16 August 2009

Everyone knows that the world is in crisis and everyone feels utterly helpless. We have been told that by the democratic system WE govern. The reality is that we live not under a tyranny but under a multi-layered system inaccessible and pre-determined to assure under the slogan of ‘change’ that, as Lampedusa saw, everything remains the same.

From 1945 and the Bretton Woods Diktat a categoric split was imposed between politics and economics, or as it was presented – between elected bi-party representational government of the State and the ‘free’ market of commodities and currencies. The tax-paying citizens were expected to pay for social services. Nothing was expected of the financial class. Their profits were for themselves. This resulted in the political system, living off the taxation of the masses, being in fact politically under the power of the financial class. Power and wealth are synonyms – power and parliament are antonyms. The resultant two languages, one for ‘democracies’ and one for finance, left the whole world plunged into ignorance. When the money system collapsed – people said, “How did you not anticipate collapse?” There was no satisfactory answer, for if politics was helpless to act, so also, finance was incapable of thinking.

Since wealth is itself power and since the political class have been unmasked as that urban scum that lives off the detritus of social anarchy – it is time to examine our current situation, money and discourse, with one vocabulary.

Our first task is to remove the trivial moral slogans that democracy stitched together after the American conquest of Europe in 1945. Still in operation by the US political class in 2000, the bi-polar moral field of absolute evil versus the forces of good employed by the allies in World War Two plunged us into further wars. As expressed by the US President – in his highest intellectual activity – the enemy were “the Baddies”! Re-translated by his in-back power-team the enemy were re-named “the Axis of Evil”.

Since none of the current protagonists in the power struggle are adherents of religion, as atheists, they have no foundation for these moral imperatives. Today, only the stateless billions of Muslims across the world can measure human actions from a Divine perspective. As Dostoevsky pointed out to a shocked Europe – if it denied God’s existence, everything was permitted.

In the perspective of today’s godless capitalism it must be seen that what has been happening from 1900 until today is a world battle for commodity wealth, activated by worthless number-based finance in its desperate struggle to control commodities to cover its primal bankruptcy. Europe in South Africa began it with British, Dutch and Jews grabbing gold and diamonds from primitive tribesmen. The European expansion exploded at its centre in a second European Thirty Years War from 1914 to 1945. Mass murder was the shared practice of all the participants. The only difference that was discernable was your choice of death. Would you rather be gassed in a gas chamber or incinerated in a fire-bomb engulfed city, or frozen to death on a distant archipelago? Does a higher genocide statistic make you ‘more’ evil – isn’t one enough? Auschwitz or Hiroshima?

The political class decreed the mass-murder wars but the financial class necessitated them due to the unavoidable flaw in the capitalist machine – the illogical interest function in the rational market activity.

Once these two self-declared separate entities are identified as one integrated system everything demands to be seen and assessed differently.

The 1914-1945 war saw the end not just of the European monarchic national order but of the sovereign State as a differentiated organism in itself. The United Nations Organisation announced the end of the nations and the beginning of the supra-national units. Its General Assembly in just over a decade was rendered powerless (it had been the super-parliament in ‘political’ terms). The Security Council indicated the new power control of the new Super Groups.

With the masses corralled and rendered without identity the true power module began to show its hand. The masses, undifferentiated and voiceless, had become the amorphous ‘International Community’, a passive media-controlled ‘thing’.

From 1945 to 2000 the power system now in play at the end of 2009 can be observed. It is an oligarchy controlled and run by the Four Hundred. The Four Hundred are those persons (and families) who jointly, across the globe, operate the banking and stock institutions and instruments of exchange.

The Four Hundred immediately pursued the world programme of merger and acquisitions that entailed, firstly, the absorption of the communist groupings outside the system. The key operation of the new hegemony has known only one massive enemy entity. China. The last sixty years has been the almost uninterrupted programme of war on China.

The war began with the invasion of Korea. It bore all the new lineaments of post-national war. It had to be seen as an activity of the ‘free’ nations against totalitarianism.

The Coalition was born. It was from then on to be the Four Hundred’s instrument of war. The political class in the USA from 1937 to 1945 blundered from wrong judgment to disastrous policy, in the end simply letting communism take over through the sheer inadequacy of State Department officials. The polarisation between China and the US was not merely one among many conflicts of the Cold War, it was at core the evidence which showed that all political programmes were from now on economic doctrines.

With the failure of the remarkable General Chiang Kai-Shek the bitter reality had to be accepted – China fell outside the new world order of the Four Hundred. The Generalissimo had been nicknamed in Washington ‘General Cash My Cheque’. In vain they might regret that they had not done as he had asked.

