This should explain why we have to get rid of Freemasonry
Take time to read this, it is so obviously the basis of so much We see every day. I ran across this many years ago, but it got buried in the volume of all I was taking in.
I suppose I have been an extremist, but maybe only in reaction to what I see as extreme evil.
This is the blueprint for all You see happening.
GRAMSCI AND THE U.S. BODY POLITIC
By: Alberto Luzárraga
Why the interest in Gramsci? Certainly, he is not a household name for most people, but nonetheless he is relevant enough to be mentioned the editorial page of the Wall Street Journal. In a recent piece (12/19/00) by George Melloan, the columnist refers to an article published by John Fonte in the Policy Review of the Hudson Institute.
According to the WSJ writer, "[Fonte] defines the ideological split in America as a contest between present-day Tocquevillians and disciples of the 20th-century Italian philosopher Antonio Gramsci, who drew on the ideas of Friedrich Hegel and Karl Marx. The Tocquevillians incline toward individualism, religious belief and patriotism. The Gramscians see any society, including America, as an arena where the "marginalized" are necessarily at war with the privileged classes. Good old-fashioned class warfare, in other words."
As we know, political events do not happen in a vacuum. There are always causes. Ideas that were deemed a failure decades ago can be successfully implemented today. In the world of ideas, decades are often only an incubation period and today Gramsci s ideas are very much alive in the political arena.
Born at Ales, Italy on January 1891, Antonio Gramsci was the fourth son of Francesco Gramsci, a clerk in the local registrar s office. He suffered through a difficult childhood, eventually received a scholarship, and graduated from the University of Turin. In 1921 he became a founding member of the Italian Communist party. In 1922 he traveled to Moscow as a member of the Communist International and remained in Moscow for a year. It was the beginning of the Stalinist period.
Gramsci, a bright man, thought that Stalinist methods would not work in western societies. Violence and revolution, in his opinion, would generate a fatal reaction against the communist movement. He returned to Italy with more subtle and long term ideas and began to develop them. Shortly upon his return, Mussolini jailed Gramsci. The fascist regime saw his ideas as a danger to the State. It was from prison (where he died in 1937) that Gramsci wrote his 33 books. They contain very shrewd insights on how a "capitalist, bourgeois society" works and how it can be taken over peacefully and dominated through a systematic change of its ideas.
His methods became in fact, the "field manual" for the many that followed. If you understand Gramsci, you will understand the "peculiar" and "weird" theories that are in vogue today. And you will understand that they are not the work of "weird crazy people" but rather of calculating and quite intelligent operatives.
One word of caution howeve. Followers of the Gramscian doctrines are a mixed lot. It would be a service rendered to the socialists to call every Gramsci follower a full fledged socialist although many certainly are that. Socialists love absolute accusations in order to label people "extremist", one of their preferred epithets. Part of the methodology is to deviate attention by accusing others of what they are or do. We should not give them that chance. Moreover, although the Gramscian proposal demands from the common follower consent and acceptance of its ideas, this does not necessarily imply that all rank and file followers have a clear understanding of where they are going.
And then, many of the more adept Gramscian operators may not fully support his economic ideas. His relevance lies in the fact that for many ambitious and opportunistic political operatives Gramsci is seen as a modern Machiavelli with a good method to achieve power. And to them this is more important than a specific economic model. The important point to understand is the method. It is a road map that shows one of the favored strategies used by persons with an unlimited lust for power to climb and acquire notoriousness, while advancing their ideas.
So what is Gramsci all about? Well, let s start with his concept of "hegemony" a word frequently used by people not noted for their love of hundred dollar words. For Gramsci ,"hegemony" is not mere dominance by force. Rather, it is the set of ideas by which dominant groups in a society secure the consent of subordinate groups to their rule.
Note the emphasis on consent. A governing class must succeed in persuading the governed to accept the moral, political and cultural values suggested by those in power. Gramsci noted that this is the way "bourgeois societies" ruled. Extreme measures were only used when there was rebellion against the established mores.
Therefore his conclusion was: Let s do the same and capture the minds of the population, as well as the institutions of the bourgeoisie and do it with ideas that we will present as "common sense". The implementation will be through intellectuals and figures of influence gained to the cause by vanity, convenience or ambition and a by a new element, intellectual operatives that work with the people. All of it, coupled to constant use of the media.
In his words: "the mode of being of the new intellectual can no longer consist in eloquence & but in active participation in practical life, as constructor, organizer, "permanent persuader" and not just a simple orator&"
Gramsci understood what Marx did not understand: Economic crises by themselves would not subvert capitalism, because capitalism always managed to overcome the crises and emerged stronger. Another theory was necessary for a different reality. One that recognized the importance of culture and ideology, and methods that went beyond the coarser forms of Marxist class struggle. Methods that would be efficient in capturing power in a western society. Methods that would fit the use of mass media because they were subtle and persuasive. If you gain the minds you gain the bodies. Even a partial victory is useful, because it weakens and diminishes your opposition.
Gramsci perceived that in a western society, the bond between the ruler and the ruled was what kept it together and this bond was what created "hegemony." And where was that bond? How was it cemented?
In the classical institutions, and through them of course. The family, the church, the schools, the civil society and its organizations, none other than the building blocks of the State.
The revolutionaries who wished to break the "hegemony" had to build up a "counter hegemony" to that of the ruling class. It was necessary to change the minds, to change the popular consensus, to change the way institutions work. In sum, to make the people question the right of their leaders to rule in the accepted way.
Success would consist in permeating throughout society a whole new system of values, beliefs and morality. A system that would become accepted by all in a way that would appear to be the normal thing to do.
How is it done? Besides the traditional intellectuals (those who see themselves as such) there must exist the "organic intellectual", i.e. the one that grows with a social group, and becomes its thinking and organizing element. The role of informal "educators" in local communities becomes essential. The educator must not be seen as a distant "brainy" figure but as "one of us", one of the neighborhood, another one of the group.
The same applies to the schools which Gramsci sees as a means used by social groups "to perpetuate a function, [namely] to rule or to be subordinate". Ergo, schools and curriculums must be controlled either directly or indirectly.
