documentary by Adrian Connock and David Shayler about the BBC’s selective and distorted 9/11 coverage.

With particular reference to the Conspiracy Files programme aired on BBC Two on February 18th 2007.


Saturday, March 5, 2011

Traversing the Moral Rubicon (From the Archives)

by Phillip D. Collins ©, June 22nd, 2006 - In the Masonic "bible," Morals and Dogma, Albert Pike writes: ". . .no human being can with certainty say. . .what is truth, or that he is surely in possession of it, so every one should feel that it is quite possible that another equally honest and sincere with himself, and yet holding the contrary opinion, may himself be in possession of the truth. . . "(160)

Evident in this statement is the overall relativistic Weltanschauung of Freemasonry. This Weltanschauung is the dominant paradigm among all correlative elitist groups as well. As adherents to relativism, the ruling class rejects absolute truths and moral certainties. Over the years, this Weltanschauung has been vigorously promulgated by the elite and, thus, has become the dominant paradigm of society. The mantra of "Do what thou wilt" is continually reiterated by academia, the media, and pop culture. With each successive generation, humanity continues its inexorable drift towards amorality. Of course, this drift serves the interests of the ruling class. The further away humanity drifts from morality, the closer it drifts towards enslavement. C.S. Lewis reiterated this contention in Christian Reflections:

The very idea of freedom presupposes some objective moral law which overarches rulers and ruled alike. Subjectivism about values is eternally incompatible with democracy. We and our rulers are of one kind only so long as we are subject to one law. But if there is no Law of Nature, the ethos of any society is the creation of its rulers, educators and conditioners; and every creator stands above and outside his own creation. (81)

Amorality facilitates the dialectic of freedom followed by Draconian control (Jones 15). With the enshrinement of moral relativism, society invariably assumes a progressively more anarchistic trajectory. Impulses are entertained and excesses are indulged. Meanwhile, objective moral law is increasingly disregarding. Eventually, individual liberties are subordinated to hedonist appetites. Fleeting pleasures are ravenously sought, even at the expense of others. The ensuing chaos provides a pretext for the imposition of authoritarian policies to restore order. Of course, there is always a self-appointed elite that establishes and benefits from such systems.

Paradoxically, the power elite is equally as amoral as those they would fetter in the name of the law. Ruling class thought is permeated with relativistic notions. It is just such relativism that allows the oligarchs to believe that they can act as the arbiters of the dominant societal ethos. It comes as little surprise that Oxford Professor Carroll Quigley, a self-avowed elitist and apologist for the ruling class, rebuked the lower classes for their rejection of "complex relativisms" (Quigley 980). Of course, Quigley's endorsement of "complex relativisms" was irreconcilable with his endorsement of an absolutist world oligarchy. After all, one cannot lay claim to an absolute right to rule if there are no absolutes at all.

In addition to promoting amorality, relativism encourages the embracing of irrationality. The problem with relativism is a systemic one, a dilemma intrinsic to the view itself. Relativism is predicated upon the contention that there are no absolutes. Yet, if there are no absolutes, then one cannot absolutely declare that there are no absolutes. In fact, declarative statements cannot exist because they are statements of fact. Facts are absolutes and, according to relativism, do not exist. Immediately, the position implodes, crushed by its own intrinsic irrationality. Relativism is a self-refuting philosophical position.

However, Darwinism cosmetically obfuscated the irrationality that blemished relativistic Weltanschauungs. By undermining the foundations of Christianity with so-called "scientific proof," Darwinism banished moral absolutes and edified the unstable premises upon which relativism tottered. In The Outlines of History, H.G. Wells writes:

If all animals and man evolved, then there were no first parents, no paradise, no fall. And if there had been no fall, then the entire historic fabric of Christianity, the story of the first sin, and the reason for the atonement collapses like a house of cards. (616)

With Christianity's "house of cards" effectively toppled, relativistic ideas could be actively promulgated with less resistance. Such ideas were certainly nothing new and had been promoted before by ideologues like Hume, Bacon, Rousseau, Descartes, Kant, and Weishaupt (Jasper 262). Yet, Darwinism was different. Cribbed from Freemasonic doctrine and promoted through the British Royal Society, Darwin's theory of evolution promised to "scientifically" legitimize relativistic Weltanschauungs. This included, of course, the relativistic outlook of the Royal Society's would-be sculptors of a new societal ethos. The nature of this emergent ethos becomes apparent [when] one considers the technocratic proclivities of the Royal Society's early Masonic founders.

In light of these observations, it becomes clear that Darwinism was an epistemological weapon developed for the technocratic restructuring of society. Jane H. Ingraham elaborates:

But Darwin's role was to dignify [relativistic] these ideas with "scientific" backing and to make them accessible to the average man in terms he could understand. His shattering "explanation" of the evolution of man from the lower animals through means excluding the supernatural delivered the coup de grace to man's idea of himself as a created being in a world of fixed truth. Confronted with the "scientific proof" of his own animal origin and nature, Western man, set free at last from God, began the long trek through scientific rationalism, environmental determinism, cultural conditioning, perfectibility of human nature, behaviorism, and secular humanism to today's inverted morality and totalitarian man. (Qutd. In Jasper 262)

As the "objective moral law which overarches rulers and ruled alike" continued to disappear with the belief in a transcendent God, human society began to witness the rise of "totalitarian man." Of course, the rise of relativism also saw the rise of mass irrationality. This mass irrationality, which is the natural corollary of relativistic thought, is especially prevalent in orthodox academia. This irrationality was most vividly illustrated during a discussion between Christian philosopher Ravi Zacharias and a group of students at Oxford University. Zacharias relates the details of this shocking discourse:

I asked a group of skeptics if I took a baby and sliced it to pieces before them, would I have done anything wrong? At my question, there was silence, and then the lead voice in the group said, "I would not like it, but no, I could not say you have done anything wrong." My! What an aesthete. He would not like it. My! What irrationality--he could not brand it wrong. (115)

What irrationality indeed! It is especially ironic that the very same school of skepticism that repeatedly asks the question, "How can there be a good God when there is so much evil in the world." How can one reject the existence of God on such grounds when one rejects moral absolutes in the same breath? Such thinking has been commensurate with the rise of scientific dictatorships during the 20th century.

On November 29, 1994, Stone Phillips conducted an interview [with the] infamous serial killer Jeffrey Dahmer. During the interview, Dahmer made a rather revealing confession:

"If a person doesn't think there is a God to be accountable to, then--then what's the point of trying to modify your behavior to keep it within acceptable ranges? That's how I thought anyway. I always believed the theory of evolution as truth, that we all just came from the slime. When we, when we died, you know, that was it, there is nothing. . ." (No pagination)

If this is how far humanity has traveled beyond the moral Rubicon, then the next step that the evolutionary Weltanschauung will take man is frightening indeed. Time and time again, history has demonstrated the consequences of relativistic thought. Perhaps the best historical example can be found in the Scriptures. Presented with a sinless man who was the obvious target of a malevolent conspiracy, Pilate merely responded, "What is truth?" (John 18:38). In the book Life of Christ, Fulton J. Sheen offers an eloquent summation of this response and its ramifications:

Then he [Pilate] turned his back on truth--better not on it, but on Him Who is Truth. It remained to be seen that tolerance of truth and error in a stroke of broadmindedness leads to intolerance and persecution; "What is truth?" when sneered, is followed up with the second sneer, "What is justice?" Broadmindedness, when it means indifference to right and wrong, eventually ends in a hatred of what is right. He who was so tolerant of error as to deny an Absolute Truth was the one who would crucify Truth. It was the religious judge who challenged Him, "I adjure thee;" but the secular judge asked, "What is truth?" He who was in the robe of the high priest called upon God the things that are God's; he who was in the Roman toga just professed a skepticism and doubt. (364)

Pilate's question was a rhetorical one, inferring that truth did not exist. Meanwhile, the Truth stood right before him, enveloped in a profound silence. Still, it was easier for Pilate to resort to the frivolity of pragmatism and utilitarianism. Despite the clear absence of evidence to convict this guiltless man of any crime, judicial protocol was circumvented and He was crucified. Of course, the Truth did not remain buried for very long.

