Monthly Archives: January 2013

The Fourth Reich (Censored on youtube)


from 6 months ago

This video was censored on youtube it is blocked worldwide with over 68,000 views. I have uploaded this to show what I uploaded late December 2010. I have done more research since then and connected more dots. Check out my website

Could the emerging world government be nothing more than a step towards space militarization and star wars? The 3rd Reich might have been defeated, except the same ideology continues to Thrive to this day. There is much that has been hidden and suppressed. History is written by the victors of war. Wernher von Braun was one of many nazi scientists, through project paperclip, who became an american citizen. Patterns from history are re-emerging. Will the Fourth Reich be the first Galactic Empire in history?

Operation Paperclip was a massive undertaking of the American government, which had prepared a plan to sweep into Germany to find and bring all Nazi scientists, occult researchers, including medical doctors involved in gene research, mind control etc. to the United States. Thousands of Nazi war criminals were selected and secretly moved to the United States, where they were integrated into the Military Industrial Complex. Similiar operations took place, like the Vatican Rat Lines.

During the dark ages, the Catholic Church not only hoarded the wealth they collected from the poor, but they hoarded knowledge. They kept the masses ignorant & in the dark by denying them a basic education. The Vatican Umbrella corporation function under many different Catholic Orders so that no one can estimate their true worth, or piece together all the organized crime schemes they have implemented worldwide.

The colossal wealth of the Vatican includes enormous investments with the Rothschild’s in Britain, France, and the USA, and with giant oil and weapons corporations like Shell and General Electric. The Vatican solid gold bullion worth billions, is stored with the Rothschild controlled Bank of England and the US Federal Reserve Bank.

The Catholic Church is the biggest financial power, wealth accumulator, and property owner in existence. Possessing more material wealth than any bank, corporation, giant trust, or government anywhere on the globe. The Pope, who is the visible ruler of this colossal global wealth is one of the richest men on Earth. While a large amount of the world is under fed or starving to death, the Vatican hordes the world’s wealth, profits from it on the stock market, and at the same time preaches about giving.

How did the Vatican accumulate all that wealth over the millennium? One method was to put a price-tag on sin. Many bishops & popes actively marketed gilt, sin & fear for profit, by selling indulgences. Worshippers were encouraged to pre-pay for sins they hadn’t yet committed & get pardoned ahead of time. Those who didn’t pay-up risked eternal damnation. Another method was to get wealthy land owners to hand-over their land/fortune to the church on their death bed, in exchange for a blessing which would supposedly enable them to go to heaven.

Pope Leo the fifth rebuilt St Peter’s Basilica, by selling tickets out of hell & tickets to heaven.

Roughly 8,500 pages of long-secret Catholic records about child-molesting California clerics and the church supervisors and colleagues who ignored, minimized, concealed and enabled their crimes, as required by a 2006 settlement. To see the documents, go to:

Some of the nazi UFO shaped craft were advanced jet aircraft, then after the war in Canada the Avro Car was made. they utilized the vortex.

My older The Fourth Reich is blocked in Germany

The link to the censored The Fourth Reich video:


Why the plundering of Greece was staged

A chronicle in three interconnected components: INTRODUCTION, REASONS and EPILOGUE – About the planned looting of Greece, as a ‘necessity’ for the dismantlement of European democracy, justice and freedom. (translated from the original article in Swedish)






579109_228685723929053_115011835_nBehind the decision to plunder Greece, there are several reasons (as always, when great powers decides to attack a country). There is never just one reason, when great powers are marching,… nor is it so in the case of Greece.

For the Globo (the global currency) to be introduced and well received, economic “suicide-bombers”, the credit financial system that is, have triggered its most explosive components. An unavoidable economic crisis must be used to elicit acceptance of the currency, and then the launchpad must be prepared from an already manipulated and controlled so-called ‘free and democratic nation’ of Europe. It is from this nation, that the old Europe, the old “civilization tools”, democracy, justice, human rights and the old ideals of liberty, equality and solidarity are about to be buried.

Some of the obvious “operations” behind the plundering, are just ‘unfortunate’ collisions of interests between the great powers (for the petrodollar systems’ preservation), and other “operations” are carefully planned “cultural attacks” and economic, social and political reforms, in order to weaken the folk-spirit, the social “glue” and the unity of a people. Simply put; very well-planned they have sought to weaken peoples ability to resist against the coming plundering. In Greece’s case it is about a plundering, that the European elite had in mind and have prepared for, since the mid 70’s.

Regardless if I, through my articles on the Greek crisis may seem tedious, in the recurring, short, historical flashbacks, I will continue to highlight the modern Greek history and the superpowers interference in Greece’s development, until it is as well-known as the Holocaust (because it has cost Greece millions of lives and enormous suffering, every 30 years, over the past 182 years). When someone denies the Holocaust, he/she is considered as stupid, an anti-semit and as a nazi-sympathizer,… fairly justified I would say, but when someone wants to downplay and ignore the great powers “rape” of Greece, he/she is a visionary, constructive and “do not want to dig into the past”. This is obvious today, because it is clear that everyone else seems to prefer to forget about the repeated abuse of Greece by the European powers,… At least,.. they wish to put that fact aside and they prefer to see this issue as over with. How can one see it as over with, when the oligarchy-tendencies, the corruption in Greece and the escalating debt are all based on this particular history? How can this ever be over with, when Greece today loses 3-8 future generations, its independence and its sovereignty due to unspecified debts, created by these great powers in cooperation with unusually obedient, Greek governments and shameless businessmen, over the last 4-5 decades?

The perpetrator of course always want to see his crimes as over with, with time, but the victim who still suffers the consequences want vindication first, and he/she wants to see justice prevail before he/she can put this aside and heal his/her wounds. The more the Europeans want to “put a lid on” this story, the more myself and some other Greeks, will run the facts down the throats of the Europeans, until they MUST take this history into account and the decisive involvement of the superpowers, which clearly have “paved the way” for Greece’s current situation …

Established, Swedish, journalists from the “approved” media, will of course NOT participate in this ‘information campaign’ and especially NOT those with a Greek background. Sadly enough, I am convinced about this fact, after three years of silence or sporadic, lifestyle journalism on this topic from them. “They have their job to think about”, I suppose! So far, their articles and reports in the Swedish media, have been “pale” and styled with a deliberate down silencing of the Greek people’s actual arguments, actions and resistance. Regardless of whether both Mikis Theodorakis ‘SPITHA and Dimiris Kazakis’ EPAM are two resistance movements, that have been judicially and politically active since the summer of 2010, and  today have thousands of active members all over Greece, none of the Greek-Swedish journalists have ever mentioned a word about these movements in their reports. This is of course hardly because of ignorance or lack of information, but rather because they find themselves media-gagged but still continues to call themselves journalists.

Historical review:

The Greek nations’ dependency on the great powers (Prussia, Russia, Britain, France, USA and Germany) since 1824, has been disastrous, as the cooperation with these powers rarely brought any real benefit for Greece, but rather the opposite. The Balkan wars, two world wars, a genocide, a civil war, two dictatorships and a long term illegitimate involvement in Greek politics and affairs, is what the superpowers involvement in Greece has meant for the Greeks, over the last 182 years. Since the liberation war against the Ottomans in 1821, the European powers lied and broke promises on a regular basis, while forcing the country into extreme excessive debt, in relation to the sums actually needed (sometimes up to 50 times larger loans than what was applied for). The country has gone bankrupt twice before since 1821, and now in 2012, it was the third time in modern Greek history (because Greece IS in fact bankrupt since a year back, regardless whether European banks and profiteers, first wants to loot the country and its resources, with the so-called “controlled” bankruptcy, they are mumbling about in the European media). These bankruptcies were thoroughly “nourished” and brought about, by one or more of these great powers and many of the loans, that had been written off through the bankruptcies, reappears in the current “debt”. Why?

