11

Google image search on “911”

Eleven years on from 9/11 I am sitting in a small room on the 26th floor of a 39 floor tower in downtown Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. A downpour has suddenly begun, and I am peering, slightly alarmed, out the window, between the air con units, across the 50 meters of airspace to the still under construction Shell Building opposite. The latter tower is – after some tautological marketing calculus – deemed ‘green’. Unpicking how thousands of tons of concrete and steel assembled by low-paid migrant workers from Punjab and Bangladesh into a 50 floor air conditioned blue glass box is ‘green’ is not what I want to do here. I only want to take my place along with the millions of other bloggers and armchair activists out there who will be saying something about the sudden removal of the World Trade Center from the New York skyline eleven years ago.

The Shell Building on fire, KL, 18 Jan 2012

Personally, I was convinced that all was not what it seemed – that an amorphous anti-West phantom called Al Qua’ida had orchestrated the attacks as part of their global Jihad against “Our Way of Life” – the instant a passport bearing the name “Mohammed Atta” and a Qur’an were ‘found’ in the glove compartment of a car in the WTC carpark within the hour of the planes striking the towers. You remember the television pictures. The clouds of dust. The people running away. Ask yourself if it was really possible to have found such a needle – such a convenient needle – in that haystack?

The word CONSPIRACY will be flashing up on your inner screen. That haystack is already oversized, bristling with articles about the ‘TRUTH’ of 9/11, ‘INSIDE JOBS’ and so on. This is not another one of those articles.

One thing strikes me about 9/11 eleven years on. Which is that the majority of people still believe the official story: that Al Qua’ida did it, which was why Afghanistan was bombed, and in turn Iraq invaded.

The latter consequence – which has been logically, legally and factually dismantled by a great many people – should, and I think does give these 9/11 Official Story people pause for thought. Just as Copernicus’s logical and factual account of the Earth orbiting the Sun gave the Vatican pause for thought. Yet the Vatican has yet to officially accept the Copernicus model. This is precisely the sort of cataclysm depicted in that most fearsome of Tarot glyphs, The Tower.

Tarot: The Tower

The Tower as depicted by Pamela Coleman-Smith in the Rider-Waite Tarot Deck

So if you find yourself pausing for thought regards what actually happened re 9/11, ask yourself, what is it you have invested in the Official Story? I am not asking you to believe in any other account. There is, I think, no need to go into the details of melting points of steel, or the demolition patterns of similar buildings and so on. I think it’s enough to take the Invasion of Iraq on false premises (Al Qua’ida hiding there armed with weapons of mass destruction) and to work backwards from there in order to arrive at questions about the Official Story. We needn’t even take into account the published papers of Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz on the New American Century and the ‘hamletization’ of various parts of the world to observe some sort of strategy at work.

I have heard many people argue that the various US bodies typically pointed at by conspiracy theorists – the FBI, the CIA, the Secret Service, FEMA, the Department of Homeland Defence etc etc – are simply not competent enough to handle any such strategy. That may be the case. One could certainly argue that 9/11 wasn’t handled particularly smoothly, hence the many holes in the Official Story.

But the point is simply that there is a question mark. A great big one. The answer to it lies in your own response. What would you like to be the answer and why? And what would you fear the answer to be and why? Somewhere in that spectrum lies ‘THE TRUTH ABOUT 9/11’.

In fact, regardless of all the mayhem and death that began on 9/11, the point of the event is this question. Considering it honestly and answering it truthfully for oneself is the way to honour the thousands of American citizens, hundreds of thousands of Afghan citizens, millions of Iraqi citizens and the thousands of individuals of all nationalities that have been detained without charge, rendered, tortured, and murdered in furtherance of the Official Story.

Do have a think.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Advertisements

Justice for Rachel Corrie

Rachel Corrie death: struggle for justice culminates in Israeli court

Nine years after she was killed protesting in the Gaza Strip, the verdict in a lawsuit brought by her family is about to be heard.

Guardian

This article about the US protester killed by bulldozer in Rafah refugee camp, Gaza, aged 23, in 2003 (esoteric note, 2+3 = 5 = Gevurah, the sephirot of justice on the kabalistic Tree of Life) is heard, on Guardian Comment Is Free-watching site CIFWatch as:

The continued exploitation of Rachel Corrie.

This coming week the verdict will be given in the civil law suit brought by the parents of ISM volunteer Rachel Corrie against the Israeli government. Already the Rachel Corrie Foundation (run by her parents and others) has scheduled a publicity event and is using the occasion to add leverage to its anti-Israel campaigning.

