The world is full of nuts that think they know everything and can fix
everything.
The blockee
-----Original Message-----
From: Ron Ristad <ristad@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: undisclosed-recipients:;
Sent: Sat, Feb 20, 2016 8:58 pm
Subject: [sparkscoffee] Contradictions in the stories of the Middle East wars
This week’s news is disturbing for several reasons. It certainly is sad to
witness the escalation of terrorism and war, particularly now in Libya,
Tunisia, and Syria, but it is the element of contradiction that shouts from the
headlines of those stories that is, perhaps, the most disturbing of all.
The contradiction in the stories in the Middle East is that it is almost
impossible to tell who is fighting terrorism and who is protecting terrorism. A
recurring thread is that the US is leading a great military campaign against
ISIS but it also delivers weapons to ISIS, provides aid to ISIS, attacks ISIS
with powder-puff blows, and does everything to prevent Russia from knocking the
hell out of ISIS.
Turkey and Egypt, allies of the US, are performing similar roles. In the name
of fighting terrorism, they somehow manage to do more harm to those who
genuinely are fighting ISIS than to ISIS itself. If you haven’t yet picked up
on this consistent contradiction, this week’s news will make it abundantly
clear.
Whenever there is a consistent contradiction, it is a sign that it isn’t a
contradiction at all but that our expectations are based on wrong assumptions.
That clearly is the case with the war on terrorism.
To resolve the contradiction, we must discard the assumption on which it is
based. The assumption is that Western nations are fighting terrorism because
they want to put an end to violence, death, and destruction. The replacement
assumption is that they are fighting terrorism precisely because doing so
creates violence, death, and destruction. In other words, terrorists are
essential and must not be eliminated. Otherwise, there would be no one to fear
and no justification for war.
Absurd as that may seem, you will find that it removes the contradiction and
explains literally all aspects of the war on terrorism – and more. But, why
would any normal person want war?
The answer is that the people making these decisions are not normal. They
belong to a small, elite core of global financiers and politicians who have an
agenda that fires their imaginations and dreams, but it requires the complete
restructuring of society. They want to replace nationalism with a global
government based on the model of collectivism. They believe that the way to
bring that about is to destroy all existing systems that do not fit that model
and then build a “new world order” on top of the rubble.
This strategy was dramatically illustrated in a stained-glass window in the
Beatrice Webb house in Surry, England, former headquarters of the Fabian
Society. The Fabians are a highly influential organization promoting global
collectivism since 1884. Former British Prime Minister, Tony Blair, was a
Fabian.
Across the top of the stained-glass window appears the last line from Omar
Khayyam:
Dear love, couldst thou and I with fate conspire
To grasp this sorry scheme of things entire,
Would we not shatter it to bits, and then
Remould it nearer to the heart’s desire!
Beneath this line, the mural depicts George Bernard Shaw, one of the better
known Fabians, and Sidney Webb striking the Earth with hammers.*
Once you understand the concept of deliberate destruction as a strategy for
preparing the way for something that is “to the heart’s desire”, you will find
that there are very few contradictions in the news.
G. Edward Griffin
2016 February 19