Once organized these groups would engage in incessant political activity and use massive means of communication. No armed conspiracies, just unrelenting propaganda. The introduction of Gramscian methodology in society, produces a constant clash for supremacy of ideas and a patient but persistent subversion of the building blocks of that society. Subversion is a many faced endeavor played by different people with different objectives but the modern method has a substantial Gramscian content.
Take a case in point. Why it is that we must often suffer a way of thinking that attempts to coerce us intellectually? Look around. How many times have you heard: You must not be "judgmental" or "intolerant." What does that mean in Gramscian terms? It means: You must accept our values and not argue. If you do not you are out the mainstream. Remember the Gramscian objective of turning their ideas into "common sense"?
Do you now understand, why we have political correctness?
Why we have neighborhood groups that look more like agitation and propaganda entities than neighborhood associations?
Why we have schools that push a peculiar curriculum and ignore parents, school budgets that make available funds for incredible courses, and teachers unions that often do not appear to represent teachers true interests?
Why we have churches that have become political discourse centers?
Why we have a myriad civil associations with goals that appear to be destructive and divisive?
Why we have mass media that often operate as propaganda machines rather than reporters of events?
The Wall Street Journal article continues: "Mr. Fonte says the Gramscian view has special currency in higher intellectual circles, particularly on elite college campuses. The plight of women, minorities, gays and other victims of cultural hegemony is a favorite subject of student indoctrinations, not to mention speech and thought control, in such places. The federal Violence Against Women Act produced a Supreme Court case in which a 10-year-old boy was charged with harassing a fifth-grade female classmate. It is no accident that the Gramscian New York Times editorial page thought that the most important thing Al Gore said in his eloquent concession speech was that he would continue to fight for people "who need burdens lifted and barriers removed." How he might have conducted his fight if he had been elected has never been clear; certainly not by cutting their taxes."
The only way to gain absolute power in the United States is through long range Gramscian tactics. There is hope however, if we don t take for granted what we now enjoy and fight to maintain power divided. The true strength of the American Republic is the division of power. This is why the would be revolutionaries so hate the Electoral College, States Rights, local self government, etc. The system devised by the Founding Fathers complicates their life tremendously. As the quoted article notes:
"Over and above these structural features, there are the multiplicity of interests and interest groups, the immense diversity of American society and the excessive rhetoric that characterizes the conflict of those separated in fact by minor differences." Underlying it all, however, "is the sheer power of the idea of freedom an idea so powerful that not even those opposed to freedom condemn it . . . ."
The last sentence is crucial. Even those that seek to destroy the system must pay lip service, at least, to the idea of liberty. They must talk about the people s right to vote while they work against it and seek to discredit the process.
The Gramscians in the United States cannot wage a war of conquest. They must wage a war of attrition and position. If we understand their tactics we can stop them and win. But it won t happen by staying at home and watching the game. We must all become involved. In the same way they become involved. To use a Gramscian term, each one of us must become an "organic intellectual" of sorts, one that explains and convinces. Gramsci was right when he said that all men have intellectual concerns outside their field of activity. The problem is that most citizens are so busy with their lives that they do not have the time to think things through. They need help and those who understand must help, each in his own way.
We have in our favor truth and true common sense. If they succeed it is only because we allowed the party with the harmful product to sell it to an unsuspecting public.
It appears Gramsci took a more than a page or two from the Fabians book. Being an "intellectual" he no doubt differs slightly because he is a genius after all. But his philosophy does not appear to be an original idea at all.
...I agree that society has been hijacked by a cabal of several thousand well placed individuals who knowingly or unknowingly are following the directives of a very few. Freedom is most seriously in jeopardy
Gramsci's Grand Plan
by Fr. James Thornton
http://www.grecoreport.com/gramsci's_grand_plan.htm
One of the most interesting aspects of the study of history is that very often men born in the most humble of circumstances nevertheless rise up to affect the course of human history dramatically. They may be men of action or men of thought, yet in either case their activities can father tremendous changes across the years. Antonio Gramsci was both a man of action and thought and, whatever the outcome of the events of the next several decades, he will almost certainly be reckoned by future historians to have been a remarkable figure.
Born in obscurity on the island of Sardinia in 1891, Gramsci would not have been considered a prime candidate to impact significantly the 20th century. Gramsci studied philosophy and history at the University of Turin, and soon became a dedicated Marxist, joining the Italian Socialist Party. Immediately after the First World War, he established his own radical newspaper, The New Order [Ordine Nuovo], and shortly afterwards helped in the founding of the Italian Communist Party.
The Frankfurt School
With respect to the subject of the undermining of the American family, and to many other aspects of the Gramscian technique, let us explore briefly the story of the Frankfurt School. This organization of leftist intellectuals, also known as the Frankfurt Institute for Social Research, was founded in the 1920s in Frankfurt am Main, Germany. There it flourished amidst the decadence of the Weimar period, both compounding and feeding off the decadence, and extending its influence throughout the country.
With Hitler's acquisition of the chancellorship in 1933, the leftist stalwarts of the Frankfurt School fled Germany for the United States, where they soon established a new institute at Columbia University. As is characteristic of such men, they repaid their debt to the U.S. for sheltering them from Nazi brutality by turning their attention to what they regarded as the injustices and social deficiencies inherent to our system and society. Immediately they set about devising a program of revolutionary reform for America.