After the bloody wars that the great powers involved Greece in, the interests of Greece and the Greek people where always put aside, when the time came to sign the peace agreements. One of many examples is about how they where forced to take large loans to BUY back their own railways, that where reconquered during the bloody wars. These great powers blackmailed the Greeks constantly, by delaying the recognition of the country’s borders. This has been a consistent strategy of the great powers, which incidentally, for over a century and a half, has deliberately prevented the country’s actual development. After the War of Independence against the Ottomans, it was always the great powers’ unwillingness to give full recognition of Greece’s geographical borders, its independence and its sovereignty, that ‘blackmailed’ Greek political rule and business, and conducted the country’s’ economic direction. The full recognition weren’t fully given until 1974 (requested from 1824?), but by then the country was once again ‘drowned’ in foreign debt, so any independence or sovereignty, could  of course not be used for Greece’s best then either. Thus the country has NOT  really been free to manage its own affairs since 1453, when the Ottomans began the nearly 660 years long line, of foreign rule of Greece. After the Ottomans (1824), the above mentioned European powers, took control of Greece, one after the other. First, by placing King Otto, a Bavarian king, on the Greek throne, after the Greek freedom fighters had got rid of a 400-year long Ottoman rule. This was enforced, despite the fact that the freedom fighters and the Greek people, very clearly, showed that it was the country’s freedom and a genuine, Greek democracy, they had fought for and not for a European style monarchy.

This obligatory background knowledge, is needed in order to understand that the current Greek crisis, which in its actual root is cultural, not economic,… in fact is a smelly and highly toxic legacy, from the European powers. More about Greek, modern history, on the following link: Modern Greece: A History since 1821

APTOPIX Greece Financial Crisis.JPEG-0e857


In Greece’s case, the plundering goes on today, due to a combination of the following real causes and reasons:

1) Strategic, geographical position which has attracted imperialists to conquer or to control Greece, throughout history.

Eastern_Med_MapGreece, is the only nation in the world with borders to three continents and which, throughout thousands of years, have influenced them and have been influenced by them, has traded with all three continents, and served as a cultural and philosophical-scientific “key” between them – The geo-political plans of the great powers, for the the Middle East, the Balkans and the Eastern Mediterranean, turn Greece into a country which the great powers have been, and still are, extremely interested in controlling. Ex: The military junta in Greece, took power 21 April 1967 – 6 weeks later, June 5, 1967, the six-day war between Israel – Egypt, Syria and Jordan, began – U.S. needed to establish and secure American military bases in Greece, to support the Israeli forces, and this was also the important role of the military junta, for the United States. Something that would have been impossible under a real democratic, Greek parliament (the situation today is not so much different from the one in 1967, given that Israel and USA are rampaging Syria today with Iran as their target)… Once the junta finally was overthrown, it was important to the CIA that a right politician, Konstantinos Karamanlis, became the only alternative, after the dictatorship of the general’s. This, because Anwar Sadat’s success in the “October War” 1973, against Israel, worried the Americans. 1981, when finally a left government was ‘allowed’ to win the election in Greece, it was well timed enough, shortly after Sadat and Reagan shook hands, outside the White House. A few months later, Sadat was assassinated and Rockefeller-socialism emerged as the left-government in Greece (Andreas Papandrepou, leader of PASOK took a “loan” from David Rockefellers’, Chase Manhattan Bank, of 100 million dollars to start the Greek Socialist Party [Papandreous contract]).

Several, extremely crucial and well-timed, political events, where ‘orchestrated’ in Greece, really with only the great powers’ plans for the region in mind (the Balkans, the Middle East, Eastern Mediterranean). As long as the Middle East is a powder keg, the great powers want to have Greece as one of its arms depots, the Greek government as one of their obedient governments and its ‘rebellious’ people, on its knees.

A month ago, the Greek Army and the Israeli Army, officially announced their close cooperation, despite the fact that over 80% of the Greek people are against Israel’s foreign policy and their illegal occupation of the West Bank and Gaza. They are for Palestinian rights, and they believe that the Israeli military forces are committing a war crime, against the Palestinian people.

2) Greece’s corrupt oligarchs and the great powers involvement, in the affairs of the Greek society

kissinger_players_ap-708730aThe widespread racist doctrine, that suggests that southern Europeans are more dishonest than northern Europeans, is based on a carefully well marketed ‘smokescreen’ that they have lowered in front of the European’s eyes. This, in order to hide the great power’s and the big finances’ illegal and immoral interference in other countries’ affairs, throughout the whole postwar period.

In Greece it is in reality, apart from an excessive, unwarranted interference by the great powers in the Greek society  and for far too long (1821), about a very carefully planned NSA/CIA operation, which began in 1974. That operation, deliberately “paved the way”, for a social climate in Greece in which politicians, businessmen, media moguls and judges, acted as “dealers” and intermediaries to foreign interests. After the, by Henry Kissinger expressed, planned and implemented, NSA/CIA attack on the Greek society in 1974, it stands clear that very different ‘interests’ than the Greek, have been taking turns to spread corruption, division and injustice in the Greek society, during the past 40 years.

The hawks in Washington DC, crafted plans for the “disobedient” Greeks, after the fall of the junta (which was Washington-supported, but meant to last longer than just 7 years). Henry Kissinger, former American Secretary of State and one of the 10 most powerful men in the world today, expressed himself in the U.S. Congress in September 1974, with the following words:

“The Greek people is anarchic and difficult to control. Therefore, we must strike deep into their cultural roots, maybe then we can  force them to conform.

I mean, of course, to strike at their language, their religion, their cultural and historical reserves, so that we can neutralize their ability to develop and to distinguish themselves, and their ability to fight and win – and thereby remove them as an obstacle to our vital strategic plans in the Balkans, the Mediterranean and the Middle East. “

1aaUnfortunately, they have managed to get far with these plans, to this date. The Greeks have, since the mid 70’s, been ‘bombarded’ with “modern” reforms and “legislative changes” (in order to be ‘europeanized’, it was called), which strongly weakened exactly the culture, the language, the identity and the Greek people’s unique strengths and ability to rise up against tyranny. In Greece now many clearly see the disastrous consequences of the economic and political circus, that with many western governments help and protection, freely have ravaged the country since 1974. Everyone in Greece has seen it and experienced it, and the vast majority KNOW very well through which ‘foreign interests’, the Greek oligarchs maintain their private empires.

Oddly enough, none of the Greek media bothered to seriously match Mr Kissinger’s speech, with the reforms and social and economic changes over the last four decades (not here either, in my blog, among the ‘informed’, has anyone reacted in any considerable relevant way, when I several times over the past two years published Kissinger’s statement).. Its is  unnecessary now, because we have reached a point where the tragic facts speak for themselves. American, former “economic hit men” and former CIA agents have declared that Greece has been subjected to a long lasting (about four decades), cultural and economic “terrorist attack” and economic top analysts concluded that the Greek crisis is orchestrated by George Soros and Wall Street together with a couple of big European banks. We see and hear the fake final aria in Kissinger’s Greek version of the Swan Lake, in other words.

3) Greek natural resources that major powers and neighboring countries ‘desire’

τα κοιτασματα υδρογοναθρακων στην ΕΛΛΑΔΑ 01The huge natural resources, which “did not exist” and therefore were not exploited, as long as Greece could decide about them themselves (something that the “memorandum packages” now prevents). Everyone, are raising their eyebrows, when the timing of the discovery of the resources and the  Greek government’s signing of the “support-package-agreement with the EU/ECB/IMF, is so clearly disastrous for the Greeks, but so incredibly ideal for those who want to plunder Greece. The, by Washington DC and London, radar-guided, obedient Greek governments, has not established the Greek EEZ, which means that then ‘one can not exploit ones own natural resources’. This has hardly been done for the best of the Greeks. This favors, beyond the great powers, in fact, Greece’s’ neighbor countries, especially Turkey, which is of great interest to the EU. Much has probably been promised to Ankara, that Greek people do not know about, but are now beginning to understand.