CIFWatch

In other words, the prospect that justice might or could be done is inflammatory to CIFWatch. At least, viz my review of The Dictator, we are here talking definitely about Israel rather than trespassing on a jews-only web of connections between Israel and jews. Which we have to observe, is not a million miles from the connectivity between muslims and various racial groups. General aside: problems ensue when religious and racial groups overlap too neatly. Oh but wait! This bulldozer was bulldozing (refugee housing plus Rachel Corrie plus nine, unsung Palestinians that day) in Rafah refugee camp, which is Gaza, close to the border with Egypt. Disputed territory isn’t it? Someone‘s trespassing.

The young American’s intention was to prevent the demolition of a Palestinian home in Rafah refugee camp, close to the border between the Gaza Strip and Egypt. Scores of homes had already been crushed; Corrie was one of eight American and British volunteers acting as human shields for local families. [Guardian]

Becomes:

When Rachel Corrie was accidentally killed nine and a half years ago, public awareness of the nature of the organization (also known as the Palestine Solidarity Movement – PSM – in the US) which sent her and many others to endanger their lives in a war zone (and still does) was perhaps limited. The International Solidarity Movement had, after all, only been in existence for a short while at the time, having been founded in 2001 – several months after the second Intifada commenced. [CIFWatch]

 

Paranoia

Paranoia seems to be the mindset around these issues. From a certain point of view the existence of CIFWatch full stop is paranoid. And from such a point of view, it’s possible to view Justice for Rachel is as anti-Israeli, anti-Zionist, anti-Jewish (take your pick). As is the peaceful flotilla sent from Turkey to Gaza, and militarily disabled by Israel, who in their paranoia are immune, or rather thriving on international criticism.

So we shouldn’t criticise Israel or CIFWatch for being paranoid, but to reach out to them with paranoia of our own, specifically the suspicion that, just as the muslims have been hijacked by the wahabi-salafis, the christians by the fundamentalist american agenda, so the jews – and israel – have been hijacked by the Zionists. Perhaps even Zionism has been hijacked.

As Joe Biden said in 2007, “You don’t have to be a jew to be a Zionist.” Now, as then, Biden is Barack Obama’s running mate for the Israeli, sorry, US Presidency. As Peter Bradshaw, Guardian reviewer of The Dictator wrote in his 2006 review of Borat:

One of the first sequences is Borat introducing a TV clip showing one of his community’s oldest folk traditions: the Running of the Jew. It is quite incredible, and conceived on an epic scale to rival the chariot race from Ben-Hur. Obviously, Sacha Baron Cohen is himself Jewish and perhaps we should here quickly rehearse the saloon-bar truisms: only Jewish people are allowed to tell Jewish jokes, if these comedians wanted to be dangerous why don’t they take on Islam – yes, yes, quite … but is Sacha Baron Cohen really allowed to do this? Is anyone? It is a sensational provocation, a 19th-century anti-semitic cartoon gigantically reborn in the 21st century, in which anti-semitism is alive and well all over the world, in places where they have incidentally never heard of the liberal west’s carefully nurtured distinction between anti-semitism and anti-Zionism.

With all this jews but not Israel, Israel but not jews, jews but not Zion stuff, the phrase that comes to mind is having your cake and eating it. The other observation to make is that Bradshaw seems to have missed one of Baron Cohen’s ironic turns. For a jew to feel pricked by  the spoofed anti-semitism of the Running of the Jew scene in Borat is something like me feeling racially offended by Bernard Manning ranting “cheese wog” re [round, yellow cheese like] spoof drug “cake” in Chris Morris’s Brass Eye. Pricked enough that he must resort, reflexively to a swipe at Islam.

 

Pain and healing

The more I think about it, the more the whole dynamic around the jews and Israel and so on seems childish. It’s a game of sticks and stones (except, in their case, nuclear ones). It’s Eckhart Tolle’s pain body at work – a nexus of negative energies with a will to survive of its own.

Here’s what I want to say on a shamanic blog about the Zionist agenda: Something deeply pained, paranoid and unhealed lies at the centre of it, heavily protected by memetic smokescreens and, as everyone knows, armed with nuclear weapons. It has the power to draw in other pain bodies by mere mention (mine included). Primarily it draws to itself the other ‘god’ pain bodies: Iran, the ‘christian’ fundamentalist right and so on. I will go a stage further and say that, The Devil lies at the heart of the God World. Which, from an esoteric point of view is hardly news, but for those arriving at this from a political background, may sound like madness.