Over two thousand years later, it would appear as though man has come no further. As moral absolutes are jettisoned in favor or relativism, technocratic social engineers continue to shape a totalitarian ethos. In Brave New World Revisited, Aldous Huxley wrote:

. . .a new Social Ethic is replacing our traditional ethical system. . .the system in which the individual is primary. …the social whole has greater worth and significance than its individual parts. . .that the rights of the collectivity take precedence over. . .the Rights of Man. (23)

Nietzsche's world "beyond good and evil" is more closely akin to Skinner's world, which is "beyond freedom and dignity." As the moral Rubicon is traversed, so is the line separating freedom from slavery. It is a scientific dictatorship, dignified by Darwinism and built on the ashes of morality.

Sources Cited
Huxley, Aldous. Brave New World Revisited. New York: Bantam Books, 1958.
Jasper, William F. Global Tyranny. . .Step by Step: The United Nations and the Emerging New World Order.
Appleton, Wisconsin: Western Islands Publishers, 1992. Jones, E. Michael. Libido Dominandi: Sexual Liberation and Political Control.
South Bend, Indiana: St. Augustine's Press, 2000.
Lewis, C.S. Christian Reflections.
Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1967. Pike, Albert. Morals and Dogma. 1871. Richmond, Virginia: L.H. Jenkins, Inc., 1942.
Quigley, Carroll.Tragedy and Hope: A History of the World in our Time. New York: Macmillan, 1966.
Sheen, Fulton J. Life of Christ. New York: McGraw-Hill,1958.
Wells, Herbert George. The Outline of History: Being a Plain History of Life and Mankind. London: Cassell and Company Ltd., 1925. Zacharias, Ravi. Jesus Among Other Gods. Nashville, Tennessee: Word Publishing, 2000.


The Ruling Class-Sponsored Race War and the Balkanization of America Part Two: Is California Ground Zero? (From the Archives)

by Paul Collins ©, July 6th, 2006 - In part one we presented evidence suggesting the Minutemen project was being radicalized by white supremacists and certain leading lights in the power elite. This radicalization process is meant to undermine efforts to restore America's border integrity and to manufacture a politically expedient race war. Radicalized border activists and Chicano radicals are being set up to enter into conflict with one another. California seems to be the ideal staging grounds for the beginning of this conflict.

Ground Zero: California

The most likely place for a race war to begin is California. It is in this state that two individuals possessing radical racist views have risen to political power. These individuals will be able to mobilize the different racist groups for a confrontation. They are Los Angeles mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger.

Antonio Villaraigosa would lead the Mexican racists' charge. Roger D. McGrath describes Villaraigosa's racist background:

Antonio Villaraigosa was known as Tony Villar when he was growing up on the Eastside. (He combined his surname with that of his wife, Corina Raigosa, to create the last name he uses now.) As Villar, he attended East Los Angeles Junior College and then transferred to UCLA in 1972 under an "affirmative action" program. By the time he left UCLA in 1975, he had not graduated but had risen to a position of leadership in the campus chapter of Movimiento Estudiantil Chicano de Aztlan, better known by its acronym, MEChA. The group was organized in 1969 by Mexican-American college students, for the most part, who preferred to call themselves Chicanos and Chicanas. MEChA proudly proclaims that its mission is to reclaim California and the rest of the Southwest—an area MECha calls Aztlan—from "the foreigner 'gabacho' who exploits our riches and destroys our culture… [W]e declare the independence of our mestizo nation. We are a bronze people with a bronze culture. Before the world, before all of North America, before all our brothers in the bronze continent, we are a nation, we are a union of free pueblos, we are Aztlan." (12)

There is no evidence that Villaraigosa ever abandoned MEChA's racist ideology. Roger D. McGrath reports: "When asked if he still supported MEChA's mission and goals during an interview on a talk-radio station in Los Angeles, Villaraigosa refused to answer" (13). Villaraigosa's refusal to answer may as well be taken as an admission of guilt. The former MEChaista remains firmly dedicated to a thoroughly racist ideology. The problem is that Villaraigosa is not some low level street thug. On May 17, 2005, he was elected mayor of Los Angeles. This makes him a racist with authority and lots of political clout.

Mention the name of Schwarzenegger and most people think of ridiculous action films featuring Arnold jumping from one explosion to the next. The man's escapades in bodybuilding and the movie industry cause most people to view Arnold as just one more celebrity with a humorous back-story. However, closer examination reveals that many of Schwarzenegger's closet skeletons come dressed in Nazi uniforms. In Arnold: The Unauthorized Biography, Wendy Leigh reveals some of Schwarzenegger's darker aspects:

According to Rick Wayne, who is black, when they discussed apartheid Arnold said he thought South Africa was right, saying things like "If you gave these blacks a country to run, they would run it down the tubes." However, Rick was accustomed to Arnold's reactionary views and quirky ways. He and Arnold had posed together in Munich. In his book, Muscle Wars, a study of bodybuilding politics, Rick recalled that after Arnold had "struck a pose reminiscent of the Nazi salute," he received less applause from the German audience than he had expected. Arnold's response was to comment to Rick, "These people are nothing without an Austrian to lead them." (68-9)

Many close to Schwarzenegger viewed Arnold's Nazi mask as part of his body building fa├žade. One such person was Dick Tyler. Tyler had given posing lessons to Schwarzenegger. According to Leigh: "Tyler commented that if Hitler had wanted to advertise the Aryan ideal, Arnold would have been its perfect representative" (87). Leigh continues:

Tyler's remarks may sound a trifle barbed; however, since 1977 rumors have circulated in the bodybuilding world that during the filming of Pumping Iron, the pseudo-documentary film that transformed him into a legend, Arnold said he admired Hitler. When contacted for a newspaper article in 1988, George Butler, the producer and director of the film and still a close friend of Arnold's today, admitted that during the filming of Pumping Iron Arnold definitely did say that he admired Hitler. Butler then conceded that the remark was cut from the final version of the film, adding that Arnold expressed his admiration of "Hitler and Kennedy in almost the same breath as people who were leaders." When asked why Arnold admired Hitler, Butler replied that the context in the film was that Arnold was saying he had "always wanted to be remembered like the most famous people in history, like Jesus and so on. . ." (87-88)

Schwarzenegger associate Manfred Thellig's account is also very telling:

Manfred Thellig, who worked with Arnold in Munich, offers a similar interpretation. According to Thellig, Arnold "definitely admires the Teutonic period of the Third Reich. He just loved those leftover relics of the Third Reich in Munich—those Teutonic statues." He added that Arnold would say, "If I had lived at that time, I would have been one of those Teutonic breeders" but explains, "Whenever he opened his mouth and it sounded like 'Oh, there is a neo-Nazi,' this was just playing Tarzan. It wasn't serious. . ." (88-9)

However, there is evidence that Arnold's Nazi antics were not so tongue and cheek:

There are, nevertheless, witnesses over the years who have seen Arnold break into the "Sieg Heil" salute and play his records of Hitler's speeches. Arnold responded to this issue during a 1989 Penthouse interview with journalist Sharon Churcher. According to Churcher, a former associate of Arnold's during the seventies had heard from a mutual acquaintance that Arnold had Nazi paraphernalia in his apartment. According to the associate, Arnold's reaction at that time was to claim through Pumping Iron producer George Butler, that his interest "was only that of a student." Butler, professing to have forgotten the above exchange, says that he had never seen any Nazi paraphernalia at Arnold's house. (89)

Arnold's family background is also steeped in Nazism. Leigh elaborates:

Arnold personified Aryan supremacy and Germanic strength of will. To top that, his father had been a member of the Nazi party. Both his heritage and his image were inescapable. Inescapable, but not ineradicable. Yet Arnold, far from underplaying his roots, embraced and advertised them. (89-90)

The Schwarzenegger family's Nazi background apparently had a profound influence on Arnold's life. Consider the testimony of black bodybuilder Dave DuPre:

Black bodybuilder Dave DuPre, who would appear with Arnold years later in Pumping Iron, says Arnold declared one time while working out at Gold's. "Serge is your only black hope to beat me. Black people are inferior. You are not capable of achieving the success of white people. Black people are stupid." Black people weren't the only target of his venom, for as usual he was completely democratic in his heckling. According to DuPre, "He would make fun of Jews. If anybody looked Jewish, he would point it out and tell them that they were inferior." (101)

Schwarzenegger's past certainly makes him a candidate for mobilizing white supremacists for a race war. Even more disturbing is the fact that, as governor of California, Schwarzenegger has the political clout and influence to make this more than just a remote possibility.