Below: an extracted and translated part of my Swedish article that fully cover this issue, “Om de Grekiska naturtillgångarna och det Europeiska spelet bakom dem

“… Another question that has puzzled us Greeks for years is why Greece, which has the second largest EEZ the Mediterranean Sea (Exclusive Economic Zone), has NOT officially established it, as the single country out of 142 countries in the world? What are they waiting for? Who benefits from Greece NOT establishing its EEZ? An officially established EEZ is namely essential, if one want to exploit one’s own natural resources. What lies behind the Greek governments’ clear desire to postpone this issue for decades? Georgios Kasimatis, Constitutional professor – Mikis Theodorakis (SPITHA / KAP) – Manolis Glezos (SYRIZA and SPITHA) and economist Dimitris Kazakis (EPAM) has a very clear and well-founded answer to this question…The answer is: We have had governments in Greece since long back that look after foreign intersets instead of the Greek interests. Their knowledge on the subject primarily, but also statements by politicians from the three neighboring countries, shows a clear tendency towards “scrambles” with the EU about Greek natural resources and land… This is why all of Europe is silent about the crystal clear democratic and constitutional violations against Greece and therefore they were silent, when Goldman Sachs “helped” the Greek finance Ministry to fix numbers, for entry into the Euro Union. Everyone is waiting like hyenas to rip the carcass apart as soon as they get an OK from the “hunter”. Likewise they speak very quiet about the $ 200 billion that has been smuggled INTO Greece and washed white, in the last almost three years, while the Euro Group have had full insight into Greek affairs.”

The EEZ issue is the most important in terms of Greece’s possibilities to exploit its own natural resources and thus, lift itself out of the current disaster. The globalists don’t want that to happen at all!

4) Greek folk culture, a breeding ground for freedom struggles and liberation wars against tyranny

greek-revolution-1821-n1-greece-greece+1152_13307747709-tpfil02aw-2343Greece has a very long history and a rooted folk culture, where the individual freedom, the states freedom and social and political justice, played a very big role. It’s about the folk culture which through its history and its literature, has given birth to streams of liberation movements worldwide and recurrent in history people has through them, strongly opposed and fought against despotism and tyranny. With the current, apparent EU plans in mind, one can, however, understand that they do not want the Greeks to have access to their cultural “spears,” their spiritual “swords” and their moral “shields”, that has been proved to be extremely strong and difficult phenomenons to defeat previously. Therefore, it was also these very phenomenon’s that Kissinger “targeted” in the Greek society.

Declaration_of_the_Rights_of_Man_and_of_the_Citizen_in_1789The French revolution was based on the resurgence of the classic Greek values and because of the Ottoman occupation of Greece, the intellectual exile-Greeks in Paris had resurrected ancient ideas, thoughts and virtues in the French poets, writers and philosophers of the 18th century, so that the  basic ideas of the revolution took form with ancient Greece as footrest – The fact is that, even its own revolution, the Greek Independence War of 1821, would have been impossible, unless the classical Greek thinking and arts had had free “ventilation-spacein Paris for several decades, but also in Odessa and Vienna and already had fertilized the great European revolution. Rigas Fereos poetry inspirited the French revolution. The very serious distinction between these two revolutions though is that the French Revolution was executed by French people against the French aristocracy, but the Greek revolution was about a relatively small group of freedom-fighters starting a revolution against one of the greatest empires on the planet in those days. An empire that all of Europe feared.

We are still waiting for the “thanks” from Europe who for centuries couldn’t manage what a band of Greek freedom fighters with massive public support managed.

THIS folk culture, THOSE traditions and THAT literature, does not suit the globalists plans at all today, so they prefer that this culture is weakened, its teachings distorted and that it is under their control.

5) Demands for vengeance by the conservative and nationalistic part of the German electorate.

photo013The nationalistic part of the German folk-spirit wants “revenge” for the costly “tripping”, Greece caused the Nazis in World War 2, which did cost the Nazis the whole war. Scheuble, confessed openly in the German media, that their “voters demanded punishment of the Greeks.” Through the follow-up questions it became clear that it was not about punishment only for Greek economic carelessness, but mainly for their tendency to “insolence” and “disobedience” (see in paragraph 2. how Kissinger put it).

The mob-rhetoric and the smearing of Greeks in general by the German government and media (with its satellite governments and media in the north as an assent crow-choir), has not to do with facts or real economic reasons, but it is mainly an expression of a wounded folk-spirit of the conservative part of the Germans. That is what Scheuble’s and Merkel’s voters have stated with their obvious desires. They thought so much of their soldiers, when all of Europe crouched and trembled at the sight of Vermacht, that they couldn’t or can’t  swallow the fact that an army, where only every other soldier had been given an old weapon from World War 1 and barely uniforms to all, could fight for 7 full months against their dreaded troops and offer such an effective resistance throughout the rest of the war  (cf: second longest resistance was Norway’s with 61 days)

german-troops-creteFrom the CDU’s voters, there are apparently many who have relatives buried in Greece, especially in Crete, since the war. Tens of thousands of German soldiers were buried in Greece and the phenomenon, German cemeteries in Greece, cost the nationalist majority of the Germans much more than what the European ‘historical description’ today want to admit.

Regardless of how odd it may sound, for people without the emotional experiences of the actual, psychological and social after effects of war, in Greece we KNOW, after long and close association with German people in general, both in Germany (500,000 Greeks are living there, most of them since the 60’s) but also in our tourist destinations, that the wounds inflicted to the Nazis by the Greeks and that caused the loss of the war, are not yet healed in many of the conservative and nationalistic German hearts.

6a) An anti-Hellenic lobby has been needed in order to prepare the way and promote the dogma of  Rothschild-Zionism


Before the global elite can launch a long desired global paradigm shift, an induced shift of the main and basic human values and norms, the old foundations, must first be accused, slandered and falsified and facts must be distorted. Various other cultures have had to endure this throughout history (North-South American Indians, Celts, Persians, Arabs, Africans, Polynesians and others). However now it’s not about the destruction of a culture but the destruction of the whole of the Hellenic foundations of the western civilization. The globalists, who themselves claim that they are *Zionists and this regardless of whether they are Jewish or not, now aim to replace the basic human values that is the base of western societies, by a very aggressive propaganda opposing the old values, freedom, justice, humanityHellenism is the cradle of the values ancient Phariséeism or RothschildZionism detest.

Hellenism = Hellenistic (also called classical) schooling, education and upbringing, ie classical Greek literature-philosophy-science-arts-music-theater-athletics-pancration (martial arts), taught properly in balance and in an adequate symbiosis with each other,.. plus a moral approach towards the human and humanity, has proved to offer the most essential safeguards against tyranny, despotism, monarchy and oligarchy – Hellenism, as a broader term, originates from the word ellinismos (describes the genetic, geographic, cultural and spiritual roots of the Hellenes/Greeks) and is NOT limited to only the classical period of ancient Greece and later Rome, as Wikipedia and many other encyclopedias suggest. The word describes the ENTIRE history of the Hellenes (the Ionian and the Doric tribes). Hellenism has throughout the recorded history been *Zionisms and its predecessors, the Pharisees, enemy No. 1. This of course, because it represents a direct threat to what later became the *Zionist worldview, the Zionist dogma.Hellenism highlights the importance of human freedom, it develops free thinking and offer the spiritual and intellectual tools, so that each individual can be able to develop  independent, free, critical thinking. *Zionism, in which the individual and free critical thinking is seen as a weakness for the collective and in which the individual is seen as merely a cog in a larger machinery, considered the Hellenic thoughts about the free human as nonsense and even as dangerous for the community. This ‘attitude’ towards Hellenic teachings is also what is diligently spread in the schools and in the common encyclopedias today.

This is why today the concept of freedom is distorted and changed into freedom without responsibilities (capitalism, neo-liberalism)or even into, too much freedom is dangerous for the human societies (conservatism, totalitarianism, autocracy).

“when truth has been peeled out of history, all that is left of it, is a worthless story”


Since about 70 years now an anti-Hellenic lobby has deliberately been spreading false teachings and pseudo-arguments among secondary school’s, college’s and universities, with the aim to undermine the classic, Hellenistic education. Anyone who is a bit familiar with the recorded facts in the history of mankind notice this without difficulties, primarily through the major encyclopedias obvious omission and distortion of important knowledge and facts about the legacy of the Greeks. On closer examination you can very easy discover a deliberate manipulation of facts behind the history of the Hellenes, their discoveries, their knowledge, their origin and their language.

Pure cultural persecution has been conducted against Hellenism from a Rothschild-Zionist lobby among academics, with the aim to undermine the possibilities for students to discover the genuine European heritage and the real western spiritual origin and instead replace it with a Rothschild-Zionist worldview. 