Max Horkeimer, one of the notables of the Frankfurt School, determined that America's profound allegiance to the traditional family was a mark of our national inclination towards the same fascist system from which he had fled. Explaining this connection between fascism and the American family, he declared: "When the child respects in his father's strength a moral relationship and thus learns to love what his reason recognizes to be a fact, he is experiencing his first training for the bourgeois authority relationship." Commenting critically on Horkheimer's theory, Arthur Herman writes in The Idea of Decline in Western History: "The typical modern family, then, involves 'sadomasochistic resolution of the Oedipus complex,' producing a psychological cripple, the 'authoritarian personality.' The individual's hatred of the father is suspended and remains unresolved, becoming instead an attraction for strong authority figures whom he obeys unquestioningly." The traditional patriarchal family is thus a breeding ground for fascism, according to Horkheimer, and charismatic authority figures--men like Hitler and Mussolini--are the ultimate beneficiaries of the "authoritarian personality" instilled by the traditional family and culture. [The careers of such non-traditional culture destroyers as Clinton, Blair and Papandreou blows this whole masturbatory fantasy out of the water. But what do you expect from ivory-tower "intellectuals" who never met a payroll? For more on the extensive damage done to civilization by such creatures see Paul Johnson's great book on the subject titled Intellectuals, as well as the "fairy tale" on this website titled "Thanasaki Goes to College." [ed.] Theodor W. Adorno, another notable of the Frankfurt School, underscored Horkeimer's theory with his own study, published in book form as The Authoritarian Personality, which he authored together with Else Frenkel-Brunswik, Daniel J. Levinson, and R. Nevitt Sanford. Upon closer examination, it became apparent to critics that the research on which The Authoritarian Personality was based was pseudo-sociological, flawed in its methodology and skewed in its conclusions. But the critics were ignored.
America, Adorno and his research team pronounced, was ripe for its own, home-grown fascist takeover. Not only was the American population hopelessly racist and anti-Semitic, but it had far too acquiescent an attitude towards authority figures such as fathers, policemen, clergy, military leaders, and so forth. It was also far too obsessed with such "fascist" notions as efficiency, cleanliness, and success, for these qualities revealed an inward "pessimistic and contemptuous view of humanity," a view that leads, Adorno held, to fascism.
Through such unmitigated balderdash as one finds in the writings of Horkeimer, Adorno, and the other luminaries of the Frankfurt School, the structures of the traditional family and traditional virtue have been called seriously into question and confidence in them blunted. Elected government officials and bureaucrats have contributed to this problem through government taxation policies, which mulct the traditional family while subsidizing anti-traditional modes of life.
Additionally, these officials are inclined more and more towards the elevation of abominations such as homosexual and illicit heterosexual unions to the same level as marriage. Already, in many localities throughout the country and in numerous private corporations, benefits previously reserved to married couples are now granted to unmarried sexual "partners." Even the word "family" is slowly being superseded by the vague euphemism "household."
****
Conspirators, Hierarchy: The Story of the Committee of 300
by Dr. John Coleman 1992 - ISBN 0-922356-57-2 [excerpts]
Levin was the author of a work entitiled "Time Perspective and Morale" which is a Club of Rome publication concerning how to break down the morale of nations and individual leaders.
Here is an extract of the document:
"One of the main techniques for breaking morale through a strategy of terror consists in exactly this tactic: keep the person hazy as to where he stands and just what he may expect. In addition, if frequent vacillations between severe disciplinary measures and promise of good treatment together with the spreading of contradictory news make the structure of the situation unclear, then the individual may cease to know whether a particular plan would lead toward or away from his goal. Under these conditions, even those individuals who have definate goals and are ready to take risks are paralyzed by the severe inner conflict in regard to what to do."
This Club of Rome blueprint applies to COUNTRIES as well as to individuals, particular(y) the government leaders of those countries. We in the U.S. need not think that "Oh well, this is America, and those kinds of things just do not happen here." Let me assure you that they ARE happening in the U.S., and perhaps more so than in any other. (hello Canada ~ AVRO Arrow?)
.....An outstanding example of social conditioning to accept change, even when it is recognized as unwelcome change by the large popultion group in the sights of Stanford Research Institute, was the "advent" of the BEATLES. The Beatles were brought to the United States as part of a social experiment which would subject large population groups to brainwashing of which they were not even aware.
When Tavistock Institute brought the Beatles to the United States nobody could have imagined the cultural disaster that was to follow in their wake. The Beatles were an integral part of "THE AQUARIAN CONSPIRACY," a living organism which sprang from "THE CHANGING IMAGES OF MAN", URH (489)-2150-Policy Research Report # 4/4/74. Policy Report prepared by SRI Center for the study of Social Policy, Director, Professor Willis Harmon.
The phenonemon of the Beatles was not a spontaneous rebellion by youth against the old social system. Instead it was a carefully crafted plot to introduce by conspiratorial body which could not be identified, a highly destructive and divisive element into a large population group targeted for change against its will. New words and new phrases - prepared by Tavistock - were introduced to America along with the Beatles. Words such as "rock" in relation to music sounds, "teenager", "cool", "discovered", and "pop music" were a lexicon of disguised code words signifying the acceptance of drugs and arrived with and accompanied wherever they went, to be "discovered" by "teenagers". Incidentally, the word "teenagers" was never used until just before the Beatles arrived on the scene, courtesy of the Tavistock Institute for Human Relations.
As in the case of gang wars, nothing could or would have been accomplished without the cooperation of the media, especially the electronic media and, in particular, the scurrilous Ed Sullivan who had been coached by the conspirators as to the role he was to play. Nobody would have paid much attention to the motley crew from Liverpool and the 12-atonal system of "music" that was to follow had it not been for an overabundance of press exposure. The 12-atonal system consisted of heavy, repetitive sounds, taken from the music of the cult of Dionysus and the Baal priesthood by Adorno and given a "modern" flavor by this special friend of the Queen of England and hence the Committee of 300. (small wonder they all get knighted)
....In much the same way the Committee of 300 used "The Beatles" to popularize "social drugs" with the youth of America and the Hollywood "in-crowd". Ed Sullivan was sent to England to become aquainted with the Tavistock Institute "rock group" to hit the shores of the United States. Sullivan then returned to the United States to draft a strategy for the electronic media on how to package and sell the group. Without the full cooperation of the electronic media and Ed Sullivan, in particular, "The Beatles" and their "music" would have died on the vine. Instead, our national life and character of the United States was forever changed.
Now that we know, it is all too clear how successful the "Beatles" campaign to prolificate the use of drugs became. The fact that "The Beatles" had their music and lyrics written for them by Theo Adorno was concealed from public view. The prime function of "The Beatles" was to be discovered by teenagers, who were then subjected to a non-stop barrage of "Beatlemusic", until they became convinced that they liked the sound and adopted it, along with all that accompanied it. The Liverpool group performed up to expectations, and with "a little help from their friends", i.e., illegal substances we call drugs, created a whole new class of young Americans in the precise mold ordained by the Tavistock Institute.
