Who Really Owns You? It Is Time for You To Think, Really-Part III

2013-03-01

Chapter 5: Saudi imperialism?

The British-Saudi Empire of Today

I am well-known among some actually leading figures of several or more nations, well-known among those limited circles best qualified to react to my exceptionally specific skills as an forecaster. For example, on that account, on January 3, 2001, I had passed a warning to a relevant leading figure and his wife, forewarning them to expect a serious terrorist threat to our United States to appear during the course of that year. During the late Spring and Summer of that same year, I had tracked several likely, trend-like signs of such a major event. On September 11, 2001, that event hit me (among any others) with a certain degree of surprise as to exact timing, but I had recognized, since my forecast of January 2nd of that same year, the situation and its implications, immediately, and presented the details of my reactions during an ongoing radio broadcast of a blow-by-blow account of the breaking developments.

During that same lapse of time, my associates and I had tracked developments which conformed to a prelude for a terrorist event. The cases of which I registered warnings of such a class of event during that same year, became serious enough to be classed as a forewarning of a threatened action in progress near Washington, D.C. What actually happened was what would become known as "9-11:" September 11, 2001, which was soon proven to have been an actually Anglo-Saudi-organized terrorist action, an attack which had been prepared in collusion with Saudi Arabian leading circles, and in cooperation against the United States, also, with a leading role of the British monarchy's BAE institution. Unfortunately, the facts have been suppressed by the role of lying by both the administrations of George W. Bush, Jr., and, now, Barack Obama.

These essentials are now to be classified under the rough category of "long since," except for the present fact, of another, clear-cut case of a new "9-11" terrorist attack which had struck in Libya's Benghazi region, in the Autumn of this just-past year. This new "9-11" attack, has been in fact, a continuation of what had begun in public attention since September 11, 2001. In the case of, now, both those "9-11" attacks, the U.S.A.'s Barack Obama Presidency had sought to conceal, fraudulently, even impeachably, the relevant facts of the combined two cases.

The "Brutish" Empire Acts
To understand that situation in an adequate manner, we must consider the consequences of a process of developments, since the bloody reign of William III in the British Isles, through the time of the 1763 Peace of Paris, which Britain had signed as the conclusive peace treaty with the United States. That date marked a coincident set of treaties of a then newly-established British, Roman-style world empire. The shaping of the empire has been altered since 1763, but the essential characteristics of that British world empire, as an overruling system of collected, relatively local satrapies, has never changed.

It is to be emphasized on this account, that the British empire is somewhat like a chameleon, which changes its colors, to fit the background of the role it is playing, as if diplomatically, according to the circumstances of not only place and time, but in accord with that which is the momentary choice of which nation, and so forth, is being wooed or crushed at the time. It is what "British Empire" has always meant: it has been, in principle, an heir of the original Roman empire, in intention, underlying methods, and embedded consequential disasters.

A Helpful Key to Understanding
The lack of actual understanding of the underlying nature of the present world monetarist's crisis, is typified, for example, by William H. Gross's "Credit Supernova!" He is right in describing the immediate instant of (what is now!) the present date's situation of the financial universe as, from his choice of vantage-point, a virtual "Credit Supernova." What he misses entirely, is the actually underlying nature of a real economy. In other words, Gross has no solution, because, although he has diagnosed the disease itself well, considering all else, he has proceeded in an intrinsically wrong way. There is nothing to fear if we cease attempting to "bail out" that global financial system which is the actual cause of the onrushing global catastrophe.

The actually catastrophic error which Gross' words imply, is the actually insane presumption that money as such is a real determinant of human values. Alexander Hamilton had already defined both the problem, and its remedy, in four statements on the subject of economic principles: his two 1790 reports on Public Credit and a National Bank, his extended 1791 Report on the Subject of Manufactures, and his Opinion on the Constitutionality of the National Bank of 1791. Credit and money are in no respect congruent conceptions, except in the respect that money has no intrinsic value except in its incarnation as a means of an otherwise useless conveyance of the signaled presence of wealth by the messenger-service of mere money.

There is an example to be employed as an illustration of the point I have just stated, an illustration carried over from the progressive evolution of living species toward successively higher orders of the equivalent of higher "energy flux densities" in the ordering of progress in the advancement of the evolution of living species. It is the creative (i.e., noëtic "powers") of successive advances in the relative qualities of living species, which are expressed in the effects comparable to the notions of increases of effective expressions of "energy-flux density," which are the basis for the increase of the productive power of human noëtically driven increments in the relative value of human labor.