With two racist demagogues planted high up in Californian politics, the stage has been set for a race war. When the time is right, both Schwarzenegger and Villaraigosa will be in a position to mobilize the two racist camps for the fighting. All that is needed now is a pretext. A violent border incident involving radicalized Minutemen and illegals could provide just such a pretext.

The idea of an inevitable war with Aztlan beginning in California may already be spreading among white racist groups. One purveyor of the idea is Stephen McNallen. McNallen is the head of Asatru', a white racist group steeped in satanism and Norse paganism. Mattias Gardell describes McNallen's propaganda:

Alarmed by activities of radical Chicano separatists who want to establish an independent Aztlan Nation out of what is now California and the Southwest, McNallen believes that California soon will be a battleground. "The spiritual descendants of the Aztec are looking northward," and Euro-Americans will either resign to a subordinate position or rise from their slumber to resist the conquest. McNallen suggests that accumulating ethnic tension is a reflection of deeper movements in the collective unconsciousness of Chicanos and northern Europeans. While admitting that the great majority of Mexican descendants are Christian, McNallen uses Jung to explain that the "old Aztec and Mayan deities never really went away, they simply went underground." What if Jung's analysis of the rise of national socialism as a manifestation of the Wotan archetype in the Germanic soul is applied to explain the emergent Hispanic nationalist scene? "Are Tonatzin and Tezcatlipoca moving among their folk, stirring them to conquest?" And who should better lead Euro-American resistance than their own archetypal deities? "Mighty psychic forces, and powerful religious impulses are on the move. The old Gods of Mexico, and the Gods of ancient Europe, are stirring their respective peoples." The spiritual "awakening" of the northern European folk is vital to accomplish lest they would follow Kennewick Man into obliteration. (283)

While not all racists may buy the Jungian and Norse pagan elements of McNallen's rhetoric, his presentation of California as battleground between Aztlan and white supremacist forces would appeal to most racists seeking an excuse to start shedding blood. This includes white supremacist infiltrants within the ranks of the Minutemen.

The Larger Picture

It is quite possible that the manufactured conflict between Chicano radicals and radicalized border activists is merely part of a much larger power elite project. This project would be a worldwide balkanization campaign. It is no secret to the informed minority that the elite intend to unite the world under the banner of a common ideology, a new world religion. However, people still must be conditioned to accept this ideology. Until that time, people must be kept fighting one another to prevent a unified grassroots front forming against the oligarchs.

One place that can be look[ed] at for examples of the worldwide balkanization project is Iraq, which has been brought to the brink of civil war. The bombing of the Askariya mosque in Samarra played no small role in bringing about the social fragmentation one sees in Iraq. Interestingly, it has been suggested that the Samarra bombing was a state-sponsored terrorist act. During an interview with Alex Jones, former CIA analyst Ray McGovern made it clear that such a possibility cannot be ruled out:

"The main question is Qui Bono? Who benefits from this kind of thing? You don't have to be very conspiratorial or even paranoid to suggest that there are a whole bunch of likely suspects out there and not only the Sunnis. You know, the British officers were arrested, dressed up in Arab garb, riding around in a car, so this stuff goes on." (No pagination)

There is a body of evidence that supports the contention that the Askariya bombing may have involved government hands. Iraq's Construction Minister's findings concerning the bombing raised a major question pointing to state sponsorship:

Construction Minister Jassem Mohammed Jaafar, who toured Sammara and inspected the damage incurred to the shrine, said the placing of explosives inside the dome was meticulous and must have taken at least 12 hours.

"Holes were dug into the mausoleum's four main pillars and packed with explosives," he told the media, adding that work on each pillar must have taken at least four hours. This is an astounding statement to make. This means that the perpetrators had free rein for much of the time to carry out their heinous crime. How did they get access to the shrine in the first place? (Al-Atraqchi, no pagination)

Firas Al-Atraqchi points out several other disturbing details and questions surrounding the mosque bombing:

Initial reports said that four men, one donning Interior Ministry commando garb, stormed the Shrine after dawn prayers on Wednesday, took the five guards hostage, and fled before detonating their explosive charge.

They released the guards and mingled with worshippers for the Fajr prayers before slipping out.

Reports later said that the attackers were 10 men dressed in commando outfits and that they had been apprehended.

The shrine is meant to be protected by a contingent of 35 Interior Ministry troops because the Mosque is of particular importance to the Shia community.

Questions abound. Why was the security detail reduced from 35 to only five men guarding such an important shrine?

If it took at least 12 hours to plant the explosives, why did no one notice that the five police guards had been taken hostage? If it took at least 12 hours to plant the explosives, would that not have meant access to the shrine during evening prayers the night before? (No pagination)

It should also be noted that Samarra eyewitnesses claimed on various websites that "U.S. and Iraqi forces had sealed off access ways to the Shrine the night prior to the explosion" (No pagination). It seems that people in high places using the American and Iraqi governments as their personal prostitutes may have been involved in the bombing. What was the goal? Firas Al Atraqchi may have provided a precise answer to that question: "The conspiracy is to tear Iraq at the seams and pit sectarian differences into a diabolical civil war" (No pagination).

Patriots and activists need to be on their toes during this volatile period in history. Much of the chaos we see in the streets below was instigated by the bluebloods above. There is absolutely nothing civil about civil wars. That's because they are orchestrated by those who lack all civility: the power elite. We ignore this fact at our own peril.

Sources Cited

  • Al-Atraqchi, Firas. "After Askariya." El Ahram Weekly. 2006
  • "Former CIA Analyst: Western Intelligence May Be Behind Mosque Bombing." Prison Planet. 26 February 2006
  • Gardell, Mattias. Gods of the Blood: The Pagan Revival and White Separatism. London: Duke UP, 2003.
  • Leigh, Wendy. Arnold: The Unauthorized Biography. Congdon and Weed, 1990.
  • McGrath, Roger D. "Remaking America." The New American Magazine 13 June 2005: 12-18.

About the author

Paul D. Collins has studied suppressed history and the shadowy undercurrents of world political dynamics for roughly eleven years. In 1999, he earned his Associate of Arts and Science degree. In 2006, he completed his bachelor's degree with a major in liberal studies and a minor political science. Paul has authored another book entitled The Hidden Face of Terrorism: The Dark Side of Social Engineering, From Antiquity to September 11. Published in November 2002, the book is available online from,, and also It can be purchased as an e-book (ISBN 1-4033-6798-1) or in paperback format (ISBN 1-4033-6799-X). Paul also co-authored The Ascendancy of the Scientific Dictatorship (ISBN 1-4196-3932-3).



by Phillip D. Collins ©, FEB. 17th, 2006 - As the mists of antiquity gradually receded and history welcomed modernity, the old theocratic power structures were gradually supplanted by secular theocracies governed by science. No doubt, the chronocentric impulses of the contemporary mind compel many to consider this shift an advancement in “political, social, and cultural evolution.” However, although these new theocracies are veiled in secularism, it must be understood that their new state-sanctioned epistemology is a form of mysticism akin to its religious progenitor. This truth is illustrated by radical empiricism’s rejection of causality, which stipulates the investment of faith in the purported results of scientific research. Likewise, the new state-sanctioned metaphysics is equally mystical in character. Accompanying radical empiricism is materialism, the metaphysical contention that matter holds primacy.

Naturalism works in tandem with materialism because it attempts to sustain the primacy of matter with the metaphysical claim of “self-creation” (i.e., abiogenesis). Of course, this claim suggests that living and dead matter are inseparable. Thus, living things are literally artificial entities that create themselves, an occult theme communicated through the Kabalistic myth of the golem. In a universe where materialistic metaphysics hold sway, the biosphere and the life it supports amount to one enormous golem. Accompanying this contention is the Gnostic doctrine of “self-salvation.” If humanity is a god that created itself, then it is also responsible for its own salvation. Given these strange confluences of occult thought, materialism qualifies as little more than a new secular mysticism.