If you think about it, preferably via symbols, the idea that Devil lies at the heart of God is “simply” (!) yin yang philosophy. The true Light lies at the heart of the heart of darkness, Shakti awakes Shiva, spontaneous Creation from the fertile Void.

Another way of talking about this pained and paranoid Devil is to talk about – a la Final Fantasy, the Spirits Within – the Spirit of the Lizards, a la Carlos Casteneda’s Active Side of Infinity the “predator from the depths of the cosmos” who conquered humanity by giving us their minds. And that mind is pained and paranoid as it is the mind of a race which has destroyed its world. In Avatar, the protagonist Sully mentions of the Sky People (human military industrial complex) that “they killed their mother.”

This pain is in all of us, even if it is not directly ours. It is part of the inheritance of being human in this era. It is what is being healed in this era.

Political will, wars, bombings and invasions have not liberated the Palestinians – nor have the jews, Israelis or Zionists been liberated from the matter – in more than 60 years. The definition of insanity is to go on doing the same and expecting a different result.

Am I saying that nothing should be done about Israel Palestine? Am I suggesting that we all go out and hug a bulldozer? No. I’m not saying whether anything should be done or not done. But that whatever you do or do not do – or think or say – watch your pain body. Departure from peace on the inside only feeds that Great Pain Body at the centre of this world issue. Inflammation, anger, unease, indignation – these are the energies that Body thrives on.

ACTA, PIPA, SOPA: Something wicked this way comes

That’s Anti Counterfeiting Trade Agreement Act, Protection of Intellectual Property Act and Stop Online Piracy Act.

Since the advent of Google, Apple and facebook – and others, but especially those three – we’ve known that living our social lives online had a double edge. On one hand there is no better way to keep in touch with friends distributed over ever more diverse networks – in fact, no other way, facebook is the generator of a social dynamic all of its own. On the other hand, nothing is more traceable, trackable and indeed traced and tracked than online life.

The argument for the majority of fB users has always been: so what? I’m not doing anything wrong. Let them look. In this Al-Jazeera Faultlines programme, Thomas Drake, a “former National Security Agency” executive says the issue is not whether you’re doing anything wrong, but that some agency is collecting all of the data generated by your online activity…

Much of this data you won’t even think of as online. Switching your phone on or off is a tracked event, for example, as is going to the bank machine. But again so what? What can anyone do with such data?

Obviously, people like fB, Google and Apple, as well as the FBI, CIA, NSA, MI5, MI6 and the tech park firms that design the software they use (Qintel, Dettica etc) are not simply collecting the data and clogging servers in bunkers under the desert somewhere. They’re turning it this way and that and seeing what falls out.

In other words, what might be done with the data is already a function of the deep data mining and pattern recognition capabilities of software. In other words, just as mankind makes a new leap forwards in terms of interconnectivity of minds – the reaction to block SOPA et al was entirely netizen-generated – so that step exposes new levels of analysis (and therefore prediction) of our new behaviours.

It might be, for example, that you ran a fun-run in support of anti whaling, inviting others via fb and mobile phone. Your path into and out of that event would be easy to crawl – just as botnets crawl the internet – uncovering the network of friends and friends of friends and their interests. Perhaps nothing more comes out of this exercise than that 23.2% of people opposed to whaling buy farmed cod at Sainsbury’s or have viewed the same Eva Longoria clip on Youtube more than once.

Or it might be that statistically compelling connections between anti whaling and anti oil and anti Iraq, are revealed. Or that people who read Alan Moore comics (the image above is from his V for Vendetta) tend to oppose Senator Joe Lieberman and post querulous responses  to Clint Eastwood’s backing of Mitt Romney. It might be that farmed cod eaters are marginally in favour of a Dark Knight Returns scenario for Tony Blair, ousting Joker David Cameron. Again, so what? What can they do? (What can who do?)

 HIV virus buds assembling at walls of human cell In other words the enemy (to use standard game theory language) is within.  For the defending host, this is not as disastrous as it sounds. It is in fact easier to defend against an enemy inside one's territory than one without, for the simple reason that – if measures are taken – they can be seen better. They can be understood. This is precisely what human antibodies do when they tag foreign bodies with protein markers, which are later picked up by phages (the cells in the bloodstream that consume harmful pathogens).


