The crisis was in your mind!
28 December 2013
The sometimes silliness of ’taking sides’:
My report on the actually breaking developments in the Eurasian sector, from Belarus to the Pacific, appears to have unnerved some of my friends and acquaintances in central and western Europe. The fact of the matter is that the trans-Atlantic bloc had suffered what it had considered a “painful setback” when Ukraine had not capitulated to a takeover by the trans-Atlantic, Anglo-American “strategic” bloc intent on crushing the Eurasia sector. The trans-Atlantic circles had overlooked the fact that Russia’s posture in this matter had prevented an immediate, then-pending trans-Atlantic nuclear threat to the entire Eurasian bloc, had the immediately intended conquest of Ukraine succeeded, in an immediately threatened, probable provocation leading toward an early onset of thermonuclear warfare which would be experienced pretty much throughout the world.
The fact of the matter has been, that the “defeat” of the U.S.A. and Western European scheme for a pre-emptive Anglo-American strategic assault to follow a Anglo-American “takeover” of Ukraine has at least severely stalled the threat of a thermonuclear war, this far.
It was on this account that I exposed the fraud which has been spread through much of western Europe and into the United States, earlier during the course of this week. I presented the case at some length during exceptionally extended opening remarks during yesterday’s Friday evening webcast. I summarized the case in those remarks, and referenced elements of the same subject-matter during several occasions during that event. References to the same, exceptional matter, will be most appropriate for here and now.
The essence of what might be identified as the trans-Atlantic crisis launched, as an active threat, essentially by Anglo-American nuclear forces, was reflected in precautions taken by the governments of both Russia and Ukraine, under what had constituted mortal threats to what were most immediately targets of both Russia and Ukraine. The government of Ukraine rejected the offer, appropriately, and the government of Russia, too. The particular significance of the threats is pin-pointed in the fact, that the capture of Ukraine by Anglo-American and immediately related agencies would have led to prompt measures expressed in an already threatened quasi-thermonuclear pre-emptive crushing of Russia, too. The volume of physical space represented by Ukraine would have rendered Russia desperate, as the situation had been defined so by U.S. officials sharing their intentions in this matter.
Thus, on the surface of the matters in process at that point, the leading implication of the Anglo-Dutch-U.S. pre-combat posture, was entirely global. Whereas, the present status of matters between the NATO-keyed bloc and Eurasia, is presently defined as a relatively strong defense-posture by, in particular, the Eurasian bloc as now in the process of projected fulfillment during the span of the coming twelve months, sundry possible speculations discounted.
To come quickly to the crucial point of the matter, we must not separate any discussion of the strategic matters, from the policies which have been directed by the British and Dutch imperialist interests controlling the political direction of the current Presidency of the United States under Presidents George W. Bush, Jr., and, presently, Barack Obama. The pivotal concern to be brought to all responsible varieties of strategic powers of the world, is demonstrated in the actions taken in the United States under the two indicated, most recent U.S. Presidencies this far. In fact, those particular Presidencies represent the abrupt intrusion of control over the U.S.A. by an alien, usurping interest centered in the Anglo-Dutch imperial usurpations of control over both the Constitution and the people of the United States.
For example, the treason embodied in the presence and practices of those two latter U.S. Presidents, is exemplified by the military assault on the nation of the United States, by the British-Saudi operations known as “9-11.” The then-Saudi Ambassador the United States was an actively direct manager of essential operations set into motion within the United States by the combination of British and Saudi teams working through funding channels for these attacks utilizing their derived petroleum resources. This fact is not officially exposed to the public within the United States, or elsewhere. This was, in fact, clearly tantamount to an act of war against the United States. Yet, those facts were suppressed since the attacks by the succession of the two U.S. Presidents of relevance: George W. Bush, Jr., and the now incumbent President, Barack Obama.
Those same actions as conducted under the successive Presidencies of Bush and Obama, represent of the same globally strategic intentions as those of the current nominally NATO operations within Eurasia. These same agencies, which have also included treasonously witting agents included under the ranks of elements of the government of the two U.S. Presidencies mentioned, are the same strategic interest recently threatening actions against the group of Eurasian nations which I have referenced.
Every person living on this planet, is implicitly a target, in one way, or another of the agency which stands behind the relevant Anglo-American-Saudi aggregate. This is no ordinary war. It is the kind of warfare which no silly sort of pompous ass will even pretend to understand. That brings the discussion to the essential, and also more than merely global, strategic issues actually represented in the actual facts.
Who, then, is the real enemy of humanity? How could any serious scientist understand the identity of the strategies and specific interests of monsters such as those deployed in what I just identified as the historic origins of what has transpired under both the George W. Bush, Jr. and Barack Obama Presidencies?
ZEUS vs. PROMETHEUS
Nominally, the names of the allegedly “mythological” figures of Zeus and Prometheus, are relegated by convention, to mythology. However, any competent chemist or economist is implicitly confronted with evidence to the contrary. True, both could claim a mythic identity, but the up-to-date evidence shows that the conflict between the notional existences of Zeus and Prometheus, is a biologically proven case, as is the distinction between beast [Zeus] and man [Prometheus]. This is not myth; it is biological fact; the evidence of the relevant connections is made entirely from biology.
Zeus is a British imperial god, by one of his adopted natures; Prometheus, on the contrary, is elegantly human in both biology and attributably human behavior. The “Greenies,” for example, are impassioned worshippers of Zeus’s practices; where, real human beings are distinguished by their devotion to the practice of biologically evolutionary creativity on principle. It is the “Greenies” who are the mass-murderously treasonous foes of the practice of actual humanity.
The distinctions between the two, respectively, bitterly opposing natures, are fierce opponents, precisely, in all relevant detail; the difference is expressed as a matter of good versus the evil inherent to the Zeus-worshipping, virtually mere animal, “the greenie.”
Since the two identified, opposing types, are efficiently precisely distinguished, and that, precisely as Zeus and Prometheus are respectively defined in terms of their difference in essential behavior as contrary species-in-fact, whatever the process of bringing the two names into historically known cultures, this shows that there could be no doubt respecting the intentions which distinguished two opposing species-in-fact of practice and belief.
All among the most crucial distinctions which the two contrary types exhibit, make them in effect-of-practice “all-the-same-as” different species in their behavior. The one, that of Zeus, is a mere animal in his species of effectively inbred behavior and its associated culture. Only those fitting the category of Prometheus’ biologically-specific traits of behavior, are capable of consistently human qualities of behavior.