Tens of thousands of worried academics worldwide, has been sounding the alarm about this over decades. A large number of professors from all over the world argue that there is a deliberate anti-Hellenic lobby within the academic world, that want to remove Greek education in general from the curriculum in the major universities. A climate thrives in these where Hellenism is considered to be “overrated” and as being based on an up-picking of achievements of neighboring cultures. All such claims can of course be rebutted quite thoroughly and without any difficulties at all, not least by the neighboring cultures own literature, but the damage is still done because the vast majority of the students never make an effort to search for the real facts on these issues.They tend to stick to the common approach to this heritage. An approach to knowledge which by itself actually proves the increasing dissociation from the Hellenic approach to knowledge  It seem fairly unnecessary to most people to question the established encyclopedias, popular science magazines and some of the top universities ways to convey the valuable heritage of the Greeks. It is to most even less likely that, in our “enlightened” time, someone would deliberately distort the truths about our existence, our origins and our true history.

Brave professors, lecturers and academics as Mary Lefkowitz, Victor Hansen and Bruce S Thornton among many others have alarmed about this. Since it exists so much written in Greek, which through the ancient original texts, proves that the ‘anti-Hellenic lobby’ is spreading sheer lies about Greek culture, the Latin replaced classical Greek a few decades ago as the language of literature, philosophy and science. Most major encyclopedias today therefore ignore the actual, original texts (relatively undetected) and refers only to them through – far too often – very shallow interpretations and pure guesses by translators who have tried to comprehend the thinking of the ancient Greeks. They could have let the Classic Greek remain and even teach it more in its talking form, so that every student himself/herself could read the original texts and interpret them himself/herself. After all more than 85% of the books and scrolls in the infamous Library of Alexandria was in Greek. Why must the saved remains of these books content be explained to the world today by a bunch of interpreters?

6b) Short idea-historic retrospective on Zionism and Hellenism:

The Hebreo-Chaldean tribes:

praised the ‘importance of the collective’ and built their world view and their view on the human and humanity largely on religion, mythology, the natural conditions, ‘necessities’ for the survival of the tribes and pure superstition. ‘Science’, Philosophy and Religion in these cultures had to comply with eachother and theauthority, the ‘king’, the ‘emperor’, the ‘demigod’, the ‘prophet’, who was considered to have direct contact with “God” and could therefore NOT be criticized openly. He was infallible and his word could not be questioned. Any ‘weakness’ of their authority was supposed to cause chaos and anarchy in a society. They were “theocentric”, ie with a god and a priesthood (Sanhedrin) in the center of their societies. They felt in these tribes that they needed and that they wanted a ‘shepherd’, THEIR ‘shepherd’. From around 1 500 BC the elite of the Sanhedrin, ie the highest Jewish council of the synagogue of ancient times and today’s Rothschild-Zionism (not necessarily Jewish), has always seen Hellenism as its archenemyThis, because automatically, through its main characteristics, its literature and its ancient mystery traditions, Hellenism forms a constant threat to the Rothschild-Zionism’s worldview and its fundamental views on the human and humanity. Precursors of Rothschild-Zionism is actually NOT the whole of Sanhedrin but only a specific group within the ancient Sanhedrin, the highest Jewish council in the synagogue, namely the Pharisées. If you look deeper in their key political, religious, Jewish currents as a common denominator, then the Rothschild-Zionists today are the heirs of the Pharisees.Phariséism was a Jewish, religious, political party who interpreted the Torah and the law of Moses literally, but also rigidly (it was dictated instead of inspired) so the actual ethos and the spiritof the law became rigid and stiff and thus an extremely favorable tool for elitism, racism and tyranny. Today’s fundamentalism, extremism and racism in any religion or ideology is based on this kind of a rigid ethos.

The Ionian and Doric tribes:

ie the Hellenes (Greeks), praised the individuals importance and placed the human being in the center of their concern and they built their worldview and their view on Humanity on critical observations, science and knowledge of the human role in nature and in universe. They were “anthropocentric”, with the human being in the center and they looked at the world and mankind from an investigative perspective based on their own observations and studies. They did not live particularly different from their neighbors, but THE WAY THEY LOOKED UPON HOW THEY LIVED constituted their uniqueness in comparison with ALL other cultures in the ancient world. They examined everything from a critical perspective and this critical, investigative approach they also turned towards their own functions, behavior, institutions, ideas and thinking. Where most other cultures saw more or less similar patterns the Greeks, through their perspective, distinguished details, differences and exceptions. They could place their focus of observation beyond nature, humans and even the gods and examine everything from a rational, investigative, scientific perspective. The Greeks had the ability to see life steadily and see it whole, rather than remain enslaved by custom, tradition, superstition, nature or by the brute force of the political and clerical elite. It sought to free itself from the ‘shackles’, the kind of existence that often dictate people’s lives through dogma, creeds, traditions, customs and practices, and therefore breed non-examined, ingrained, ‘mechanical’ behavior patterns and routines. The Hellenes wanted to be fully ‘conscious’ in their perception and their behavior. To them it was therefore essential that Science, Philosophy and Religion were decoupled from each other, in order for free thinking to develop at all. This was something that was unthinkable in ALL the other cultures as this view was seen as dangerous and as a threat to the order,the monarchy and the clerical elite.

The biggest achievement, with this approach to life was the birth of the organized, critical thinking and thus the concept of freedom. Something that before the Greeks, existed only for kings and emperors with their courts. From this critical thinking, an organized idea that all human beings are born free and independent and therefore has the right to form and decide about their lives, was born,.. so therefore for instance slavery was seriously criticized and later abolished in ancient Athens around 300 BC (about 2000 years before anyone else). They showed by their celebration of the development of human qualities, that they did not want to be dependent on any ‘shepherd’, but that they themselves were capable of becoming the best ‘shepherds’ for their own lives, as long as they learned to understand microcosmosand macrocosmos and the natural principles that govern nature and universe.

The Hebrews were looking for “God” outside themselves and the Hellenes were looking for “God” in themselves…

It is really this ancient schism between two contradicting idea-worlds and spiritual traditions,… this “schizophrenia” between Hellenism and Phariséeism, today’s Rothschild-Zionism, that the ruling classes have tried to crowd into ONE in the ‘modern Western civilization’. This paradox and this fundamental clash of ideas, is what really reflects the whole Western society in all its institutions, its culture its societies, its social character and its basic views on humans and Humanity.

  • We believe that we base our societies and ‘democratic’ states on noble values, but everywhere we structurally violate these values on a daily basis for the sake of financial profit, power and self-pleasure.
  • We believe that we are freer than others, but we captivate ourselves more than any other culture by the shackles of materialism and the devotion of only the physical, the flesh..
  • We say that we defend freedom and human rights, but its obvious that the western Governments and institutions doesn’t count in all of humanity in the same standards.

We claim Hellenism in our spoken words and our writings but we are devoted to Rothschild-Zionism in our thoughts, behavior and our practiced values, our institutions and our administrations. In our so called ‘democratic institutions’, a tremendous dehumanization of others is an accepted ingredient in our relations to others. In fact every bizarre paradox that we discover in the western societies can be traced back to this particular cultural and spiritual “schizophrenia” between Hellenism and Phariséeism or Rothschild-Zionism.

Today Rothschild-Zionism is striving to bury Hellenism and go back to pre-Hellenic idea-worlds where:

  • the kings (today’s: royalties, financial elite, corporate leaders and bankers)
  • the emperors (today’s: leaders of superpowers and international nations-unions, international organizations, cartel’s and alliances)
  • the priests (today’s: pseudo-science, media, entertainment and show business)
  • the demigods (today’s: ruling elite and their celebrities and norm”gurus”)

are again telling humans and humanity what’s best for us.

We are again deceived to believe that we are unable to deal with our lives without the elite’s directions and laws. For that paradigm-shift to be fully implemented the pure and original Hellenic ingredients in human thinking has to first be ridiculed, humiliated and forgotten by humanity. Exactly what has been going on in most human institutions since world-war II.