"The Wickedest Man in the World"
by A.L. Hunter
http://www.thenewamerican.com/tna/2002/04-08-2002/vo18no07_rocknroll.htm
Is It "Only Rock 'n' Roll"?
The dark, serpentine eyes stare menacingly from a forbidding visage. The grim portrait is one of the best known of Aleister Crowley, the infamous apostle of evil who dubbed himself "The Beast, 666." Dubbed by the press "the wickedest man in the world" -- a title that he relished -- Crowley was without a doubt one of the 20th century's most influential figures. His diabolic creed ("Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law") and his sordid, debauched lifestyle are rapidly becoming emblematic of our age. His vices and occultic obsessions, almost universally repellent in his day, have become fashionable and are now widely extolled in popular culture. The popular, rebellious refrains, "If it feels good, do it," "Do your own thing," "Whatever works for you," "Challenge authority," (keeping in mind, the only authority our guv't has comes from the Bible (KJAV) sitting on the bench of courthouses, unless they try to replace it with a Q'uaran or comic books) and similar paeans to defiant self-will and to hedonism, are contemporary restatements of the Crowley credo, a complete inversion of the Christian precept that we are to submit our wayward wills to God, as Jesus taught in His prayer: "Thy will be done...."
Aleister Crowley was one of the first Westerners to study Buddhism and Yoga seriously. Building on the legacy of **Helena Blavatsky, he did much to popularize these and other eastern mystic traditions, as well as to rekindle European paganism. Modern Wicca (witchcraft), Satanism, and "magick" (Crowley's spelling, to distinguish bona fide sorcery from card tricks and similar party illusions) are all part of the Crowley legacy. The sexual and drug revolutions represent Crowleyanity" in full bloom. Dr. Alfred Kinsey, the infamous "sex researcher" -- and sex pervert -- who did so much to smash and overturn sexual mores and Western legal codes, was greatly influenced by Crowley and even made a pilgrimage to The Beast's "Thelema Abbey" in Sicily. ( C.W.A. CHARGES HOLLYWOOD'S NEW FILM, 'KINSEY' PROMOTES CHILD MOLESTER Kinsey, starring Liam Neeson, is due to be released in a limited number of theaters nationwide on November 14, 2004.
http://www.newswithviews.com/NWVexclusive/exclusive39.htm ) Crowley experimented with peyote, heroin, cocaine, hashish, and every other narcotic (decades before Timothy Leary, who paid Crowley homage in one of his books) and was a full-blown addict most of his adult life.
** Helena Blavatsky's seal (circa 1881)
(drugs have been around for millenium, only recently have they tried to CONTROL substances in an officially authoritarian manner - after all, they've (supposedly) dumbed down the population enough to believe they're no longer responsible enough to mangage firearms for their own protection or herbs for their own use withought succumbing to the horrors of, e.g. "reefer madness" in the case of pot.)
Crowley's name and influence is often encountered in modern pop culture. The Beast's shaven head appeared on the cover of the Beatles' immensely popular Sgt. Pepper's album, and is the inspiration for today's prevalent skinhead look. His "Do What Thou Wilt" is engraved on an album by Led Zeppelin, one of the most popular rock bands of all time. Jimmy Page, Zeppelin's famed guitarist, was so enthralled with Crowley that he bought The Beast's mansion in Scotland (near Loch Ness), where Crowley had carried out some of his most "ambitious" occult rituals. Crowley's pernicious influence can be found not only in the lyrics of Zeppelin but also those of the Rolling Stones, Ozzy Ozbourne, David Bowie, Black Sabbath, Marilyn Manson, and many other modern rock bands.
The man who put the "k" in magic
http://www.popsubculture.com/pop/bio_project/aleister_crowley.html
....In 1916, while living near Bristol, New Hampshire Crowley promoted himself to the rank of Magus through a ceremony of his own devising. According to Richard Cavendish, in History of Magic and The Powers of Evil in Western Religion, Magic, and Folk Belief (both currently out of print), this involved baptizing a toad as Jesus of Nazareth, then crucifying it. I've been chided by several acquaintances who are involved with the OTO for citing this "utter fabrication".
Crowley waited out the first World War in the United States, publishing a fair amount of Anti-British propaganda. He later claimed that the writing done supporting the German side was done satirically, however this did little to improve his already festering public image.
After the war, Crowley had a daughter, Poupee, with Leah Hirsig (AKA The Scarlet Woman), and in 1920 he set up the notorious Abbey of Thelema in Sicily.
The Abbey, however, was an "unsanitary hovel". Crowley's addiction to both heroin and cocaine raged out of control. The Abbey was the setting for Diary of a Drug Fiend, Crowley's hopeful novel about a couple struggling to free themselves of their drug addiction. Sadly, the truth was much more grim. Poupee died there, while Crowley was travelling between London, Paris and the Abbey. It was when one of the Crowley's undergraduates Raoul Loveday died from drinking impure water, that the Abbey's fate was finally sealed. Loveday's wife Betty May went back to England and sold her story to the London tabloid newspaper The Sunday Express.
The papers were filled with reports of black magic rituals and other scandalous acts allegedly performed at the Abbey. These reports came during the same time as the rise of the Mussolini regime and Crowley was quickly expelled from Sicily in 1923.
In 1925 he was elected World Head of the O.T.O., and 1929 saw the publication of his seminal work Magick: In Theory and in Practice.
In 1955, Kenneth Anger shot the documentary Thelema Abbey at the Abbey, which had been exorcised after Crowley's departure, painstakingly exposing the whitewashed walls to reveal paintings and other physical evidence of Crowley's occult activities.
After his expulsion from Italy, Crowley's life took a turn for the worse. His reputation as "The Wickedest Man In The World" was now more than ever playing against him. Unable to find a reliable publisher for his writing, or for that matter, a reliable place of residence, he spent the remaining years as a wanderer, still addicted to heroin, desperately in need of both disciples and money.