Not surprisingly, materialistic metaphysics pervade the fabric of many occult institutions. Even the acknowledgement of supra-sensible and incorporeal entities cannot hide the occultist’s materialistic propensities. In fact, such propensities may have given rise to the occultist’s mystical beliefs in the first place. Guenon explains:

Without seeking for the moment to determine more precisely the nature and quality of the supra-sensible, in so far as it is actually involved in this matter, it will be useful to observe how far the very people who still admit it and think that they are aware of its action are in reality penetrated by materialistic influence: for even if they do not deny all extra-corporeal reality, like the majority of their contemporaries, it is only because they have formed for themselves an idea of it which enables them in some way to assimilate it to the likeness of sensible things, and to do that is certainly scarcely better than to deny it. There is no reason to be surprised at this, considering the extent to which all the occultist, theosophist, and other schools of that sort are fond of searching assiduously for points of approach to modern scientific theories, from which they draw their inspiration more directly than they are prepared to admit; the result is what might logically be expected under such conditions. (153-54)

In this sense, materialism acts as a veil. The fact is that, although the occult theocracy of antiquity declined in power, it is still very much alive. It perpetuates itself through secularism. As sociologist William Sims Bainbridge makes clear, secularization actually represents the opening stage of an occult counterculture movement:

Secularization does not mean a decline in the need for religion, but only a loss of power by traditional denominations. Studies of the geography of religion show that where the churches become weak, cults and occultism explode to fill the spiritual vacuum. (“Religions for a Galactic Civilization”)

Thus, the thoroughly secularized society merely presages the emergence of a new theocratic order. The new ecclesiastical authority shall be occult in character, embracing what Guenon calls “neo-spiritualism” (155). The galvanizing mythology of this new theocratic order will most likely reflect the paradigmatic character of the Gnostic cosmology, depicting humanity as a collection of pluralities awaiting unification into a singularity through the sorcery of “science.” As for the dominant religion, it will be Luciferianism, which was initially disseminated on the popular level as secular humanism. This is anatomy of the emergent “Satanic state.”

In addition to facilitating the rise of a new occult theocracy, materialism has also contributed to the enormous volumes of bloodshed witnessed by the 20th century. Arguably, contemporary regimes premised upon dialectical materialism have murdered far more people than any traditional theocracy premised upon a theistic faith. This is directly attributable to materialism’s emphasis upon the primacy of matter. Materialistic metaphysics preclude the spirit, confining moral questions to the ontological plane of the physical universe. Severed from their ontological source, moral principles become tantamount to material phenomena. Thus, in a universe where materialism holds sway, it is reasonable to assume that evil is a purely corporeal entity that can be physically expunged. The ramifications of such an outlook are disturbing. In the article “What Evil Is and Why It Matters,” Christian philosopher John Paul Jones reveals the consequences of this Weltanschauung:

According to this [materialist] methodology, all we need do is find the material cause of evil and destroy it. After, all, since materialists assume all causes are material, they are logically obliged and conceptually predisposed to assume that evil is itself caused by material, physically destructible things or causes. (64)

The outgrowth of this paradigm is what Jones calls the “search and destroy” approach to dealing with evil (64). Jones expands on this approach:

Consequently, those of a materialist mindset, whether Christian or otherwise, are constantly engaged in campaigns to destroy the evil things or people they think are at the root of the problem. So we have, for example, the “war on drugs,” the “war on guns,” the “class war” and various genocides--all of which are known to cause more evil than they allegedly uproot, and today, as we witness the spread of eco-fascism in Europe that holds that we can solve the reputed environmental crisis by simply exterminating many millions of people, we also witness the approval of Chinese population control techniques, such as state-sanctioned abortion, infanticide, and forced sterilization. Strange fruits and bad apples, all. (64)

After years of war and waste, the materialist state is still incapable of expunging evil. This failure is directly attributable to materialism’s misappropriation of matter as the totality of reality. In light of this metaphysical error, one is still left to ponder the source of evil. Yet, Biblical wisdom, which the materialist thoroughly rejects, may have already answered the question of evil. James 4:1-10 states:

From whence come wars and fighting among you? Come they not hence, even of your lusts that war in your members? Ye lust and have not; ye kill, and desire to have, and cannot obtain; ye fight and war, yet have not, because ye ask not. ye ask, and receive not, because ye ask amiss, that ye may consume it upon your lusts. Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? Whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God? Do ye think that the scripture saith in vain, the Spirit that dwelleth in us lusteth to envy? But he giveth more grace.
Wherefore he saith, God resisteth the proud, but giveth grace unto the humble. Submit yourselves therefore to God. Resist the devil, and he will flee from you. Draw nigh to God, and he will draw nigh to you. Cleanse your hands, ye sinners; and purify your hearts, ye doubleminded. Be afflicted, and mourn, and weep; let your laughter be turned to mourning, and your joy to heaviness. Humble yourselves in the sight of the Lord, and he shall lift you up.

Of course, such a conclusion is unthinkable to the materialist. It is interesting that Charles Fort believed:

that man deliberately invented the dogma of materialism in order to shield himself from the evidence of what was being done to him by means of psycho-spiritual warfare methods hyped by “coincidence,” symbolism and ritual. (Hoffman 68)

A metaphysical smoke screen currently obstructs humanity’s view of the spiritual principles upon which so many of the world’s dilemmas rest. It is the veil of materialism.

Sources Cited:

1, Bainbridge, William Sims. "Religions for a Galactic Civilization." Excerpted from Science Fiction and Space Futures, edited by Eugene M. Emme. San Diego: American Astronautical Society, pages 187-201, 1982
2, Guenon, Rene. The Reign of Quantity and the Signs of the Times. Trans. Lord Northbourne. Baltimore, Maryland: Penguin Books Inc, 1953.
3, Hoffman, Michael. Secret Societies and Psychological Warfare. Coeur d'Alene, Idaho: Independent History & Research, 2001.
4, Jones, John Paul. "What Evil Is and Why It Matters." Paranoia Magazine Issue 33 (2003): 62-64.

© 2006 Phillip D. Collins - All Rights Reserved


Luciferianism: The Religion of Apotheosis (From the Archives)

WWW, January 2006 - Luciferianism constitutes the nucleus of the ruling class religion. While there are definitely political and economic rationales for elite criminality, Luciferianism can account for the longevity of many of the oligarchs' projects. Many of the longest and most brutal human endeavors have been underpinned by some form of religious zealotry. The Crusades testify to this historical fact. Likewise, the power elite's ongoing campaign to establish a socialist totalitarian global government has Luciferianism to thank for both its longevity and frequently violent character. In the mind of the modern oligarch, Luciferianism provides religious legitimacy for otherwise morally questionable plans.

luciferLuciferianism is the product of religious engineering, which sociologist William Sims Bainbridge defines as "the conscious, systematic, skilled creation of a new religion" ("New Religions, Science, and Secularization," no pagination). In actuality, this is a tradition that even precedes Bainbridge. It has been the practice of Freemasonry for years. It was also the practice of Masonry's religious and philosophical progenitors, the ancient pagan Mystery cults. The inner doctrines of the Mesopotamian secret societies provided the theological foundations for the Christian and Judaic heresies, Kabbalism and Gnosticism. All modern Luciferian philosophy finds "scientific" legitimacy in the Gnostic myth of Darwinism. As evolutionary thought was popularized, variants of Luciferianism were popularized along with it (particularly in the form of secular humanism, which shall be examined shortly). A historical corollary of this popularization has been the rise of several cults and mass movements, exemplified by the various mystical sects and gurus of the sixties counterculture. The metastasis of Luciferian thinking continues to this very day.