Korea was not only the first major US-China conflict, it was also the first to reveal the new power nexus. From within the old nationalist (USA a political entity) forms still surviving from World War Two, General MacArthur was the military chief who fearlessly read the politics of war in military/political terms. He saw what could not yet be confronted – the new power situation demanded war, all-out war on first the surrogate, Korea, and then the true antagonist, China. Truman ordered him to halt the ‘military’ operation to reach a ‘political’ settlement. MacArthur said that if the US did not see the war to its conclusion then North Korea, itself a limb of China, would come back to challenge the USA. He was right, of course, a nuclear North Korea stands today over the US Asian policy with a threat that keeps the US two moves away from invasion of China. As divided Poland came to delay and lie between Russo-German war, so today does Korea stand as a marker between China and the USA.

The next phase of the war proved a terrible defeat and moral humiliation for the forces – again in Coalition – fighting Viet Nam. This, even more than Korea, revealed that the Viet Cong were a surrogate for China.

The continuation of that conflict into Cambodia indicated just how cynically the Four Hundred were prepared to destabilise a whole nation in the name of the bankers’ ideology. With an enfeebled Britain handing Hong Kong to China on a platter the Four Hundred immediately set up Macao as a capitalist substitute ‘island’ disguised as an island casino. Already they had sliced out of Malaysia the peninsular banking enclave of Singapore. The Four Hundred had based this on the European model of Luxembourg, a tiny principality consisting of a castle, a garage, and banks but with a national status inside Europe, even boasting a veto on all legislation.

When China invaded Tibet the Dalai Lama was retained as titular negotiator as the US had done before with Chiang Kai-Shek. By the point at which the bankers’ oligarchy moved on Afghanistan their whole system was in jeopardy.

The ‘Coalition’, now elegantly designed under the rescue model of NATO, had an even more convincing explanation for its war there. They were hunting for the father of Wahhabi terrorism, in fact already dead for several years, Bin Laden, and at war with the demonised Taliban, in reality the national youth of the country waging a war of independence. The Four Hundred had seen that occupation of Afghanistan was, for their survival, absolutely necessary. Afghanistan was needed as what the Greek historian, Thucydides, called an ‘EPITEICHISMOS’. As he put it, “we can fortify a position in their own territory.” That is, take military possession of a country that BORDERS China. Thucydides comments on this tactic: “War is not something that proceeds on set rules – far from it: for the most part war devises its own solutions to meet any contingency.”

Afghanistan is therefore that land base on their (China’s) territory from which the Four Hundred oligarchy can set up the next perhaps even ultimate conflict.

Anticipating this and preparing Coalition forces for it, a British General said that the present invasion force would have to stay there for forty years.

Is it not therefore a matter of urgency that we should demand of the Defence Ministers and other relevant politicos an answer to this question? Have the Coalition forces been adequately guaranteed the fulfilment of their natural (and un-natural) sexual needs? Are they suggesting NATO forces are the first occupying army in history without a sexual drive – something accentuated by killing?

Are prostitutes to be flown in by the plane-load as Germany did from East Europe for the World Cup? How will the US troops get their legal requirement of youths as they could in America? Will prostitution be run as a state business or privately as capitalism demands? Will the legalised prostitutes pay income tax or a client tax? Will the girls be assured at least trade union status as in Europe?

The Coalition governments can assure the grieving parents that up until their sons’ deaths – everything was done to cater for their needs.

This is a crucial aspect of the war on Afghanistan – as it has been on every protracted war prior to this destruction of a great Muslim people.

What are you going to do – O Muslim Umma? This situation is a product of banking, yes. And ‘Islamic banking’ in particular, for that underwrites our passive acceptance of kufr.

At the moment the two great protagonists ignore us, indeed both parties, Bankers’ Coalition and Chinese Tyranny slaughter us without either concern or remorse.

Yet just as the victorious Spartans’ oligarchy embarked on its long war with Athens, only partly distracted by an emergent Persia, so too today, the two locked powers, while distracted also by Iran, are so engrossed in their programme of world domination that they fail to see that a great world power is ready to emerge. That power is the highest civilisation of mankind, at present broken and exhausted by persecution but more so by the dominance of a false Isma’ili / Shi’a ‘Aqida and the kafir curse of suicide. That power is the great motherland of Divine love, Islam.

The ancient world of Sparta and Athens was soon swept away when Rome emerged with its higher vision of man as legislator and administrator, so too will the decadent force of America, propped up as it is uniquely by its military technology, and the sub-human uneducated masses of atheist China, be swept away by a world community with a higher vision of man. What is that urgently needed higher vision? It is that man has been placed on earth to preserve and protect it. Man, in Islam, is the guardian of the world, its lands, its waters, its air, and all its living creatures. Islam’s return will be the ecological rescue of a dying planet.

Allah, the Exalted declares in Surat al-An’am (6:167):

It is He who appointed you khalifs on the earth.

And in Surat al-‘Araf (7:136):

And We bequeathed to the people who had been oppressed
the easternmost part of the land We had blessed,
and its westernmost part as well.

Rescue from Allah from mankind and the Earth itself will come from Samarkand, Balkh, Kashi, Lahore, Kazan, Ajmer, Granada and Sarajevo.

  *   *   *    *    *

“Once these two self-declared separate entities are identified as one integrated system everything demands to be seen and assessed differently.”