These six points, of course, in a mobile relation to eachother and in time, is the basis for the plundering of Greece today. Therefore,  the ways to the real solutions cannot be described with clichés, in the form of new economic models or political power shifts in a system that has been hijacked by the bankers since a very long time. One have to take all these six points under serious consideration if one claims that one intends to suggest solutions for the problems. Those who seek simple solutions, shoot with blanks.



Every people has the government it deserves, it is said.

But some people who happen to live in “key countries” in the past six decades, has mainly the governments that MI6, the CIA and Mossad prefers. The term “key countries” here, describe only some countries value and importance from the perspective of the great powers and nothing else.

Since these intelligence organizations do not use any particularly democratic methods, one can also add methods as psycho-social manipulation, false flag operations, media propaganda, political lies, political assassinations, torture, sanctions, wars and threats as frequently used tools, which very strongly dictates many countries’ political direction. For Greece the six reasons above applies for the great powers interference in Greece’s affairs, since the War of Independence against the Ottomans in 1821. These facts MUST be seriously considered if one intends to really understand what is happening now in Greece and why.

When its clear that CIA, MI6 and Mossad, through the “The Arab Spring”, with both conscious and unconscious support groups for nearly three years worked very hard to eliminate the West-critical movements in North Africa and the Middle East,… my analysis regarding the planning of the looting of Greece  should not surprise (“the Arab spring” is a working name of CIA’s infiltration and military support to the Western-loyal militias and mercenaries in the region). Such “operations” has many times before left countries in Latin America, Asia and Africa in ruins, they have substantially increased the flow of refugees in the world and they have filled the countries cities with graveyards where civilians and children, killed in millions, are buried… When the two first intelligence services during the 50’s – and 60’s primarily spent their time to make sure that Latin America were “held on the mat”, the anti-socialist “mat” ie, they exported the “model” for takeovers of sovereign nations, and thereby they started the general rehearsals for the globalization project.

The three general rehearsals for CIA’s and MI6’s (until Mossad would grow out of its diapers) “overthrow-them-we-don’t-like-and-take-over-their-resources-opera” was Iran in 1953, Greece in 1967 and Indonesia 1968. Pinochetts Chile in 1973, the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989 and the fall of the Soviet Union in 1993 laid the foundation for the neo-liberal, aggressive capitalist model (Milton Friedman model that all globalists celebrates although it has been proved to never work without dictatorial methods) which is now presented as the only solution to ALL our problems. (see this documentary on the subject neo-liberalism and anti-democratization: Catastroika – privatization goes public)

“The carpet was laid out” for the superpowers complete re-entry into Greek business in 1967, when the country was put in “quarantine” by the dictatorship. Then democracy was ground down by the CIA’s military junta in Greece and then, the fear for the horror and the violence of the civil war, spread again  in the Greek society.

What the CIA agent Kermit Roosevelt’s overthrow of the democratically elected socialist leader, Mohammad Mossadegh, resulted in, in Iran, is well known to those who have a basic knowledge about the world political events after the war, but what the Washington-backed military junta in Greece actually “paved the way” for, is not at all as well known, because everyone wanted to see Greece as a restored European, democratic country, after the the fall of the junta. They wanted to give the impression that the Greek society left its dark period behind it and that it could now begin the reconstruction. Whose reconstruction, there is no need to ask ourselves in retrospect? This regardless of whether it took two political-murders, Gregoris Lambrakis, May 27, 1963 and Alekos Panagoulis May 1, 1976, carried out by the Greek intelligence, the royalist, right-wing candidate, Konstantinos Karamanlis, could be presented as the only capable candidate. Andreas Papandreou ”was prepared” subsequently as the left movements hope very quickly, because they knew that the Left, which of course was those who had opposed the junta, also had the majority of the Greek people with them and would therefore not settle for a right-wing leader for too long. Karamanlis, as an already known politician would just be a necessary solution from dictatorship to “democracy”, the world leaders assured  the Greeks. Thus after the fall of the right-junta a right-politician was placed as leader of the country, regardless whether the fight against the junta and the students’ revolt had been a pure left-democratic popular struggle. The natural leader of Greece after the junta, of course, would otherwise have come from the democratic resistance struggle’s ranks. Unfortunately, this development was strangled by political assassinations and the surgical procedure by the CIA and MI6, in Greek politics, which placed both New Democracy and PASOK on top of the Greek political scene and the Greek public life ever since. In Iran they had appointed one royal family and in Greece two “royal families” in the form of political leaders of the two largest parties.

If the Shah’s regime, could mean the sale of Iranian oil, and because of this, an enticed increasing Islamist opposition to the West, with the ayatollahs revolution as the culmination, (direct result of the U.S. / UK-led coup in 1953),… why could not the military junta in Greece be seen as the final “lid on”, for all real democratic forces in Greece? In Iran they wanted a “king” / Shah to negotiate with, and in Greece, they appointed a few tested and loyal political families, along with some ship owners and some big businessmen who became “kings” in Greece, with their “courts”. These have worked exclusively for American, English and German interests since the 70s and they have been well-rewarded by the great powers. After the junta had  deported the German King Constantine and his Danish wife, Anna-Maria from Greece, something that people did not mind at all, the superpowers understood that they could not suggest a king as head of state after the fall of the junta. Instead they supported a handful of “their own” politicians and businessmen, in 1974 in Athens, with the same result in mind as the support of the Shah in 1953 in Tehran and the support for Suharto in 1968 in Indonesia had given them. The control of the country’s resources and the control of its political and military forces.

These decisive “intervention” in other country’s’ affairs were thus general rehearsals for the globalists plan for a takeover of military-strategically important but sovereign nation-states and their natural resources. Everything was excused of course by the existence of the Soviet Union and that their agenda was “much worse”. The new economic, colonial wars was “a necessary evil” we were told, to keep communism away from the “free world”. You know, the “free world”, which needs to order the assassinations and the overthrow of democratically elected leaders in favor of dictators and that needs to suck out all the natural resources of the country, so that its citizens have to escape poverty, war and oppression. The “free world” where a handful of filthy rich, powerful and wrinkled parasites, can not sleep well if people are free, independent and creative.

MI6, CIA and Mossad are not intelligence services of countries, they are these wrinkled parasites private “bodyguards” and “hit-men”… The end of their monopoly is near and the beginning of justice, freedom and the development of man is here, if we only dare to shine into their dark corners with HUMAN wisdom, decency, dignity and love.

Kosmas Loumakis


(the article in Swedish)


*Zionism is usually considered to be Theodor Hertzl’s organized movement for a country for the Jewish people, the Jewish state of Israel… In his article though when I refer to Zionism I describe Rothschilds version, which is much more about the cultural “hijacking” of the Jewish religion and traditions in order to serve an oligarchic global family empire, with the current state of Israel as the vehicle to this aim… The Rothschilds, the Rockefellers and the Morgans for instance are not originally Jewish, but Khazars. There are Christian Zionists and Muslim Zionists no matter how strange that can sound, simply because today’s Rothschild-Zionism has nothing to do with the Jewish culture but only with the aims of those families that  consider themselves as “kings” of humanity and their plans with he state of Israel.


Published 25 januari in i ‘’, 2013 | By Christer Brandt

Hur började det??. Valutahaveriet med dollarn 1971 öppnade en lavin som orsakade Oljechocken 1973 som knäckte nationers handelsbalanser. 70-talskrisen slog sig ned som väldig Gam. Andra gamar kom – valutaspekulatörerna!

Nyliberalisterna ropade. VÄLFÄRDEN HAR GETT OSS KRISEN!

Ekonomipristagare och prof. Robert Mundell från Chicagoskolan är designern bakom euron.

Robert Mundell, evil genius of the euro

Kriget mot välfärden sker när 70-talet spränger vallar. Revolution mot den nationella självständigheten.

Robert Mundell utarbetade spjutet  med  “utsidans ekonomi” in i nationer  med  centralbank (ECB) 1998 som nu står  utanför för nationerna för  en enda  gemensamma valutan och ränta. En metod att lösa problemet att undergräva den självständiga nationalekonomin, det sociala systemet och det fackliga inflytandet. EU:s käpphäst är valutasystemet “über alles”.