Luciferianism represents a radical revaluation of humanity's ageless adversary: Satan. It is the ultimate inversion of good and evil. The formula for this inversion is reflected by the narrative paradigm of the Gnostic Hypostasis myth. As opposed to the original Biblical version, the Gnostic account represents a "revaluation of the Hebraic story of the first man's temptation, the desire of mere men to 'be as gods' by partaking of the tree of the 'knowledge of good and evil'" (Raschke 26). Carl Raschke elaborates:

In The Hypostasis of the Archons, an Egyptian Gnostic document, we read how the traditional story of man's disobedience toward God is reinterpreted as a universal conflict between "knowledge" (gnosis) and the dark "powers" (exousia) of the world, which bind the human soul in ignorance. The Hypostasis describes man as a stepchild of Sophia ("Wisdom") created according to the "model" of aion, the imperishable realm of eternity. On the other hand, it is neither God the Imperishable nor Sophia who actually is responsible in the making of man. On the contrary, the task is undertaken by the archons, the demonic powers who, because of their "weakness," entrap man in a material body and thus cut him off from his blessed origin. They place him in paradise and enjoin him against eating of the tree of knowledge. The prohibition, however, is viewed by the author of the text not as a holy command but as a malignant effort on the part of the inferior spirits to prevent Adam from having true communion with the High God, from gaining authentic gnosis. (26)

According to this bowdlerization, Adam is consistently contacted by the High God in hopes of reinitiating man's quest for gnosis (26). The archons intervene and create Eve to distract Adam from the pursuit of gnosis (26-27). However, this Gnostic Eve is actually a "sort of 'undercover' agent for the High God, who is charged with divulging to Adam the truth that has been withheld from him" (27). The archons manage to sabotage this covert operation by facilitating sexual intercourse between Adam and Eve, an act that Gnostics contend was designed to defile the "woman's spiritual nature" (27). At this juncture, the Hypostasis reintroduces a familiar antagonist from the original Genesis account:

But now the principle of feminine wisdom reappears in the form of the serpent, called the "Instructor," who tells the mortal pair to defy the prohibition of the archons and eat of the tree of knowledge. (27)

The serpent successfully entices Adam and Eve to eat the forbidden fruit, but the "bodily defilement" of the woman prevents man from understanding the true motive underpinning the act (27). Thus, humanity is fettered by the archons' "curse", suggesting that the "orthodox theological view of the violation of the command as 'sin' must be regarded anew as the mindless failure to commit the act rightly in the first place" (27). In this revisionist context, the serpent is no longer Satan, but is an "incognito savior" instead (27). Meanwhile, God's role as benevolent Heavenly Father is vilified:

The God of Genesis, who comes to reprimand Adam and Eve after their transgression, is rudely caricatured in this tale as the "Arrogant archon" who opposes the will of the authentic heavenly father. (27)

Of course, within this Gnostic narrative, God incarnate is equally belittled. Jesus Christ, the Word made flesh, is reduced to little more than a forerunner of the coming Gnostic adept. According to the Gnostic mythology, Jesus was but a mere "type" of this perfect man (27). He came as a "teacher and an exemplar, to show others the path to illumination" (27-28). The true messiah has yet to come. Equally, the serpent is only a precursor to this messiah. He only initiates man's journey towards gnosis. The developmental voyage must be further facilitated by the serpent's predecessor, the Gnostic Christ. The Hypostasis provides the paradigmatic template for all Luciferian mythologies.

Like the Hypostasis, the binary opposition of Luciferian mythology caricatures Jehovah as an oppressive tyrant. He becomes the "archon of arrogance," the embodiment of ignorance and religious superstition. Satan, who retains his heavenly title of Lucifer, is the liberator of humanity. Masonry, which acts as the contemporary retainer for the ancient Mystery religion, reconceptualizes Satan in a similar fashion. In Morals and Dogma, 33rd degree Freemason Albert Pike candidly exalts the fallen angel:

LUCIFER, the Light-bearer! Strange and mysterious name to give to the Spirit of Darkness! Lucifer, the Son of the Morning! Is it he who bears the Light, and with its splendors intolerable blinds feeble, sensual, or selfish Souls? Doubt it not. (321)

He makes man aware of his own innate divinity and promises to unlock the god within us all. This theme of apotheosis underpinned both Gnosticism and the pagan Mystery religions. While Gnosticism's origins with the Ancient Mystery cults remains a source of contention amongst scholars, its promises of liberation from humanity's material side is strongly akin to the old pagan Mystery's variety of "psychic therapy" (28). In addition, the Ancient Mystery religion promised the:

opportunity to erase the curse of mortality by direct encounter with the patron deity, or in many instances by actually undergoing an apotheosis, a transfiguration of human into divine (28).

Like some varieties of Satanism, Luciferianism does not depict the devil as a literal metaphysical entity. Lucifer only symbolizes the cognitive powers of man. He is the embodiment of science and reason. It is the Luciferian's religious conviction that these two facilitative forces will dethrone God and apotheosize man. It comes as little surprise that the radicals of the early revolutionary faith celebrated the arrival of Darwinism. Evolutionary theory was the edifying "science" of Promethean zealotry and the new secular religion of the scientific dictatorship. According to Masonic scholar Wilmshurst, the completion of human evolution involves man "becoming a god-like being and unifying his consciousness with the Omniscient" (94).

During the Enlightenment, Luciferianism was disseminated on the popular level as secular humanism. All of the governing precepts of Luciferianism are encompassed by secular humanism. This is made evident by the philosophy's rejection of theistic morality and enthronement of man as his own absolute moral authority. While Luciferianism has no sacred texts, Humanist Manifesto I and II succinctly delineate its central tenets. Whittaker Chambers, former member of the communist underground in America, eloquently summarizes this truth:

"Humanism is not new. It is, in fact, man's second oldest faith. Its promise was whispered in the first days of Creation under the Tree of the knowledge of Good and Evil: 'Ye shall be as gods.'" (Qutd. in Baker 206)

Transhumanism offers an updated, hi-tech variety of Luciferianism. The appellation "Transhumanism" was coined by evolutionary biologist Julian Huxley ("Transhumanism," Wikipedia: The Free Encyclopedia, no pagination). Huxley defined the transhuman condition as "man remaining man, but transcending himself, by realizing new possibilities of and for his human nature" (no pagination). However, by 1990, Dr. Max More would radically redefine Transhumanism as follows:

Transhumanism is a class of philosophies that seek to guide us towards a posthuman condition. Transhumanism shares many elements of humanism, including a respect for reason and science, a commitment to progress, and a valuing of human (or transhuman) existence in this life… Transhumanism differs from humanism in recognizing and anticipating the radical alterations in the nature and possibilities of our lives resulting from various sciences and technologies… (No pagination)

Transhumanism advocates the use of nanotechnology, biotechnology, cognitive science, and information technology to propel humanity into a "posthuman" condition. Once he has arrived at this condition, man will cease to be man. He will become a machine, immune to death and all the other "weaknesses" intrinsic to his former human condition. The ultimate objective is to become a god. Transhumanism is closely aligned with the cult of artificial intelligence. In the very influential book The Age of Spiritual Machines, AI high priest Ray Kurzweil asserts that technological immortality could be achieved through magnetic resonance imaging or some technique of reading and replicating the human brain's neural structure within a computer ("Technological Immortality," no pagination). Through the merger of computers and humans, Kurzweil believes that man will "become god-like spirits inhabiting cyberspace as well as the material universe" (no pagination).

Following the Biblical revisionist tradition of the Gnostic Hypostasis myth, Transhumanists invert the roles of God and Satan. In an essay entitled "In Praise of the Devil," Transhumanist ideologue Max More depicts Lucifer as a heroic rebel against a tyrannical God:

The Devil—Lucifer—is a force for good (where I define 'good' simply as that which I value, not wanting to imply any universal validity or necessity to the orientation). 'Lucifer' means 'light-bringer' and this should begin to clue us in to his symbolic importance. The story is that God threw Lucifer out of Heaven because Lucifer had started to question God and was spreading dissension among the angels. We must remember that this story is told from the point of view of the Godists (if I may coin a term) and not from that of the Luciferians (I will use this term to distinguish us from the official Satanists with whom I have fundamental differences). The truth may just as easily be that Lucifer resigned from heaven. (No pagination)

According to More, Lucifer probably exiled himself out of moral outrage towards the oppressive Jehovah:

God, being the well-documented sadist that he is, no doubt wanted to keep Lucifer around so that he could punish him and try to get him back under his (God's) power. Probably what really happened was that Lucifer came to hate God's kingdom, his sadism, his demand for slavish conformity and obedience, his psychotic rage at any display of independent thinking and behavior. Lucifer realized that he could never fully think for himself and could certainly not act on his independent thinking so long as he was under God's control. Therefore he left Heaven, that terrible spiritual-State ruled by the cosmic sadist Jehovah, and was accompanied by some of the angels who had had enough courage to question God's authority and his value-perspective. (No pagination)

More proceeds to reiterate 33rd Degree Mason Albert Pike's depiction of Lucifer:

Lucifer is the embodiment of reason, of intelligence, of critical thought. He stands against the dogma of God and all other dogmas. He stands for the exploration of new ideas and new perspectives in the pursuit of truth. (No pagination)

Lucifer is even considered a patron saint by some Transhumanists ("Transtopian Symbolism," no pagination). Transhumanism retains the paradigmatic character of Luciferianism, albeit in a futurist context. Worse still, Transhumanism is hardly some marginalized cult. Richard Hayes, executive director of the Center for Genetics and Society, elaborates:

Last June at Yale University, the World Transhumanist Association held its first national conference. The Transhumanists have chapters in more than 20 countries and advocate the breeding of "genetically enriched" forms of "post-human" beings. Other advocates of the new techno-eugenics, such as Princeton University professor Lee Silver, predict that by the end of this century, "All aspects of the economy, the media, the entertainment industry, and the knowledge industry [will be] controlled by members of the GenRich class. . .Naturals [will] work as low-paid service providers or as laborers. . ." (No pagination)

With a growing body of academic luminaries and a techno-eugenical vision for the future, Transhumanism is carrying the banner of Luciferianism into the 21st century. Through genetic engineering and biotechnological augmentation of the physical body, Transhumanists are attempting to achieve the very same objective of their patron saint.