Aleister Crowley died December 1st, 1947 at age 72. His last words are often reported to be "I am perplexed", though since he died alone, this is patently false.
1947 was a big year though: N.S.A. (National Security Agency) in the U.S. was founded, AND the nation state called Israel, to name two.
ANYWAY BOB, I DON'T SEE YOU HAVING A VISION PROBLEM: i.e. with respect to, "I suppose I have been an extremist, but maybe only in reaction to what I see as extreme evil.
Pharoah, Cesear, Hitler: what's the difference?
Compare in google: - Egypt Cecil Rhodes Lest We Forget -
http://www.insects.org/ced2/beetles_rel_sym.html
The scarab is generally associated with old Egypt which indeed made this beetle their most important religious symbol; however, scarabs and other beetles have been worshiped in various ways from Prehistory. This paper will show the Egyptians' use of the scarab beetles as neither accidental or unique and only the most obvious of many sacred beetle examples throughout history.
Yves Cambefort article is divided into four main sections. 1. Prehistory to Buddhism and Taoism including Shamanism, The Scarab as Creator, and Buddhism and Taoism. 2. Ancient Egypt including Khepri and the pyramids, The scarab and the mummy, The auspicious scarab, and Ptah and Neith. 3. Indo-Europeans including Old Europe, India and Iran. 4. Judeo-Christian culture including Semitic people and the Bible, Christian authors, and Modern Europe.
the SCARAB BEETLE (kheper)
http://www.egyptianmyths.net/scarab.htm
Appearance: The particular species of beetle represented in the numerous ancient Egyptian amulets and works of art was commonly the large sacred scarab (Scarabaeus sacer). This beetle was famous for his habit of rolling balls of dung along the ground and depositing them in its burrows. The female would lay her eggs in the ball of dung. When they hatched, the larvae would use the ball for food. When the dung was consumed the young beetles would emerge from the hole.
Millions of amulets and stamp seals of stone or faience were fashioned in Egypt depicted the scarab beetle.
Meaning: It seemed to the ancient Egyptians that the young scarab beetles emerged spontaneously from the burrow were they were born. Therefore they were worshipped as "Khepera", which means "he was came forth." This creative aspect of the scarab was associated with the creator god Atum.
The ray-like antenna on the beetle's head and its practice of dung-rolling caused the beetle to also carry solar symbolism. The scarab-beetle god Khepera was believed to push the setting sun along the sky in the same manner as the beetle with his ball of dung. In many artifacts, the scarab is depicted pushing the sun along its course in the sky.
..little darlin'... "Here comes the sun" doo doo, doo doo..
...Truth really IS stranger than fiction.
During and following the New Kingdom, scarab amulets were often placed over the heart of the mummified deceased. These "heart scarabs" (such as the one pictured above) were meant to be weighed against the feather of truth during the final judgement. The amulets were often inscribed with a spell from the Book of the Dead which entreated the heart to, "do not stand as a witness against me."
..a few intersting tidbits here:
http://www.tribwatch.com/utopia.htm
..maybe more than you're up to: 'Yellow Submarine', and all.
- The Yellow Brotherhood Which had its seat in old Egypt -
The Origins Of The Illuminati - Welcome To Hell
http://www.federalobserver.com/archive.php?aid=8467
DISC JOCKEY ~ (sun disc)
Nov. 28, '01 The story of Sun Records founder Sam Phillips is very much the story of rock 'n' roll.
http://www.npr.org/programs/morning/features/2001/nov/phillips/011128.sam.phillips.html
And for Phillips -- who brought us the sounds of Elvis Presley, Jerry Lee Lewis, Johnny Cash and many other musicians who came through his studios -- the story goes back to 1945, when he first came to Memphis (ancient Egyptian name) to work as a radio station disc jockey
As he tells Bob Edwards on Morning Editiion: "Beale Street convinced me that with the talent coming out of the Delta, especially (of black artists), I really wanted to try to do something with that talent because I was very close to it all of my life. I saw the great association between country music and black blues in the South.
That association led Phillips to launch his Memphis Recording Service in 1950 and record Elvis as well as such artists as blues legends B.B. King and Howlin' Wolf.
Phillips is full of stories about his famous artists. Like the time country singer Johnny Cash came to Phillips saying he wanted to record gospel music. The studio executive (Sam Phillips) replied: "Johnny, go sin a little bit, (then) come back and sing me some songs..." I saw the interview myself & it is exactly what Sam said. It's the spirit behind it, NOT the flesh & blood: Ephesians 6:12 ..keep them oldies playin' huh? am radio (media).
Cecil Rhodes School Winnipeg
http://www.wsd1.org/cecilrhodes/crsinternet/CRS_INFO/history/history.html
..empire builder with a philosophy of mystical imperialism. His dream was to create a "Cape to Cairo" railroad that would "Paint the Map Red" (in those days anything red was considered under British rule), along with a reconciliation of the Boers and British under the British flag and a recovery of the American colonies for the British Empire.
ONE FOOT AT PANAMA & ONE FOOT IN WINNIPEG DOING THE NAFTA CORRIDOR THING?? GET YOUR North American ID!! & LOVE IT!! (like it or not.) Forget ESAU!! duh?? Ya'll never heard of him
Manitoba Legislature building full of occult symbolism including writings to the sun god RA on the roof along with a statue of Hermes.. (opened in 1920)..
http://www.infowars.com/articles/occult/winnepeg.htm
ref. Occult on the Prairies:
http://canadafreepress.com/2005/cover031005.htm
Rosecrucians in Canada:
http://sric-canada.org/Legislature.htm - Began in Canada in 1877, same year as Cecil Rhodes "confession of faith":
http://www.lufa.ca/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=677
In October 1883 Edith Nesbit and Hubert Bland decided to form a socialist debating group with their Quaker friend Edward Pease. They were also joined by Havelock Ellis and Frank Podmore and in January 1884 they decided to call themselves the Fabian Society. Podmore suggested that the group should be named after the Roman General, Quintus Fabius Maximus, who advocated the weakening the opposition by harassing operations rather than becoming involved in pitched battles.