“Det är mycket svårt att avskeda arbetare i Europa”, klagade han. Hans svar är: euron. Euron skulle verkligen få göra sitt arbete när kriser slår, förklarade Mundell. Att ta bort regeringenens och centralbankens kontroll över sin valuta skulle förhindra en keynesiansk penning- och finanspolitik.

“Det sätter penningpolitiken utom räckhåll för politikerna”. Det enda sättet för nationerna utan sin finanspolitik för att behåll jobben blir att genomföra en konkurrensutsatt reduktion av den sociala lagstiftningen. Han tar upp arbetsrätten, miljöbestämmelser och naturligtvis skatter. Allt skulle då spolas bort genom euron. Demokrati skulle då inte tillåtas störa marknaden!

EURO blev ett svärd att kapa friheten!!!  Euro blev en stålkrage runt nationens hals kedjade till ECB som tvingade dem till stålbad. Utan sin bank och egen räntepolitik blev redlösa skepp, som seglade på grund. Mundells plan fungerade. Olikheterna var för stora meveringd en bank, en ränta och en valuta. Välfärd skrotas för att släppa in “Marknaden”.

Liberalism förkunnas? Vad är frihet och vad är liberalism?

  • Frihet är med ansvar.
  • Liberalism är väg till frihet utan ansvar och till individualism och egenintresse.
  • Nyliberalism innehåller en väg utan ansvar för samhällets utveckling, människors välfärd eller naturens hållbarhet. Etik är lönsamhet
  • Ett samhälle utan sammanhålling

Tyskland blev vinnaren med en dold devalvering. Euro stod i lägre kurs än D-mark. Exporten gynnades. Tyskland ser att “det storTyska riket” förverkligas. Tyskland är med i alla slagen VK I och VK II och nu Unionen Europa.

Storbritanniens premiärminister David Cameron talade Han talade igår i Världsekonomiskt forum i Davos om landets medlemskap i EU.

• Det pågår en utveckling mot en politisk union i Europa, och Storbritannien kommer aldrig att delta i en sådan, • Vore ett stort misstag för Europa. … Om ni anser, att Europa måste förvandlas till en politisk union, att det ska bli mer av ett land som heter Europa. Då håller jag inte med, sade David Cameron. • Förändringen är redan på gång i klubben som vi tillhör. Det är euroländerna som driver på förändringen. • Vi måste ha ett nytt EU. Med respekt för ländernas olikheter, sade han.

Avhumanisering av de sjuka, fattiga och arbetslösa

. Lagen 2008 om arbetskraftsinvandring är redan skojar- och traffickingbransch. En bristfällig lag som korrupta entreprenörer svindlar med.

Arbetare luras på löner och blir slavarbetare. Alliansen som skapat lagen och uttalar sig att beteendet  är oacceptabelt!!

Effekten är att fack, löner och arbetsrätt trasas sönder enligt “krismetoden”. Ny lucka öppnas att riva välfärd. Vargarna kommer och tar för sig. Ekot hörs igen.

”Endast en kris – verklig eller inbillad – kan åstadkomma verklig förändring” – först i krisskeden och chocktillstånd kan nyliberala idéer ta initiativet för att privatisera allmänningarna, förbjuda fackförbunden, avskaffa social välfärd, släppa priserna fria och cementera äganderätten och centralbankens överhöghet, Milton Friedman, Chicagoskolan.


Alliansregeringen innehåller demolering av det svenska välfärdssystemet till  fragment.  Vi vet att läget är katastrofalt på den ena eller andra fronten; men den informationen liknar mest styckvisa eldhärdar, som snabbt slocknar eller snarare släcks. Från ”oppositionen” kommer ingen sammanfattning av läget om denna EU-revolution. Skall vi få veta det efteråt, när det är klart??

  • det fattas hundratusen bostäder i Sverige,
  • Svenskarna är världens åttonde mest skuldsatta folk (bostadsbubbla)
  • landsbygden är på väg i urbaniseringen att bli ett stort åldrinngshem med alla utflyttning
  • avreglerignar med lönsamma ambualer med avlastning
  • privatiserad järväg är ett haverie i ledarskap, samhällsnytta och långsiktigt milöarbete
  • arbetslösheten i det rika Sverige närmar sig åtta procent, Tal i hög sysselsättningsgrad = de som står i en kö för arbete
  • sänkt moms resulterade i 5000 nya arbeten = kostade 1 milj/arbete.
  • brist i resurser i vård, skola och annan samhällsnytta
  • vi har färre vårdplatser per invånare på sjukhus än resten av Europa
  • privatiserade apoteken ger mycket sämre service än den tidigae modellen. Landsbyggden drabbas
  • satsningen på jobbcoacher har kostat tre miljarder kronor men inte gett några mätbara resultat.
  • fas3-kränkning av människor
  • memanningsföretagsanställda ökar i rekordfart.
  • 150 000 svenskar saknar A-kassa, vilket betyder arbetslösa som får noll ersättning.
  • utförsäljning av vård till reaspris. 7,5 miljarder av privata vårdföretags vinster, skattepengar, går till skatteparadis. Serafimerlasarettat i Stockholm och Tibbleskolan i Täby, Reinfeldtarnas hemkommun, såldes till skandalösa underpriser, ingen görs ansvarig. Åtalan  läggs ner.
  • friskoler som kassakor och vinstbolag.
  • Sverige har gått från första plats till fjärde som världens mest jämställda land under alliansregeringen
  • export till diktaturer. Telias mutaffärer i diktaturen Azerbajdzan,
  • ett försvar som kan hålla 1 vecka

Nylberal värdesym, Maria-Pia Boëthius, ETC

Skapa en vilt konsumerande medelklass, som helst bara läser nyheter som bekräftar deras egen världsbild. När bubblan spricker kommer deras främsta mål vara att bevara sitt riggade välstånd; också på bekostnad av att ”andra” går under. Det gäller ju mig och min familj! Demokratin är trevlig, men inte om den hotar mitt välstånd, då kan jag tänka mig andra lösningar.

Vad gör EU? EU genomför en revolt mot

  • den självständiga nationen
  • fragmentiserar välfärde
  • folkmakten
  • fragmentiserar den fria människan till  en förslavning

Människan kapitaliseras som vilken vara som helst att brukas.

  • Det mänskliga “etiska” värdet är graden av produktionsduglighet.
  • Den utbytbara människan. En koponent i ett system. Kan ersättas med dator
  • En elit urskiljs – 1 %-folket med alla tillgångarna (idag 40 %)

Känns systemet igen???

  • förslavning av människor
  • teknokratiseringen
  • eliten
  • Unionen

“A Radical Revolution of Values”: Dr. King’s Most Important (And Dangerous) Speech

By Ed Ciaccio (republished from Thomas Paine’s Corner)


“A nation that continues year after year to spend more money on military defense than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual death.”

No, it’s not the “I Have a Dream” speech most people associate with Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and ceremoniously trot out every year as we commemorate his birthday. It’s a speech largely ignored by mainstream commentators who are content to pigeonhole Dr. King as a “slain civil rights leader”, as though his Nobel Prize was awarded solely for his civil rights efforts. It’s a speech known very well to advocates of peace and social justice. It’s an audacious, even dangerous speech which turned many former supporters against him after he gave it, and may even have accelerated the efforts of those who felt so threatened by this audacity that they murdered him a year after he delivered it. And it’s a speech that has even more resonance for us today than it did over 40 years ago, and not merely because we will see our first African-American President inaugurated five days after what would have been Dr. King’s 80th birthday.

On April 4, 1967, exactly a year before his assassination, Dr. King gave a speech titled “Beyond Vietnam: A Time to Break Silence” at a meeting of Clergy and Laity Concerned at Riverside Church in New York City. Clergy and Laity Concerned was one of many groups opposed to the Vietnam War.

This powerful, enlightening speech contains passages which are strikingly, even eerily, more relevant to us today than when Dr. King first spoke them. Replace “Vietnam” with “Iraq and Afghanistan” and this speech is as timely as if it was given this morning.

