“I saw huge buildings rise up faint and fair, and pass like dreams.” -- HG Wells, The Time Machine
By Lou Saboter
On August 9th, it was reported that Michael Brown was shot to death in Ferguson, Missouri.
Highly militarized police, trained by Zionists in counterterrorism tactics, came on the scene to suppress the public reaction. They arrested journalists, pointed assault rifles in people's face and made threats, and shot rubber bullets and teargas canisters at American citizens peacefully assembling.
On July 31, a bill had been introduced in the house concerning anti-semitism.
Language in the bill reads: Condemns: (1) all forms of anti-Semitism and rejects attempts to justify anti-Jewish hatred or violent attacks as an acceptable expression of disapproval over political events, and (2) the comparison of Israel to Nazis.
Now, why on earth would we be worried about such a ludicrous comparison as that? Text in the bill also noted that President Obama had said that: "
if the memories of the Shoah survivors
teach us anything, it is that silence is evil's greatest co-conspirator.
And it's up to us--each of us, every one of us--to forcefully condemn
any denial of the Holocaust. It's up to us to combat not only anti-
Semitism, but racism and bigotry and intolerance in all their forms,
here and around the world. It's up to us to speak out against rhetoric
that threatens the existence of a Jewish homeland and to sustain
America's unshakeable commitment to Israel's security'
Meanwhile, the security of other Middle East nations is of no concern, whereas their horrifying anti-semitism is, at least to the Anti-Defamation League. It reads:
a survey by the Anti-Defamation League of attitudes towards Jews in more
than 100 countries around the world, released in May 2014 found that
over a quarter of the people surveyed (26 percent), and nearly three
quarters of those surveyed in the Middle East (74 percent) hold anti-
Semitic views, a stunning indicator of the stubborn resilience of anti-
Semitic beliefs, even in countries where few Jews reside;
The bill passed the House on September 8th. It had 172 co-sponsors.
At present, with huge protests in the streets thanks to a well-hyped media circus, the public is clearly demanding action from the state that caused the problems of militarized, abusive, increasingly faceless police in the first place.
What sort of actions might such a state take? Will they be for the betterment of society, or for the increase of its own powers?
In the wake of Obama's un-televised immigration reform speech, timed perfectly to come before the announcement of the Darren Wilson verdict, and his notions that Americans have nothing to say about immigration unless they're Native Americans, can we expect positive change?
Also, if only Native Americans can have an opinion, why does Obama? Did the Native Americans get consulted here?
That being said, now that I'm no longer a citizen, and only one of a "nation of immigrants", perhaps I shouldn't be surprised that my rights are being quickly dissolved. Obama is pushing thousands of regulations that tighten the psychiatric approach to gun control and dissent. The new NSA powers being proposed don't surprise me, but should disturb you now that the NSA now has quantum computing in its voyeuristic hands. Quantum computing has the ability to consider many realities, or possibilities, at once. Instead of the familiar discrete 0's and 1's of old style computer bits, we now have 0's and 1's simultaneously occurring, finding solutions to problems that defy human comprehension.
It all reminds me of a scene from a movie, Back to the Future, where an issue with the narrative of the past starts to erase Marty Mcfly (played by Michael J. Fox), and he watches himself fading away.
Well, perhaps I'm showing my age. But you should watch that movie, despite its diabolical revisionism. It examines how radically the future can be changed by the small actions of a single individual, and how the story of the past determines the future.
A British writer, George Orwell, in his novel of a dystopian yet increasingly familiar future, Nineteen Eighty-Four, had a pertinent saying about this: Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past. In that book, Winston Smith's job is creating artificial news stories for public consumption, assaulting history with alternate narratives. A firm sense of history could give people a sense of identity or purpose contrary to the state's interest. The state also plans to reduce language to further limit the threat of possible narratives contrary to state interests arising.
(yeah, spoilers ahead)
Similarly, another film, Frank Capra's It's a Wonderful Life also examines alternative narratives. In that film, George Bailey, played by James Stewart, on the verge of suicide, is allowed to see what the world would be like if he were never born. As it turns out, he finds out that his existence, and the acts of self-sacrifice he performed, actually profoundly affected the tenor of the town and the personal lives of those he cherished.
George played a banker with values, willing to make sacrifices for the good of the community. In fact, after his suicide is averted, he is even willing and grateful to be jailed if necessary, taking responsibility for his mistakes.
Imagine that.
In a more recent film, Edge of Tomorrow, Earth has been invaded by aliens called Mimics. General Brigham tells Major Cage (Tom Cruise) he must go to the front lines. He isn't exactly combat ready, disobeys, and is shanghaied. He awakes from being knocked out at a military base. He is then forced, without training, to fight on the battlefield as a private.. Master Sargent Farrell, at the base, has been fed a narrative that prevents Cage from convincing him he was set up.
Despite his lack of experience, Cage manages to bag one on the battlefield, getting bathed in its blood before dying. He is soon killed, only to find himself back at the moment he awoke. This process repeats, allowing him, with the foreknowledge he acquires, to change the narrative, investigate the situation, see through all the deceptions, try out many alternate realities, and eventually drive a veritable stake into the heart of the enemy.
Unfortunately, we the people don't quite have such powers. But, under the First Amendment, we are empowered with free speech, which means we have the right to express ourselves and to question the so-called "Official Story," or state-mandated narrative of events. A narrative enforced by a media which seems almost to have a story prepared before events even happen, and is rarely willing to make any major changes to the story once their ready made, repeated plot points are laid out.
Perhaps the past isn't what it seems. And, if we can see the past for what it is, we can change the present--and create a better future.
No comments:
Post a Comment