Hubert Bland chaired the first meeting and was elected treasurer. By March 1884 the group had twenty members. However, over the next couple of years the group increased in size and included socialists such as Sydney Olivier, William Clarke, Eleanor Marx, Annie Besant, Graham Wallas, J. A. Hobson, Sidney Webb, Beatrice Webb, George Bernard Shaw, Charles Trevelyan, J. R. Clynes, Harry Snell, Clementina Black, Edward Carpenter, Clement Attlee, Ramsay MacDonald, Emmeline Pankhurst,Walter Crane, Arnold Bennett, Sylvester Williams, H. G. Wells, Hugh Dalton, Rupert Brooke, Clifford Allen and Amber Reeves.
Early talks at the Fabian Society included: How Can We Nationalise Accumulated Wealth by Annie Besant, Private Property by Edward Carpenter, The Economics of a Postivist Community by Sidney Webb and Personal Duty under the Present System by Graham Wallas.
By 1886 the Fabians had sixty-seven members and an income of £35 19s. The official headquarters of the organisation was 14 Dean's Yard, Westminster, the home of Frank Podmore. The Fabian Society journal, Today, was edited by Edith Nesbit and Hubert Bland.
The Fabians believed that capitalism had created an unjust and inefficient society. They agreed that the ultimate aim of the group should be to reconstruct "society in accordance with the highest moral possibilities". The Fabians rejected the revolutionary socialism of H. M. Hyndman and the Social Democratic Federation and were concerned with helping society to move to a socialist society "as painless and effective as possible".
The Fabians adopted the tactic of trying to convince people by "rational factual socialist argument", rather than the "emotional rhetoric and street brawls" of the Social Democratic Federation. The Fabian group was a "fact-finding and fact-dispensing body" and they produced a series of pamphlets on a wide variety of different social issues.
In 1889 the Fabian Group decided to publish a book that would provide a comprehensive account of the organisations's beliefs. Fabian Essays included chapters written by George Bernard Shaw, Sydney Webb, Annie Besant, Sydney Olivier, Graham Wallas, William Clarke and Hubert Bland. Edited by Shaw, the book sold 27,000 copies in two years.
William Morris, a former member of the Social Democratic Federation, and founder of the Socialist League, strongly criticised the Fabian Essays in the journal Commonweal. Morris disagreed with what he called "the fantastic and unreal tactic" of permeation which "could not be carried out in practice, and which, if it could be, would still leave us in a position from which we should have to begin our attack on capitalism over again".
The success of Fabian Essays in Socialism (1889) convinced the Fabian Society that they needed a full-time employee. In 1890 Edward Pease was appointed as Secretary of the Society. His duties included keeping the minutes at meetings, dealing with the correspondence, arranging lecture schedules, managing the Fabian Information Bureau, circulating book-boxes and editing and contributing to the Fabian News.
In 1890 Henry Hutchinson, a wealthy solicitor from Derby, decided to give the Fabian Society £200 a year to spend on public lectures. Some of this was used to pay Fabian members such as Harry Snell, Ramsay MacDonald, Graham Wallas, Catherine Glasier and Bruce Glasier to travel around the country giving lecturers on subjects such as 'Socialism', 'Trade Unionism', 'Co-operation' and 'Economic History'.
Hutchinson died four years later leaving the Fabian Society £10,000. Hutchinson left instructions that the money should be used for "propaganda and socialism". Hutchinson selected his daughter as well as Edward Pease, Sidney Webb, William Clarke and W. S. De Mattos as trustees of the fund, and together they decided the money should be used to develop a new university in London. The London School of Economics (LSE) was founded in 1895. As Sidney Webb pointed out, the intention of the institution was to "teach political economy on more modern and more socialist lines than those on which it had been taught hitherto, and to serve at the same time as a school of higher commercial education".
The Webbs first approached Graham Wallas, now one of the most prominent members of the Fabians, to become the Director of the LSE. Wallas agreed to lecture there but declined the offer as director, and W. A. S. Hewins, a young economist at Pembroke College, Oxford, was appointed instead. With the support of the London County Council (LCC) the LSE flourished as a centre of learning.
On 27th February 1900, Edward Pease represented the Fabian Society at the meeting of socialist and trade union groups at the Memorial Hall in Farringdon Street, London. After a debate the 129 delegates decided to pass Hardie's motion to establish "a distinct Labour group in Parliament, who shall have their own whips, and agree upon their policy, which must embrace a readiness to cooperate with any party which for the time being may be engaged in promoting legislation in the direct interests of labour."
To make this possible the Conference established a Labour Representation Committee (LRC). This committee included two members from the Independent Labour Party, two from the Social Democratic Federation, one member of the Fabian Society, and seven trade unionists. Some members of the Fabian Society had doubts about this and Edward Pease personally paid the affiliation dues.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Edward Pease, The History of the Fabian Society (1918)
At the second meeting of the Fabian Society on 25th January, 1884, reports were presented on a lecture by Henry George and a Conference of the Democratic Federation (later the Social Democratic Federation); the rules were adopted, and Mr. J. G. Stapleton read a paper on "Social conditions in England with a view to social reconstruction or development." This was the first of a long series of Fabian fortnightly lectures which have been continued ever since.
(2) Edith Nesbit, letter to Ada Breakell (February, 1884)
On Friday we went to Mr. Pease's to tea, and afterwards, a Fabian meeting was held. The meeting was over at 10 - but some of us stayed till 11.30 talking. The talks after the Fabian meeting are very jolly. I do think the Fabians are quite the nicest set of people I ever knew. Mr. Pease's people are Quakers and he has the cheerful serenity and self-containedness common to the sect. I like him very much.
(3) Edith Nesbit, letter to Ada Breakell (April, 1884)
I should like to try and tell you a little about the Fabian Society - it's aim is to improve the social system - or rather to spread its news as to the possible improvements of the social system. There are about thirty members - some of whom are working men. We meet once a fortnight - and then someone reads a paper and we all talk about it. We are now going to issue a pamphlet. I am on the Pamphlet Committee. Now can you fancy me on a committee? I really surprise myself sometimes.