I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north: I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High. (Isaiah 14:13-14)

This declaration reflects the aspirations of the power elite as well. Whatever form the Luciferian religion assumes throughout the years, its goal remains the same: Apotheosis.

Sources Cited

About the Author

Phillip D. Collins acted as the editor for The Hidden Face of Terrorism. He has also written articles for Paranoia Magazine, MKzine, News With Views, B.I.P.E.D.: The Official Website of Darwinian Dissent and Conspiracy Archive. He has an Associate of Arts and Science. Currently, he is studying for a bachelor's degree in Communications at Wright State University. During the course of his seven-year college career, Phillip has studied philosophy, religion, and classic literature. He also co-authored the book, The Ascendancy of the Scientific Dictatorship: An Examination of Epistemic Autocracy, From the 19th to the 21st Century, which is available online here. He also moderates the Yahoo discussion group "Panoptic Age."


Vatikan Takes Control over Jerusalem Sites (From the Archives)

BABYLON OBSERVER, DECEMBER 20, 2005 - Israeli researcher Barry Chamish has revealed that the Vatikan and the Pope have made an agreement with the Israeli State to have the Roman Catholic Church take control over various places in the nation's capital.

In a revealing interview with a well known historian, he puts this all into the right context and it turns out, that the events are driven out of an old desire to revive "Holy Roman Empire" with Jerusalem as capital.


by Barry Chamish

18 Dec 2005

Just a few weeks ago, the following was the issue of the day in Israel:

Report: Israel to hand control of Jerusalem holy site
to Vatican
Haaretz November 6, 2005
By Amiram Barkat
Israel is to give the Vatican control over one of the
most sacred Christian sites in Jerusalem, several
European newspapers have reported recently. According
to the reports, Israel will give the Holy See
possession of the Coenaculum, or the Room of the Last
Supper (also known as the Upper Room or the Cenacle),
on Mount Zion.

In response to the news, I wrote an article which proved the handover of the Old City of Jerusalem was a done deal. In fact, it was one of the secret clauses of the first Oslo "peace" accord signed by the Israeli government.
A week after, I received a phone call from a rabbi of the Diaspora Yeshiva. He explained that the Tourism Minister was visiting their school the next day and he was trying to fill the study hall to prove to the government that their yeshiva was too valuable to be given away.
I replied that I would not partake in such a spectacle. I might come if the students forcibly barred the Minister or any government official from entering the property. Hadn't he learned anything from Gush Katif? The government of Israel couldn't care less about him and could care even less how many students he can pack into a room. Mount Zion was a litmus test of how much opposition the government and its corrupted army could expect when all of the Old City was turned over to the Vatican.
He said I must talk to the headmaster of the Yeshiva, Rabbi Goldstein.
An hour later, I was honored by a call from Rabbi Goldstein. Soon, however, I was in despair. As far as he knew, the Vatican wanted to turn his school into a money making tourist site and the Ministry of Tourism was being enticed by the prospects of millions of Catholic tourists visiting Israel to see the Last Supper room.
I did my best to wake the Rabbi. I told him that tourism was the facade, not the issue. I tried to explain the global forces using their muscle to get the Jews out of Jerusalem's holy sites. I noted that the government of Israel was the worst enemy of Judaism and that he must block the entrance of their representative with whatever force he could muster.
However, as with the Rabbis of Gush Katif, my words were wasted. Mount Zion will give up without a real fight. You watch.
Nonetheless, the truth marches on. A brilliant Jerusalem-based German-born historian, Dr. Asher Edar, also honored me with a conversation. Vive le difference:

BC - Why is the Vatican suddenly so interested in getting its hands on Mount Zion real estate?

AE - There's nothing sudden about it at all. In fact, the roots of the desire go back 1200 years to the time of Charlemagne. He was the Vatican's military tool for converting Europe to Roman Catholicism.
He succeed magnificently and created what is known as the Holy Roman Empire but what was then called The Holy Roman Empire Of The German Nation. Charlemagne's capital was at Aachen and there he built his first cathedral.

BC - Excuse me but, so?

AE - Next to the yeshiva on Mount Zion is the Dormition Abbey, built by the Germans starting in 1906. It is an exact duplicate of Charlemagne's Aachen Cathedral.

BC - How did that happen?

AE - Kaiser Wilhelm II came to Jerusalem in 1898 to build two churches, a modest Lutheran Church of minor religious significance and a magnificent Catholic structure on Mount Zion. In 1898, the ruler of a nation didn't make such a difficult journey to a diplomatic backwater unless it was extremely important. The Vatican was worried that the British had an operating church in Jerusalem and its presence could solidify and spread. The Vatican provided much of the funds for the trip and the bribe to the Turkish Sultan, Khamid. Since Wilhelm had a Protestant population to appease, he put up a smaller Lutheran church as well, but the real prize was Mount Zion.

BC - Why all the money and trouble if the Vatican gets the real estate? What was in it for Germany?

AE - Germany has never given up its dream of reviving the Holy Roman Empire. At the height of that empire, their greatest king, Frederick the Great, marched into Jerusalem and became the city's king. Jerusalem was once part of the Holy Roman Empire and the dream is that it will be again. In this empire, the delineation of powers was strict. The pope was the spiritual leader, but the political leader was whoever ruled Germany. This dream led straight to World War I.

BC - Where do the Jews fit in all this?

AE - Nowhere. Herzl tried to get a role for the Jews and met with Wilhelm in Jerusalem. Wilhelm would have nothing to do with him. His goal was to save Jerusalem for a Christendom led politically by Germany and spiritually by Rome. Nothing has changed except now the pope is a determined German. The Vatican want the Jews out of the Old City and apparently our government is agreeing with them.

Now a history lesson with little comment:

Encyclopedia-Frederick II, Holy Roman emperor and German king
King of Jerusalem

Having married (1225) Yolande, daughter of John of Brienne, he claimed the crown of Jerusalem, but again postponed his departure on crusade. He further offended the pope by reasserting at the Diet of Cremona (1226) the imperial claim to Lombardy. The Lombard League was immediately revived, but open conflict did not break out until 1236. On the insistent demand of the new pope, Gregory IX, Frederick embarked on a crusade (Sept., 1227), but fell ill, turned back, and was excommunicated.
In 1228 he finally embarked. His -crusade,- actually a state visit, was a diplomatic victory. At Jaffa he made a treaty by which Jerusalem, Nazareth, and Bethlehem were surrendered to the Christians, with the Mosque of Omar being left to the Muslims. In 1229 he crowned himself king at Jerusalem.

In 1226, by means of the Golden Bull of Rimini he confirmed the legitimacy of rule by the Teutonic Knights under their headmaster Hermann von Salza over the Prussian lands east of the Vistula, the Chelmno Land.
At the time he was crowned Emperor, Frederick had promised to go on crusade. In preparation for his crusade, Frederick had, in 1225, married Yolande of Jerusalem, heiress to the Kingdom of Jerusalem, and immediately taken steps to take control of the Kingdom from his new father-in-law, John of Brienne. However, he continued to take his time in setting off, and in 1227, Frederick was excommunicated by Pope Gregory IX for failing to honor his crusading pledge - perhaps unfairly, at this point, as his plans had been delayed by an epidemic. He eventually embarked on the crusade the following year (1228), which was seen on by the pope as a rude provocation, since the church could not take any part in the honor for the crusade, resulting in a second excommunication. Frederick did not attempt to take Jerusalem by force of arms. Instead, he negotiated restitution of Jerusalem, Nazareth, and Bethlehem to the Kingdom with sultan Al-Kamil, the Ayyubid ruler of the region.