HIV virus buds assembling at walls of human cell

Isn’t knowledge power? Ultimately, the state can resort to outright violence against the people, as it has in Syria. In some cases perhaps the few could win over the many with use of weapons of mass destruction, for example. But this is surely a journey of no return – and must therefore have a similar game dynamics as MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction) nuclear strategy. MAD seems to obtain a sort of stability when it comes to external foes. But Syria reveals the hopelessness of MAD as a strategy when it comes to the “enemy within”. Notice how every single Arab Dictator tried to pin the Spring on external influences.

It’s not a new idea to think of the state as an organism, and organs such as MI5 or NSA as something like parts of an immune system. What is new is the emerging mathematics of game theory, which borrows from observations of biological cells under attack etc. I shan’t pretend to understand the mathematics – that is a seriously specialised language. (Interesting that it requires such a specialised language to express generalised statements.) But one key idea I am able to comprehend is that defensive strategies which resemble castles under siege are no longer viable. Why? The castle walls have long ago been breached.

In other words the enemy (to use standard game theory language) is within.

For the defending host, this is not as disastrous as it sounds. It is in fact easier to defend against an enemy inside one’s territory than one without, for the simple reason that – if measures are taken – they can be seen better. They can be understood. This is precisely what human antibodies do when they tag foreign bodies with protein markers, which are later picked up by phages (the cells in the bloodstream that consume harmful pathogens).

In fact, in the case of the game played between viruses like HIV, bird flu and dengue, the human cell must allow the attackers a certain amount of progress inside the cell, in order to learn about how they got in. Equally then, the attackers try to take advantage of this feigned surrender, perhaps with feigned attack.

Thus the state allows us to have facebook et al because it thereby learns about us en masse and in detail like never before. Indeed, the juxtaposition of dangerous memes from the political or spiritual spheres alongside more innocuous ones like pictures of what you had for dinner provides the defending host (the state) with truly organic information about our goings on.

Equally, it is thanks to cancerous invaders like Julian Assange, or the Anonymous hackers, perhaps even Al Jazeera, that the attackers (you and me) learn something about the defending and surrounding state.

It seems to me that while state and hackers may possess information – that Eva Longoria fans are Seven Seven skeptics or not or whatever the case may be – what to do with that information, thereby converting it into knowledge, hence power, is rather like a breaking wave. It might be that possessing the information about the game changes the game before it can be acted upon. Or it might be that possessing the information is a moot point unusable within the game itself – being therefore purely observational. In either case, it would seem that knowledge is not power. Rather that power is gently osmosing elsewhere. Whether that elsewhere is the hands of some New World Order, God, or intergalactic forces of Ascension would seem to be mostly a matter of nomenclature.

There is much more to say on this – watch this space. Meanwhile take it from me, Eva Longoria fans are deeply skeptical about Seven Seven.

 

Spin and Win

Roll up roll up if you’re not already rolled up and jammed in a tube train/behind a desk/down the pub/in front of the telly/at a sushi bar in Westfields. Priceless double think and irony going for a song. Where to start…how about here:

Screen Shot 2011-11-02 at 20.15.03

'Screen Shot' 2011-11-02 at 20.15.03

Before we delve…

Actually, before we do anything I will enable typographic safety mode: encapsulate anything that might be seen to ‘refer’ to the ‘real’ and therefore litigious world in quotes. Borrowing from the dynamic of simulation, this syntactic tongue in cheek will serve to dissimilate from any ‘statement’ ‘made’ ‘here’ that might be used against ‘author’ or ‘reader’ at some hypothetical point in the future, that point itself being hypothetically subsequent (or at least near) to another point – the point at which ‘you’ ‘decide’ ‘you’ have ‘had enough’. That point has already been algorithmically computed, according to e.g. your average proximity to St Paul’s Cathedral over the last few weeks, your average delay in paying your council tax and a complex function of the content of websites you visit – this one assuredly fattening your stakes of being Guantanamoed by forces outsourced from Serco, Capita, Veolia, First Capital Connect or whichever’s CEO is in favour on the golf course at the moment. I leave off the quotes in that last sentence by way of heroic experiment.

‘That’ said, we can continue.

Before we delve into the ‘substance’ of the ‘fresh nuclear fears’ we make two observations:

  • that ‘war’ with ‘Iran’ is a foregone conclusion, given the presentation of the ‘question’ under More on this story: “Is the US heading for war with Iran?”
  • that the Devil has a sense of humour, which manifests particularly easily through advertisement placing algorithms, here gently nudged in order to place “click here to spin and win…” on this ‘page’ ‘about’ ‘war’ with ‘Iran’.