(4) Edward Pease, The History of the Fabian Society (1918)
Fabian Essays, the work of seven writers (George Bernard Shaw, Annie Besant, Sydney Olivier, Sydney Webb, William Clarke, Hubert Bland, Graham Wallas) all of them far above the average in ability, some of them possessing individuality now recognised as exceptional is a book and not a collection of essays. Bernard Shaw was the editor, and those who have worked with him know that he does not take lightly his editorial duties. He corrects his own writings elaborately and repeatedly, and he does as much for everything which comes into his care.
None of us at that time were sufficiently experienced in the business of authorship to appreciate the astonishing success of the venture. In a month the whole edition of 1,000 copies was exhausted. With the exception of Mrs. Besant, whose fame was still equivocal, not one of the authors had published any book of importance, held any public office, or was known to the public beyond the circles of London political agitators.
(5) Beatrice Webb, diary entry (21st September, 1894)
A few weeks ago Sidney (Webb) received a letter from a Derby solicitor informing him that he was left executor to a certain Mr Hutchinson. All he knew of the man (whom he had never seen) was the fact that he was an eccentric old gentleman, member of the Fabian Society, who alternately sent considerable cheques and wrote querulous letters about Shaw's rudeness, or some other fancied grievance he had suffered at the hands of some member of the Fabian Society. When Sidney heard he was made executor, he expected that the old man had left something to the Fabian Society. Now it turns out that he has left nearly £10,000 to five trustees and appointed Sidney chairman and administrator - all the money to be spent in ten years. The poor old man blew his brains out.
The question is how to spend the money. It might be placed to the credit of the Fabian Society and spent in the ordinary work of propaganda. Or a big political splash might be made with it - all the Fabian Executive might stand for Parliament. Sidney has been planning to persuade the other trustees to devote the greater part of the money to encouraging research and economic study. His vision is to to found, slowly and quietly, a 'London School of Economics and Political Science' - a centre not only of lectures on special subjects, but an association of students who would be directed and supported in doing original work.
(6) Beatrice Webb, diary entry (23rd January, 1895)
Last night we had an informal conference with the ILP leaders. Ramsay MacDonald and Frank Smith (who are members both of the Fabians and the ILP) have been for some time harping on the desirability of an understanding between the two societies. To satisfy them Sidney (Webb) arranged a little dinner of Keir Hardie, Tom Mann, Edward Pease and George Bernard Shaw and the two intermediaries. I think the principals on either side felt it would come to nothing. Nevertheless, it was interesting.
Tom Mann said the Progressives on the LCC were not convinced Socialists. No one should get the votes of the ILP who did not pledge himself to the 'Nationalisation of the Means of Production'. Keir Hardie, who impressed me very unfavourably, deliberately chooses this policy as the only one which he can boss. His only chance of leadership lies in the creation of an organisation "against the government"; he knows little and cares less for any constructive thought or action. But with Tom Mann it is different. he is possessed with the idea of a 'church' - of a body of men all professing exactly the same creed and all working in exact uniformity to exactly the same end. No idea which is not 'absolute', which admits of any compromise or qualification, no adhesion which is tempered with doubt, has the slightest attraction to him. And, as Shaw remarked, he is deteriorating. This stumping the country, talking abstractions and raving emotions, is not good for a man's judgment, and the perpetual excitement leads, among other things, to too much whisky.
I do not think the conference ended in any understanding. We made clear our position. We were a purely educational body, we did not seek to become a 'party'. We should continue our policy of inoculation, of giving to each class, to each person, that came under our influence the exact dose of collectivism that they were prepared to assimilate.
(7) The Fabians became very interested in the Hull House Settlement project in Chicago. Several members, including H. G. Wells, Sidney Webb and Beatrice Webb, visited the settlement. A resident of Hull House, Alice Hamilton, wrote about these visits in her autobiography, Exploring the Dangerous Trades (1943)
Our English visitors sometimes surprised us by combining social radicalism with a total lack of democratic feeling, which to our way of thinking was most inconsistent. A Fabian Socialist amused me very much when one morning I took him out into our neighborhood. He was talking eagerly about the need of vacation schools for London slum children as we stepped out into our courtyard, which was crowded with children waiting to go on a picnic in the country. He never saw them, at least not as slum children like those he was eager to help; he only saw them only as obstacles in his way, and he pushed them aside impatiently as if they were so many chickens, all the time telling me about the pitiful children in London. I thought to myself, "You may love humanity, but you certainly do not love your fellow man."
We found we could not always trust English radicals and Socialists to be nice to their American "comrades" when the latter were from an inferior social level, as most of them were, and we had some painful and embarrassing experiences when what was supposed to be a joyful meeting of kindred souls proved to be a meeting of the snubbers and the snubbed.
(8) Clement Attlee, As It Happened (1954)
My elder brother, Tom, was an architect and a great reader of Ruskin and Morris. I too admired these great men and began to understand their social gospel. My brother was helping at the Maurice Hostel in the nearby Hoxton district of London. Our reading became more extensive. After looking into many social reform ideas - such as co-partnership - we both came to the conclusion that the economic and ethical basis of society was wrong. We became socialists.
I recall how in October, 1907, we went to Clements Inn to try and join the Fabian Society. Edward Pease, the Secretary, regarded us as if we were two beetles who had crept under the door, and when we said we wanted to join the Society he asked coldly, "Why?" We said, humbly, that we were socialists and persuaded him we were genuine.
I remember very well the first Fabian Society meeting we attended at Essex Hall. The platform seemed to be full of bearded men: Aylmer Maude, William Sanders, Sidney Webb and Bernard Shaw. I said to my brother, "Have we got to grow a beard to join this show. H. G. Wells was on the platform, speaking with a little piping voice; he was very unimpressive.
(9) J. R. Clynes, Memoirs (1937)
George Bernard Shaw agreed to take the chair for me at a Fabian Society meeting. The meeting was a great success. Shaw has always been a brilliant speaker as well as a provocative writer. During the early years of the Fabian Society he spoke constantly at public meetings, drawing crowded audiences. He always gave of his best, whether there were two thousand listeners or only twenty. That is the hallmark of the true artist.