Anticipating and answering those who criticized him for speaking out against the illegal, unnecessary war on the people of Vietnam, he said:

I knew that America would never invest the necessary funds or energies in rehabilitation of its poor so long as adventures like Vietnam continued to draw men and skills and money like some demonic destructive suction tube. So I was increasingly compelled to see the war as an enemy of the poor and to attack it as such…I knew that I could never again raise my voice against the violence of the oppressed in the ghettos without having first spoken clearly to the greatest purveyor of violence in the world today — my own government.

martin-luther-king- picBy calling the United States “the greatest purveyor of violence in the world today”, King even antagonized many of his own supporters, who then, and still, today, choose to ignore United States’ foreign policy, including the many violent military and CIA “operations” conducted by various administrations since at least 1947 “to protect America’s vital interests and security” while overthrowing elected governments and causing the deaths of millions of innocent people. In doing so, he not only expanded his message beyond civil rights to the violence of war and exploitation, but also beyond Americans to all people in words which still sear our consciences:

This I believe to be the privilege and the burden of all of us who deem ourselves bound by allegiances and loyalties which are broader and deeper than nationalism and which go beyond our nation’s self-defined goals and positions. We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy, for no document from human hands can make these humans any less our brothers.

Speaking today, he would no doubt have decried the ongoing genocide in Darfur, the slaughter of civilians in Gaza by U.S.-supplied weapons, and the threat to all life on earth from human-caused climate chaos. But he would be especially critical of our own nation, the most powerful and wealthy on earth, which maintains that power and wealth through an empire of over 760 military bases in more than 130 foreign nations, supporting exploitative, impoverishing, environmentally-devastating economic policies such as NAFTA and through control of the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, and the World Trade Organization whose “structural adjustment” policies serve mainly to drive poor Third World nations even deeper into un-repayable debt.

Meanwhile, as the world’s biggest arms merchant, the U.S. supplies advanced military equipment to oppressive governments such as Egypt, Pakistan, and Saudi Arabia, and all of this with mostly unquestioning bipartisan Congressional support.

In his 1967 speech, citing such a U.S. foreign policy, even before the term ‘blowback’ was widely known, Dr. King said:

It is with such activity in mind that the words of the late John F. Kennedy come back to haunt us. Five years ago he said, “Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.”

Increasingly, by choice or by accident, this is the role our nation has taken — the role of those who make peaceful revolution impossible by refusing to give up the privileges and the pleasures that come from the immense profits of overseas investment.

But it is the passage immediately following those words which should force us all to recall Dr. King’s prescience, and the tragic truth his words still hold for us today:

I am convinced that if we are to get on the right side of the world revolution, we as a nation must undergo a radical revolution of values. We must rapidly begin the shift from a “thing-oriented” society to a “person-oriented” society. When machines and computers, profit motives and property rights are considered more important than people, the giant triplets of racism, materialism, and militarism are incapable of being conquered.A true revolution of values will soon cause us to question the fairness and justice of many of our past and present policies…

True compassion is more than flinging a coin to a beggar; it is not haphazard and superficial. It comes to see that an edifice which produces beggars needs restructuring. A true revolution of values will soon look uneasily on the glaring contrast of poverty and wealth. With righteous indignation, it will look across the seas and see individual capitalists of the West investing huge sums of money in Asia, Africa and South America, only to take the profits out with no concern for the social betterment of the countries, and say: “This is not just.” It will look at our alliance with the landed gentry of Latin America and say: “This is not just.” The Western arrogance of feeling that it has everything to teach others and nothing to learn from them is not just. A true revolution of values will lay hands on the world order and say of war: “This way of settling differences is not just.” This business of burning human beings with napalm, of filling our nation’s homes with orphans and widows, of injecting poisonous drugs of hate into veins of people normally humane, of sending men home from dark and bloody battlefields physically handicapped and psychologically deranged, cannot be reconciled with wisdom, justice and love. A nation that continues year after year to spend more money on military defense than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual death.

A genuine revolution of values means in the final analysis that our loyalties must become ecumenical rather than sectional. Every nation must now develop an overriding loyalty to mankind as a whole in order to preserve the best in their individual societies.

This call for a world-wide fellowship that lifts neighborly concern beyond one’s tribe, race, class and nation is in reality a call for an all-embracing and unconditional love for all men.

We still have a choice today; nonviolent coexistence or violent co-annihilation.

In 2009, in the midst of yet other illegal wars, with a Congress well-funded by corporations profiting from such wars, and following a presidential campaign in which the candidates of both major parties were beholden to their corporate benefactors, it is doubtful that King’s “revolution of values” will come from any of our elected leaders.

If we truly “recall the fullness of his message,” it is we ourselves who are called to act today to make the “great revolution of values” happen for us, and for our children. As Dr. King said, near the end of that Riverside Church speech, “We are now faced with the fact that tomorrow is today. We are confronted with the fierce urgency of now. In this unfolding conundrum of life and history there is such a thing as being too late.”

How can we put Dr. King’s words into action? He gave us a hint in a speech, “Where Do We Go from Here?” which he gave later that same year, on August 16, 1967, at the SCLC Conference in Atlanta, Georgia:

And one of the great problems of history is that the concepts of love and power have usually been contrasted as opposites, polar opposites, so that love is identified with a resignation of power, and power with a denial of love… What is needed is a realization that power without love is reckless and abusive, and love without power is sentimental and anemic. Power at its best is love implementing the demands of justice, and justice at its best is power correcting everything that stands against love. And this is what we must see as we move on. What has happened is that we have had it wrong and confused in our own country, and this has led Negro Americans in the past to seek their goals through power devoid of love and conscience.

“Power devoid of love and conscience” is exactly what we in the U.S. have been blighted with for at least the past eight years, but which has also been the modus operandi of all governments, whether they call it “realpolitik” or “pragmatism”, for most of human history. That is why “reform” will not suffice. That is why “a radical revolution of values is needed now, meaning “radical” in both the sense of “extreme” and “going to the root of”, and “revolution” as in “overthrowing” the accepted, but continuously failing, value system of our culture.

The “love” Dr. King speaks of is not the sentimental, Hallmark card variety. It is not a mushy, “bleeding-heart liberal” emotion. It is a very active verb. Its closest meaning in English is demonstrating “compassion” and “empathy” (not mere “sympathy”), two words which carry within them the meanings of putting oneself in the place of those who are suffering, of “feeling the way they feel”, not just “feeling for them.” Out of this compassion comes the realization not only of our literal as well as moral kinship, but of the need for justice or fairness for those suffering and oppressed, especially due to our values and our way of living. It is the basis of the Golden Rule as well as of our own Declaration of Independence.

It, therefore, requires not only feelings, but actions which put that compassion and empathy into practice on personal and local levels, and especially on national and international levels. This is the power, which, “…at its best is love implementing the demands of justice, and justice at its best…correcting everything that stands against love.”

The policies and programs, environmental, social, and economic, which we must now demand of our leaders at this crucial time of human and environmental crises, especially in this, the most influential nation on earth, should and must be policies of compassion and justice which embody Dr. King’s “radical revolution of values.”

Let us commemorate Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. then, as not only a civil rights or anti-war leader, but also as a world leader against the ethic of greed, materialism, and exploitation (what he termed “the giant triplets of racism, materialism, and militarism”) and for the values of compassion and justice for all people, especially the poor and powerless, both at home and abroad. It is precisely those roles which are his true, lasting legacy to all of us today, and we can best and truly celebrate his legacy by putting those “revolutionary” values into practice in our personal and public lives. We ignore, or choose to forget this full legacy, to our shame and peril, and that of future generations.

Ed Ciaccio, a conscientious objector since 1970, is a retired teacher.

Full text of the speech – Beyond Vietnam — A Time to Break Silence

Mr. Chairman, ladies and gentlemen:

I need not pause to say how very delighted I am to be here tonight, and how very delighted I am to see you expressing your concern about the issues that will be discussed tonight by turning out in such large numbers. I also want to say that I consider it a great honor to share this program with Dr. Bennett, Dr. Commager, and Rabbi Heschel, and some of the distinguished leaders and personalities of our nation. And of course it’s always good to come back to Riverside church. Over the last eight years, I have had the privilege of preaching here almost every year in that period, and it is always a rich and rewarding experience to come to this great church and this great pulpit.