There were rumblings from Al Bla’ira not so long ago – we can trust them to be ahead of the game at least – but what has ‘happened’ that we are being primed with images of men in trademark War On Terror suits? According the Guardian article:

The Ministry of Defence believes the US may decide to fast-forward plans for targeted missile strikes at some key Iranian facilities. British officials say that if Washington presses ahead it will seek, and receive, UK military help for any mission, despite some deep reservations within the coalition government.

Which ‘implies’ that:

  • the US has been planning ‘this’ for some time.
  • the UK’s exemplary, democratic ‘government‘ is not in agreement over the automatic transmission of US military will to the UK.
  • therefore, any actual ‘democratic action’ will have no effect whatsoever.
and ‘could’ be seen to imply that:
  • there’s plenty of money available for military action against middle eastern countries.

Now clock this textbook doublespeak:

The Guardian has spoken to a number of Whitehall and defence officials over recent weeks…They made clear that Barack Obama has no wish to embark on a new and provocative military venture before next November’s presidential election.

Actually, it’s Triplespeak. The statement begs the question: who are Whitehall officials to be making clear what Barack Obama might or might not want to do?

As ‘I’ wrote in The Special Relationship some months ago, I sort of want to kinda like you know like Barack. Lets indulge this fantasy a bit longer then, and look elsewhere for the ‘source’ of any ‘provocative military venture’. The Guardian article notes that:

Washington has been warned by Israel against leaving any military action until it is too late.

And searching for ‘Iran’ on ‘the BBC website’ produces:

Screen Shot 2011-11-02 at 21.20.41

'Screen Shot' 2011-11-02 at 21.20.41

Ok you got me – a little doublespeak of my own there.

But you get the point. Liking or hating Obama is about as close to the action as liking or hating Jimmy Saville, or worrying about why anyone would want to remake Total Recall. (Surely we can’t have Colin Farrell saying, ‘We’ve got get out of here!’)

‘So’ the fait accomplit of ‘war’ with ‘Iran’ would ‘appear’ to rest on Hilary Clinton’s judgment of the Iranians for

  • trying to ‘assassinate’ the Saudi ambassador to the US
  • blocking their own people’s freedom of access to the internet
The alleged assassination, according to another Guardian article, ‘began’ with this plot-point:
24 May One Iranian, Manssor Arbabsiar, meets in Mexico with a person posing as an associate of a drug trafficking cartel, but who in reality is an informant for the US Drug Enforcement Administration.

So highly spun is Clinton’s assurance that the US is doing ‘everything’ to stop ‘Iranian jamming’ of its own internet that we feel we ought to take it at face value, perhaps even conjecturing that the US wants nothing more than for ordinary Iranians to catch Colin Farrell’s remade ‘We’ve got to get out of here!’

But even a momentary fluctuation in the Whitehouse trance will have you ‘remember’ that:

The Stuxnet computer worm, thought to have been engineered by the Americans and Israelis, sabotaged many of the centrifuges the Iranians were using to enrich uranium.

Only long distance spinners will have the stomach for these last statement-side improvised doublespeak devices: ‘thought’ to have been engineered, but no such doubt in the purpose of the ‘Iranian’ centrifuges.

Medallists might care to ‘observe’ that Israel ‘is’ one of the four nations outside of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty 0f 1970 ‘known’ to ‘possess’ nuclear weapons.

Olympians may pause a moment in their sprint across town to the desk or Westfields or whatever, to wonder exactly how stupid ‘officials’ must think them to be.

Martyrs might have a go at pitching a tent in front of the MI6 building (ever noticed how all the gates say ‘OUT’?)

But only winners, motivated by uncomputable irony, will load up the original Guardian page and see what ‘big prizes’ the ‘spin and win’ ad has in store…

[Answers in the comment box.]

Predator v Alien 3

Screen Shot 2011-10-20 at 22.35.00

Screen Shot 2011-10-20 at 22.35.00

So they popped poor, bloated, fascist-moustachioed, Al Bla’ira gadfly Gaddafi in the end. Of course they did. They couldn’t risk any further unpleasant connections with Western Regimes being exposed in a trial. It/he was well executed too. A Predator drone blasted his convoy as it tried to head for the hills, and then crazed gunmen finished him off. Not unlike the demise of Saddam Hussein, whose penultimate hole in the ground was located by drone. Reactions to both ‘demises’, and ‘that of Osama bin Laden’ (use of quotes follows the current media vogue for distancing reportage from the plasticity of ‘facts’) by the US Secretary of State were broadcast ‘live’.

Am I saying it’s all scripted? Am I asking why now – why didn’t the drone pop Gaddafi before now?

Of course not.