Some forty knights were received into the new Order at its foundation by the King of Jerusalem and Frederick of Swabia, who selected their first Master in the name of the Pope and Emperor. The knights of the new confraternity had to be of German birth (although this rule was occasionally relaxed), a unique requirement among the Crusader Orders founded in the Holy Land. They were drawn predominately from the noble or knightly class, although this latter obligation was not formally incorporated into the rule until much later. Their blue mantle, charged with a black cross, was worn over a white tunic, a uniform recognized by the Patriarch of Jerusalem and confirmed by the Pope in 1211. The waves of German knights and pilgrims who followed the Third Crusade brought considerable wealth to the new German Hospital as well as recruits. This enabled the knights to acquire the Lordship of Joscelin and, soon thereafter they built the castle of Montfort (lost in 1271), the rival of the great hospitaller fortress of Krak des Chevaliers. Never as numerous in the Holy Land as either the Hospitaller or Templar Orders, the Teutonic knights were nonetheless a formidable power.


© Guy Stair Sainty

The origins of the Order of the Holy Sepulcher have been disputed for centuries. In this examination of the history of what is today a major Catholic Order of Knighthood, under the direct protection of the Holy See, it has been my intention to separate fact from fantasy and outline the historical development of this great institution. It now has a world-wide mission to support the Holy Places, particularly in Jerusalem, and has approximately eighteen thousand members across the globe.

Two Christian sources who are certain the goal of the "peace" process is to establish a German/Vatican capital in Jerusalem are David Ben-Ariel, and the Philadelphia Trumpet:

Looking to Jerusalem

We have also said that the next pope would have his sights set on Jerusalem. Ratzinger was known for statements he made concerning a reconciliation of sorts with the Jews. That reconciliation being, the moment in which Israel too will say yes to Christ.After all, the star points to Jerusalem, Ratzinger said once. Watch for this new pope to have a more fervent interest in Israeli politics and affairs surrounding Jerusalem.

First let's understand Aachen Cathedral's history:

Aachen Aachen in north-western Germany (in French, called Aix-la-Chapelle), was the capital of Charlemagne's empire in the 9th century. It became the site of one of the great medieval pilgrimages because of the textile relics obtained by Charlemagne and Ortho III. The four Great Relics include the cloak of the Blessed Virgin, the swaddling clothes of the infant Jesus, the cloth on which St. John the Baptist's head lay after his beheading, and the loin cloth which Jesus wore on the Cross. These four relics were shown only once every seven years.


John Paul II's Letter for 1,200 Years of Aachen Cathedral
VATICAN CITY, JAN 31 (ZENIT).- John Paul II referred to the ties that unite the Catholic community spread over the world with the Church of Rome and the Holy City of Jerusalem, in a letter to commemorate 1,200 years since the construction of Aachen Cathedral, an event which was celebrated last Saturday and Sunday in this historic German locality.
The Pope's special envoy to the celebration was Cardinal Dar?o Castrill?n Hoyos, prefect of the Congregation for the Clergy. The Holy Father addressed the letter to Bishop Heinrich Mussinghoff of Aachen. John Paul II pointed out that the Cathedral, dedicated to the Virgin, was built at the request of Charlemagne. That same year, 800, the emporer was crowned in Rome by Pope Leo III in the Vatican Basilica. This historical event reflects the closeness that existed between that local Church and the diocese of Rome.
But Aachen Cathedral has yet "another link" that carries it "with heart and mind" to the Holy City. These are 4 precious relics that Jerusalem gave to Charlemagne and that recall "with profound reverence events in the history of salvation." The 4 relics are fragments of the newborn Jesus' diapers, the cloth Jesus wore around his waist on the cross, the dress Mary wore on Christmas Eve, and the cloth of John the Baptist's beheading.

Now, we have a look at Aachen Cathedral:


Next, we look at the Dormition Abbey on Mount Zion:


Surprise! It's an exact copy of the first church built by Charlemagne, founder of the Holy Roman Empire.

Conflicting Agendas!

Mount Zion and Dormition Abbey, JerusalemMount Zion lies to the south of today's city walls. Coming out of Zion Gate you are faced with the Benedictine Basilica of the Dormition. The Dormition Abbey is a massive structure that rises on Mount Zion, just outside the Zion Gate, and resembles a mighty fortress; it is topped by a high, domed belltower, a conical dome and corner towers. This Benedictine Basilica, built over the site where Virgin Mary is said to have fallen asleep for the last time (Dormitio - from here one of the apocryphal writings describing this event). It was completed by Kaiser Wilhelm II at the beginning of 20th century based on plans by Heinrich Renard who used as a model the Carolingian cathedral of Aix-la-Chapelle. The Room of the Last Supper lies just outside the Dormition Abbey behind the Franciscan house on Sion. The whole area has been transformed by religious Jews into various Yeshivas (Schools of the Torah) especially due to the devotion for the Tomb of King David which is believed to be located beneath the Upper Room. Germany Rejects The Jews Not For The Last Time
When Herzl met the Duke of Baden, the Kaiser's uncle, he tried to persuade him of the importance of a meeting with Kaiser Wilhelm for the Zionist cause. After more than one and a half years of fruitless contacts with influential German figures, Herzl was called to the German consul during a stay in Amsterdam and informed that the German Kaiser was prepared to meet him on his journey to Jerusalem.
Kaiser Wilhelm II's first stop on his journey to the land of Israel was at Kushta. In October 1898, Herzl traveled to Kushta, where he met with the Kaiser for the first time and received a promise of a subsequent meeting in Jerusalem.
Herzl and his companions went up to Jerusalem in an optimistic frame of mind to wait the second meeting, which took place on November 2. His frosty reception by the Kaiser and the lack of protocol led Herzl to realize that the German monarch had withdrawn his initial offer of support for Jewish settlement in the land of Israel.

For the rejection of Herzl and the race against Britain for Jerusalem real estate, Turkey and Germany paid a heavy price. In 1910, the Dormition Abbey was completed. Within a decade, Germany and Turkey were defeated in all out war, and Britain was in Jerusalem alongside Herzl's Jews.

Then came the Holocaust.


If you are interested in helping out in any way, call David Rutstein 052 6694999.
Long Distance; 011 972 526694999.
Or write me and tell me how you'd like to help

Each and every Israeli Knesset member knows that the real killers of Yitzhak Rabin are free!
Individuals must make the effort to email, fax, call or personally visit these Knesset members and demand justice for the killers of Yitzhak Rabin and so many others.
"Our hands hath not shed the blood..."
List of Knesset members


Friday, March 4, 2011

Neocon Court Coup and the Politics of Disaster Revisited - by Paul Collins (From the Archives)

TrotskyitesWWW, 2006 (Archived) - On September 8th, 2005, my article "Katrina and the Politics of Disaster" was published. The ink was not even dry as the article's major contentions were vindicated. No, this does not make me or anyone else who saw things in advance prophets. The article's accuracy can be attributed more to common sense (a scarce commodity these days) than anything else. Playing solitaire will get you better acquainted with yourself, but it will not make you a great poker player. On the other hand, watching Chris Ferguson or Phil Ivey play a few hands will give you an idea of how the game is played. The same principle applies here. Studying the cases of elite criminality and elitist tracts will give you the uncanny ability to predict the future.

Research reveals a certain method employed by bluebloods throughout history to consolidate power. A crisis is created by government action or inaction. This crisis leads to tremendous violence and social upheaval that in turn has the population screaming for a solution. The government then plays the role of savior, presenting an oppressive remedy to the problem. Society gets onto a totalitarian trajectory as the process is repeated over and over again. It worked for the Illuminist-bred Jacobins in France. It worked for the communists in Russia. It worked for Nazis in Germany. Today, it is working for the Neocons and other elitists hidden behind the Bush Administration.