(10) Morgan Philips Price, My Three Revolutions (1969)
The Labour Party in those days suffered considerably from the anarchy of conflicting ideas, and it was not easy for me to fit in anywhere. From 1923 onwards I used to attend meetings and conferences organized by the Fabians and the I.L.P. The Fabians were serious people, rather with Civil Service minds, extremely rational and full of common sense. But they were too quiet to get the public ear. Their influence was with the 'high-ups' and a few of the people who mattered.
The I.L.P. had the mass appeal and the means to get their ideas across. But what a chaos, if the solid trade union people were not there to give it some stability! There were a large number of young women with short hair and young men with long. There were also the old pioneers who had been active in the movement before these young people were born. They thought that what Keir Hardie had said in the year one and the resolution passed by a conference in the 1890s was gospel and that it was sacrilege to alter it for something more practical in the 1920s. Socialism with these people was of the Utopian kind, a mixture of Robert Owen, William Morris and of the mid-Victorian social reformers. But they believed in democracy and thought that by propaganda a Parliamentary majority could be obtained for revolutionary changes
The problem with socialism is that the distribution of resources or talents can become clouded. People are constantly reminded there place no matter how useless or useful they are and power gets distributed on who has the best ability to argue their station or case. Everything is decided on a persons charm instead of talents. Civil servants often compete for department funs and blow money needlessly to get a better budget the next year. It is a clear sign that even in function of the government efficient spending would need competition and free enterprize. Individual ownership allows a person to own a farm and if he works hard he survives if he is lazy he goes broke. when we see people needing spindoctors we know the truth starts to disapear because all spindoctors do is just a magical act or slight of hand to lie to you. The Elite want o be the wealthy and will rob the system to stay there socialism allows this. If democracy survives, they will finally fall and we tumble into a depression till new leadership arises more efficient and we prosper for a time again. Democracy works but there is a constant battle with socialism and corruption.
Multistalking is a chess game slowly biting away democratic thinkers so it is easier for the rest to change directly to communism and is stirred on by people hoping for a new world order
Socialist Ideas and Labor Reform
so·cial·ism n 1: any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods. –Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary 10th Ed.
Socialism as defined above is exactly what Sinclair and Addams were advocating. They believed labor reform, especially immigrant labor, could best be achieved through a socialist means. In The Jungle, Sinclair supports an upheaval of the existing way of life by the people. He last several chapters of the book become a sort of socialist manifesto. Jon Yoder says in his book on Upton Sinclair,
If these were new sorts of immigrants, they were coming for traditional economic and religious reasons. And Sinclair, who never separated his economic condition from his spiritual or psychological state, was increasingly convinced that without socialism America could offer these new believers in the American Dream only a nightmarish existence. In 1905, while working on The Jungle, he took time to organize the Intercollegiate Socialist Society. Never again – if people like Sinclair, Jack London, Harry Laidler, and Norman Thomas could help it – would it be possible for someone to graduate from a university without being aware of the socialist solution. But it was his novel that called the attention of the world to Upton Sinclair. For his portrayal of Lithuanian peasants who come to America vividly suggests that our melting pot is less appetizing than the terms offered on our Statue of Liberty (30-31).
This illustrates the dire need for some sort of reform in the working and immigrant classes of America during this time. Sinclair wanted, with his novel, to let everyone know about the incredible oppression found in capitalism. A summary of The Jungle says, "The goal of his novel was to build a case for Socialism by detailing the ills of capitalism" (The Jungle). He definitely succeeded in doing just that. He uses every ill of the meatpacking industry he can possibly find, from the making of sausage, to the working children, to the boss who seduces Ona.
Jane Addams also had a hope for socialist reform. Hull House was her agent of social reform. She brought together the people of the House to form a kind of socialist community within it. Hull House could almost be considered a near communist community had it not been for those living there earning their own money and paying their own room and board. Eleanor Stebner in her book, The Women of Hull House, illustrates this idea,
The social settlement concept, however, centered on the role of the resident. Residents were workers who lived at the house (or in its compound). They usually paid their own room and board through outside work and volunteered their time and skills to the life of the house. The presence of residents made socialist settlements different from other organizations in the late nineteenth century, such as mission agencies or institutional churches. Indeed, the idea of individuals moving into a neighborhood – settling in as neighbors – gave the movement its very name. The settlement movement was a conscious attempt of middle- and upper-middle-class folks to cross boundaries of class and ethnicity, and to connect with others usually identified as different from themselves on a human, everyday basis (13).
Rivka Shpak Lissak says, "Jane Addams envisioned a ‘harmonized-holist’ society that would combine individual freedom and social harmony" (13). This is almost exactly the socialist ideal. While promoting the freedoms of the people, it would create a more organized and fair social state. A main selling point for socialism is the hope that it would even out class boundaries and bring greater equality to the people. Lissak asserts, "The settlement sought to restore the sense of community by unifying the social organism and creating a well integrated and harmonized society. Its aims were to bridge the gap that urbanization and industrialization had created between the poor and the rich and to develop the settlement house as a major mediator and as an agency of social leadership" (22). While this sounds great to most people, it is clear that the ones in charge (capitalists) want to keep their position on the top. Addams and Sinclair both wanted to disseminate this elite capitalist idea and Addams says, "that the ways of dealing with these problems were to destroy the party political machines, to extend the functions of government, and to strengthen its control by a merit system and various devices in the name of ‘the people’" (Lissak 13). The obvious solution to both Sinclair and Addams was that since the people were the ones doing all the work, the people should receive the rewards of their labor.
quelquechosedautre said:
PETER THE ROMAN = PETER TURKSON
Curiously, the identity of the next Pope might be so obvious that no-one has spotted it. Has no-one consdiered the possibility that Malachi putting the name in midstream of sentence might indicate that Peter is not his taken name, but his REAL NAME. On that basis, PETER TURKSON, an unknown Cardinal from Ghana actually PRECISELY FITS THE PROPHECY...and no-one's put a penny on him at the bookmakers!
- RObert