To derive economic growth, the standard of human productive labor, is necessary; however, to seek to derive relative economic values from money-as-such, is a form of insanity more or less congruent with the intrinsically stupid, and implicit social criminality of what Bernanke and his accomplices currently represent.

What I have just stated respecting the distinction of productive from merely monetarist "values," provides the only actually competent basis for any national economy.

The most significant of the offspring of the span from the Roman Empire, to today's actual British empire, are typified more or less exactly by the original model of the Roman Empire. The system of rulership relies to a very large extent on the jackal-like blend of sneak, coward, and opportunist, as that is played, from place to place, and time to time, among the political organizations of the subordinate elements of a British empire modeled on the original Roman. Britain rules less by the force it commands, which is chiefly the disgustingly whorish cupidity which it exploits among its subordinates—i.e., the so-called notions of "alliances."

The varieties of ways in which Russia has been duped and cheated by Venetian and British swindlers, up to the present moments, since the ouster of Chancellor Bismarck, is exemplary, whether Czarist Russia, Communist Russia, or what-have-you. The case of the way Bertrand Russell, as also Russell's relevant successors, had played Russia diplomatically, which is to say, often, "egotistically," whether Communist or otherwise, is typical of the dirty hand of British imperial diplomacy, to virtually the present instant.

I find no systematic fault in the existence of relations among nation-states as such. It is when those nation-states fall into the customary trap of British imperial diplomacy, that the "Little British Isles" so often swindles the nations of the world by playing on the national egotisms deeply rooted in language-national pride. I knew Russia of the 1990s rather well for an outsider, knowing that an honest cooperation between Russia and the United States of President Bill Clinton would have been a pathway to successful development of cooperation among respectively sovereign nations. President Clinton was brought down at that juncture when I had acted on this account. From the effect of that development, neither the U.S.A. nor Russia, has regained the common interest which were available when both nations could each have been, simultaneously, itself.

A comparable case had existed on the verge of the reunification of a divided Germany. A British orchestration among President François Mitterrand's France, Britain's Margaret Thatcher, and the U.S.A.'s "goofy" George H.W. Bush, all combined in effect with the assassination of Chairman Alfred Herrhausen of Deutsche Bank, pushed the administration of Chancellor Helmut Kohl, over the edge into a capitulation to that British Empire's Euro-system hoax which created the wretched peril among the nations of continental Europe—including that of Russia—to the present date.

It is past time that that empire itself be dissolved. The imminent collapse, just now, of the U.S.A.'s capitulation to a commitment to the "monetary easing" of Ben Bernanke, brings the world as a whole to the edge of the greatest, and actually global, financial collapse in all human history up to the present date.

The British-Saudi Swindle
The British-Saudi swindle has been the source of the "9-11's" of both 2001, as under the George W. Bush Presidency, and that of the Barack Obama Presidency in Benghazi in 2012. The origins of those connections are actually to be traced in their roots to the role of that British conquest of India which was an integral feature of the creation of the original British world empire.

The particular, most distinguishing difference between a national, or comparable economy, and an empire such as that of Ancient Rome or the British-Saudi imperialist operations of the present time, is that the British empire does not give an essential "damn" about economic progress as such. The empire's appetite is essentially power, rather than physical-economic progress; currently, it demands that previous human progress be irreparably undone. In fact, as the present Queen of England has made the issue of relative values very, very clear: her drive is, as she has indicated repeatedly, to reduce the population of the entire planet through a practiced genocide bringing it from seven billions, to approximately one billion living human persons (or perhaps very much less).

The essential feature at the root of the British empire, as for the Roman earlier, is to use physical power as a promotion and defense of empire as such. Beyond that narrowly defined intention, the overriding intention is to secure the bestialization of what might be regarded as the relatively "lower" classes. We see that policy today, through studying the bestialization being promoted against the U.S. population today (for example) in the name of a program of "environmentalism" which, when combined with the spread of drug-trafficking, can only bring about mass-death rates among the U.S.A. and also Europe, as it has been done, generally, to Africa, and so on.

The interdependency of the acceleration of drug-trafficking and stupefaction of the populations of nations, is presently the very essence of British imperial drug-pushing strategy and related intentions. The bestialization being now shaped, by the emphasis supplied by Wall Street, is typical of the evil which is otherwise characteristic of Wall Street. The problem here, is that most leaders in our United States have recently lacked even the simple "guts" to resist the destruction of our republic.