In "Katrina and the Politics of Disaster," evidence was explored that seemed to suggest that warnings were ignored and assistance was intentionally delayed, causing the Katrina situation to intensify. An atmosphere of lawlessness and anarchy arose, causing people to call for Federal intervention. We now find ourselves in the midst of phase three as the government presents the cure for our ills. Apparently, that cure is a shot of totalitarianism that involves a very long needle. On September 13th, Stewart Powell reported:

President Bush on Monday urged Congress to examine whether the White House needs stronger powers to deal with catastrophes like Hurricane Katrina. Bush's backing for the congressional inquiry raised the possibility that lawmakers might expand presidential authority to:

  • Order mandatory civilian evacuations
  • Dispatch U.S.-based armed forces for emergency search-and-rescue operations
  • Grant wider leeway for active-duty U.S. military personnel to carry out law enforcement operations. (No pagination)

Perhaps the most disturbing aspect of the government solution is the call for the military to be used here at home. A September 17th Associated Press article went into this feature of the President's plan:

President Bush's push to give the military a bigger role in responding to major disasters like Hurricane Katrina could lead to a loosening of legal limits on the use of federal troops on U.S. soil.

Pentagon officials are reviewing that possibility, and some in Congress agree it needs to be considered.

Bush did not define the wider role he envisions for the military. But in his speech to the nation from New Orleans on Thursday, he alluded to the unmatched ability of federal troops to provide supplies, equipment, communications, transportation and other assets the military lumps under the label of "logistics."

The president called the military "the institution of our government most capable of massive logistical operations on a moment's notice." (No pagination)

Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld has now entered the picture, ready to step up domestic militarization. The changes he will suggest to the President may allow the government to use natural disasters as a pretext for tearing down longtime bulwark to tyranny: the 1878 Posse Comitatus Act. The Associated Press reported:

[Spokesman Lawrence] Di Rita said Rumsfeld has not made recommendations to Bush, but among the issues he is examining is the viability of the Posse Comitatus Act. Di Rita called it one of the "very archaic laws" from a different era in U.S. history that limits the Pentagon's flexibility in responding to 21st century domestic crises. (No pagination)

Katrina has been used to make the unthinkable now thinkable. The notion that the military should be used to police civilians would make the Founding Fathers' skin crawl. Today, many Americans still share that sentiment with the architects of the Republic. However, most sit on their hands believing the system of checks and balances will remedy the problem. The branch most likely to step in on our behalf should bad legislation get passed is the Judicial. Using the power of judicial review, the Supreme Court can look at something the President or Congress does and declare it unconstitutional. However, the Administration intends to short-circuit any judicial attempts to block its acquisition of power with what can only be described as a Supreme Court coup. Integral to this coup is chief justice nominee John G. Roberts.

Roberts has been a Bush political operative since at least the controversial 2000 presidential election. In an article for the Miami Herald, Gary Fineout and Mary Ellen Klas elaborate:

U.S. Supreme Court nominee John G. Roberts provided legal advice to Gov. Jeb Bush in the weeks following the November 2000 election as part of the effort to make sure the governor's brother won the disputed presidential vote.

Roberts, at the time a private attorney in Washington, D.C., came to Tallahassee to advise the state's Republican administration as it was trying to prevent a Democratic end-run that the GOP feared might give the election to Al Gore, sources told The Herald. (No pagination)

The article continued:

Roberts, himself a noted constitutional lawyer, and an unnamed law professor spent between 30 and 40 minutes talking to Bush in the governor's conference room, sources told The Herald.

Roberts' perceived partisanship during the recount has been enough for some Democrats to suggest that his nomination should be rejected by the U.S. Senate.

A spokesman for the governor confirmed Wednesday that Bush met with Roberts during the recount.

Roberts was "one of several experts who came to Florida to share their ideas," said spokesman Jacob DiPietre. Roberts came "at his own expense and met with Gov. Bush to share what he believed the governor's responsibilities were under federal law after a presidential election and a presidential election under dispute." (No pagination)

For some, Robert's connection to the 2000 election make his nomination to the Supreme Court very problematic. U.S. representative Robert Wexler summed up critics' misgivings:

U.S. Rep. Robert Wexler, a Boca Raton Democrat, seized on Roberts' participation in the 2000 recount and suggested it should be grounds for rejecting his nomination. Wexler suggested the nomination "threw salt on the wounds of the thousands of Floridians whose voting rights were disenfranchised during the 2000 election.

"Judge Roberts worked to ensure that George Bush would become president -- regardless of what the courts might decide," Wexler said, relying on news accounts that suggested Roberts gave the governor advice on how the state Legislature could name Bush the winner. "And now he is being rewarded for that partisan service by being appointed to the nation's highest court." (Fineout and Klas, No pagination)

Roberts was no doubt rewarded for his services with a nomination to the Supreme Court. When Rehnquist passed away, nomination was upgraded to that of chief justice. Roberts has jumped the first hurdle, the Senate Judiciary Committee. All that is left is to be confirmed by the general senate. With a republican majority, victory is almost a forgone conclusion. This makes the Roberts situation even more disturbing. Why? Unfortunately, the standard for being a great chief justice is not making upright and moral decisions. Instead, the standard is the ability to bring uniformity to the Court. Eisenhower considered his decision to nominate Warren one of his greatest mistakes. Given the man's involvement in the cover-up of the Kennedy assassination, Eisenhower's regret seems justified. That notwithstanding, the man is still considered one of this nation's great chief justices for his ability to get all the justices on the same page. As a result of all this, chief justices have learned to be great politicians and work to bring uniformity to the Court, not to bring about a moral outcome. Therefore, chief justice Roberts would work to bring the Court into lock step with the Bush Administration's agenda.

However, to call Roberts merely a Bush lackey would be inaccurate. It must be understood that this Administration (like so many administrations before it) is a front for some elite faction. In a speech given by Pulitzer Prize winning reporter Seymour Hersh, the puppeteers behind the Bush Administration were revealed: "One of the ways -- one of the things that you could say is, the amazing thing is we are been taken over basically by a cult, eight or nine neo-conservatives have somehow grabbed the government" (No pagination). Those on the left have misidentified this neocon cult as anti-communist right-wingers. These poor, misguided souls have failed to recognize the difference between being anti-communist and anti-Soviet. The cult of neoconservatism is, in fact, a revival of Trotskyism. Former neocon Michael Lind revealed this fact in his article "A Tragedy of Errors":

The fact that most of the younger neocons were never on the left is irrelevant; they are the intellectual (and, in the case of William Kristol and John Podhoretz, the literal) heirs of older ex-leftists. The idea that the United States and similar societies are dominated by a decadent, postbourgeois "new class" was developed by thinkers in the Trotskyist tradition like James Burnham and Max Schachtman, who influenced an older generation of neocons. The concept of the "global democratic revolution" has its origins in the Trotskyist Fourth International's vision of permanent revolution. The economic determinist idea that liberal democracy is an epiphenomenon of capitalism, promoted by neocons like Michael Novak, is simply Marxism with entrepreneurs substituted for proletarians as the heroic subjects of history. (No pagination)

None other than the godfather of neoconservatism himself, Irving Kristol, vindicates Lind's allegations. In his book Neoconservatism: The Autobiography of an Idea, Kristol writes: "I regard myself lucky to have been a young Trotskyist and I have not a single bitter memory" (13). Left-wing activists love to charge the neocons with being fascistic anti-communists. Nevertheless, the neocons' crusade to tear down the Soviet Union and Soviet-connected regimes stemmed from the fact that they felt betrayed by Uncle Joe. Stalin had made the mistake of attacking their idol: Trotsky.

With the neocons in control, America is sure to continue on a socialist and statist trajectory. Future catastrophes, both man-made and natural, will provide the pretext for all of this. A Supreme Court with Roberts as its chief justice will declare the Administrations' actions completely legal and constitutional. All the while, the very document that is supposed to be guiding the Court's decisions, the Constitution, will be burning.

Sources Cited

Paul D. Collins has studied suppressed history and the shadowy undercurrents of world political dynamics for roughly eleven years. In 1999, he completed his Associate of Arts and Science degree. He is working to complete his Bachelor's degree, with a major in Communications and a minor in Political Science. Paul has authored another book entitled The Hidden Face of Terrorism: The Dark Side of Social Engineering, From Antiquity to September 11.


Latest Publications From The Babylon Observer Forum


In case the article(s) on this page was quoted from another source, the two following statements apply:
-1- Fair Use policy applies since the quote is for non-profit educational and research purposes only. For more information, go to:
-2- The Babylon Observer has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of the articles nor is The Babylon Observer endorsed or sponsored by the originator.