That evil is essentially a matter of conflicting moralities, the one of human morality, rather than that of predators of such as Wall Street. For the rest of the matter, the evils spring from cowardice. The root of the matter is older than the destruction of ancient Troy. The root is the same evil characteristic of oligarchy as such, purely as evil as the Emperor Nero in his time.

Chapter 6: The actual science of economy.

It Has Been Named "Reason"

In no case, has the method of sense-perception actually defined a universal principle of nature: the universe does not await permission given by something on Earth as responsible for the discovery of a truly universal physical principle. Such dubious devices must be recognized as characteristic of such ancient charlatans as the notorious Euclid, and what Ludwig Beethoven warned, prophetically, would probably be the unfortunately ruinous destiny of "the talented boy," Franz Liszt; or, worse, the all-sidedly monstrous hoaxster, Richard Wagner; and the, still worse, gibberish-like, popular musical product of the post World War II phase of the Twentieth Century.

These are not matters of "mere opinion," but of efficiently scientific fact; the proof for this resides within the effect on the quality of mind and morals of the subject considered. There are several conveniently accessible proofs available. Among modern scientific proofs, there have been the Renaissance leaders Filippo Brunelleschi, Nicholas of Cusa, and among the most notable from the Seventeenth Century's leaders, Johannes Kepler, Pierre de Fermat, and the modern Gottfried Leibniz. It were best to define the issues with better insight into the underlying issues along those historical lines.

Greed is not an appetite specific to decent people. Mission for the advancement of the intellectual powers and related goals of mankind, is a matter of essential, moral principles properly required among even simply decent human beings, and nothing less than that.

We represent, as human beings, the only living species presently known to us, which is capable of enabling even our species to continue to live as such a species, not a species in greed, or brutish ignorance, but as we represent the only presently known living species which is capable of doing some genuine good through the progress of the forced achievements of increased creative powers of action for both mankind and the improvement of our planet's usefulness.

There is a correlative factor, which has been a leading concern of mine over the greatest part of my life to date: the liberation of my human race from the presently continued general stultification, called euphemistically, "being practical," contrary to the noëtic potentialities of our species. This is a matter to be identified in relatively simple terms, as the ability of the human mind, when not crippled by malicious influences, to foresee an actual future. The tyranny of the demand to be "practical," otherwise often named so, is, in fact, the greatest evil, in its effects, even to the degree of explicit bestiality, encountered within the ranks of mankind this far.

The source of the problematic error against which I have just warned, lies in the effort to bring the behavior of the individual human mind into an attempted, precise correlation with the common terms of literal meanings, a correlation which is the primary impulse for brutish intellectual and related behavior within the human population generally. The antidote for such trends into bestiality, is found in what is fairly regarded as both Classical artistic and scientific discovery and use of principles. The model for that standard was provided efficiently by our use of two closely related terms of science and artistic composition: Johannes Kepler's vicarious hypothesis and the intrinsically related term, metaphor.

The first of these terms, was first defined by Johannes Kepler's discovery of the ontological principle of physical science, and the second is the comparably "subtle" implications of Classical artistic composition, such as those of William Shakespeare's dramas and John Sebastian Bach's sets of preludes and fugues. Both of these just-stated standards, take the imagination out of the brutalizing domain of simply literal sense-perception, into the domain of the human mind, as such.

In both of the cases which I have just emphasized as distinct from raw sense-perception, as such, the actually noëtic powers of the actual human mind are brought into play, in the domain sometimes identified as the "creative imagination." That is, in fact, the only domain in which human creativity achieves its true realization. It is known as the domain of Classical artistic composition and its realization; but, it is also the only true principle of an actualized physical science.

If, for example, you were to find yourself at a certain degree of distance from the raw experience of sitting in a chair in an audience, such that your mind is distracted from the pressures supplied to the seat of you pants, such that you are listening, not to the actors as perceived so, but standing in a position proximate to experiencing the drama as on-stage; thus, you may have experienced a jolt of sorts, whenever the curtain closed briefly on an act or scene of the drama presented before you. The same principle appears in well-performed, great, Classical musical composition. That is to speak of the specificity of the Classical imagination, a means by which we are enabled, if willing, to enter a domain of the imagination where the only true reality resides, that of human creativity in its own true nature, that for us, as for the great artist and physicist Max Planck, for example, or an Albert Einstein with his violin.

Where there is a simultaneity of Classical drama and other art, there is a place of momentary residence of the human soul.

That is the objective, which truly serves all great things which humanity could know.

Source: Executive Intelligence Review