I come to this magnificent house of worship tonight because my conscience leaves me no other choice. I join you in this meeting because I’m in deepest agreement with the aims and work of the organization which has brought us together: Clergy and Laymen Concerned About Vietnam. The recent statements of your executive committee are the sentiments of my own heart, and I found myself in full accord when I read its opening lines: “A time comes when silence is betrayal.” And that time has come for us in relation to Vietnam.

The truth of these words is beyond doubt, but the mission to which they call us is a most difficult one. Even when pressed by the demands of inner truth, men do not easily assume the task of opposing their government’s policy, especially in time of war. Nor does the human spirit move without great difficulty against all the apathy of conformist thought within one’s own bosom and in the surrounding world. Moreover, when the issues at hand seem as perplexing as they often do in the case of this dreadful conflict, we are always on the verge of being mesmerized by uncertainty; but we must move on.

And some of us who have already begun to break the silence of the night have found that the calling to speak is often a vocation of agony, but we must speak. We must speak with all the humility that is appropriate to our limited vision, but we must speak. And we must rejoice as well, for surely this is the first time in our nation’s history that a significant number of its religious leaders have chosen to move beyond the prophesying of smooth patriotism to the high grounds of a firm dissent based upon the mandates of conscience and the reading of history. Perhaps a new spirit is rising among us. If it is, let us trace its movements and pray that our own inner being may be sensitive to its guidance, for we are deeply in need of a new way beyond the darkness that seems so close around us.

Over the past two years, as I have moved to break the betrayal of my own silences and to speak from the burnings of my own heart, as I have called for radical departures from the destruction of Vietnam, many persons have questioned me about the wisdom of my path. At the heart of their concerns this query has often loomed large and loud: “Why are you speaking about the war, Dr. King?” “Why are you joining the voices of dissent?” “Peace and civil rights don’t mix,” they say. “Aren’t you hurting the cause of your people,” they ask? And when I hear them, though I often understand the source of their concern, I am nevertheless greatly saddened, for such questions mean that the inquirers have not really known me, my commitment or my calling. Indeed, their questions suggest that they do not know the world in which they live.

In the light of such tragic misunderstanding, I deem it of signal importance to try to state clearly, and I trust concisely, why I believe that the path from Dexter Avenue Baptist Church — the church in Montgomery, Alabama, where I began my pastorate — leads clearly to this sanctuary tonight.

I come to this platform tonight to make a passionate plea to my beloved nation. This speech is not addressed to Hanoi or to the National Liberation Front. It is not addressed to China or to Russia. Nor is it an attempt to overlook the ambiguity of the total situation and the need for a collective solution to the tragedy of Vietnam. Neither is it an attempt to make North Vietnam or the National Liberation Front paragons of virtue, nor to overlook the role they must play in the successful resolution of the problem. While they both may have justifiable reasons to be suspicious of the good faith of the United States, life and history give eloquent testimony to the fact that conflicts are never resolved without trustful give and take on both sides.

Tonight, however, I wish not to speak with Hanoi and the National Liberation Front, but rather to my fellow Americans.

Since I am a preacher by calling, I suppose it is not surprising that I have seven major reasons for bringing Vietnam into the field of my moral vision. There is at the outset a very obvious and almost facile connection between the war in Vietnam and the struggle I, and others, have been waging in America. A few years ago there was a shining moment in that struggle. It seemed as if there was a real promise of hope for the poor — both black and white — through the poverty program. There were experiments, hopes, new beginnings. Then came the buildup in Vietnam, and I watched this program broken and eviscerated, as if it were some idle political plaything of a society gone mad on war, and I knew that America would never invest the necessary funds or energies in rehabilitation of its poor so long as adventures like Vietnam continued to draw men and skills and money like some demonic destructive suction tube. So, I was increasingly compelled to see the war as an enemy of the poor and to attack it as such.

Perhaps a more tragic recognition of reality took place when it became clear to me that the war was doing far more than devastating the hopes of the poor at home. It was sending their sons and their brothers and their husbands to fight and to die in extraordinarily high proportions relative to the rest of the population. We were taking the black young men who had been crippled by our society and sending them eight thousand miles away to guarantee liberties in Southeast Asia which they had not found in southwest Georgia and East Harlem. And so we have been repeatedly faced with the cruel irony of watching Negro and white boys on TV screens as they kill and die together for a nation that has been unable to seat them together in the same schools. And so we watch them in brutal solidarity burning the huts of a poor village, but we realize that they would hardly live on the same block in Chicago. I could not be silent in the face of such cruel manipulation of the poor.

My third reason moves to an even deeper level of awareness, for it grows out of my experience in the ghettoes of the North over the last three years — especially the last three summers. As I have walked among the desperate, rejected, and angry young men, I have told them that Molotov cocktails and rifles would not solve their problems. I have tried to offer them my deepest compassion while maintaining my conviction that social change comes most meaningfully through nonviolent action. But they ask — and rightly so — what about Vietnam? They ask if our own nation wasn’t using massive doses of violence to solve its problems, to bring about the changes it wanted. Their questions hit home, and I knew that I could never again raise my voice against the violence of the oppressed in the ghettos without having first spoken clearly to the greatest purveyor of violence in the world today — my own government. For the sake of those boys, for the sake of this government, for the sake of the hundreds of thousands trembling under our violence, I cannot be silent.

For those who ask the question, “Aren’t you a civil rights leader?” and thereby mean to exclude me from the movement for peace, I have this further answer. In 1957 when a group of us formed the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, we chose as our motto: “To save the soul of America.” We were convinced that we could not limit our vision to certain rights for black people, but instead affirmed the conviction that America would never be free or saved from itself until the descendants of its slaves were loosed completely from the shackles they still wear. In a way we were agreeing with Langston Hughes, that black bard of Harlem, who had written earlier:

O, yes,
I say it plain,
America never was America to me,
And yet I swear this oath —
America will be!

Now, it should be incandescently clear that no one who has any concern for the integrity and life of America today can ignore the present war. If America’s soul becomes totally poisoned, part of the autopsy must read: Vietnam. It can never be saved so long as it destroys the deepest hopes of men the world over. So it is that those of us who are yet determined that America will be — are — are led down the path of protest and dissent, working for the health of our land.

As if the weight of such a commitment to the life and health of America were not enough, another burden of responsibility was placed upon me in 19541; and I cannot forget that the Nobel Peace Prize was also a commission, a commission to work harder than I had ever worked before for “the brotherhood of man.” This is a calling that takes me beyond national allegiances, but even if it were not present I would yet have to live with the meaning of my commitment to the ministry of Jesus Christ. To me the relationship of this ministry to the making of peace is so obvious that I sometimes marvel at those who ask me why I’m speaking against the war. Could it be that they do not know that the good news was meant for all men — for Communist and capitalist, for their children and ours, for black and for white, for revolutionary and conservative? Have they forgotten that my ministry is in obedience to the One who loved his enemies so fully that he died for them? What then can I say to the Vietcong or to Castro or to Mao as a faithful minister of this One? Can I threaten them with death or must I not share with them my life?

And finally, as I try to explain for you and for myself the road that leads from Montgomery to this place I would have offered all that was most valid if I simply said that I must be true to my conviction that I share with all men the calling to be a son of the living God. Beyond the calling of race or nation or creed is this vocation of sonship and brotherhood, and because I believe that the Father is deeply concerned especially for his suffering and helpless and outcast children, I come tonight to speak for them.

This I believe to be the privilege and the burden of all of us who deem ourselves bound by allegiances and loyalties which are broader and deeper than nationalism and which go beyond our nation’s self-defined goals and positions. We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for the victims of our nation and for those it calls “enemy,” for no document from human hands can make these humans any less our brothers.

And as I ponder the madness of Vietnam and search within myself for ways to understand and respond in compassion, my mind goes constantly to the people of that peninsula. I speak now not of the soldiers of each side, not of the ideologies of the Liberation Front, not of the junta in Saigon, but simply of the people who have been living under the curse of war for almost three continuous decades now. I think of them, too, because it is clear to me that there will be no meaningful solution there until some attempt is made to know them and hear their broken cries.

They must see Americans as strange liberators. The Vietnamese people proclaimed their own independence in 1954 — in 1945 rather — after a combined French and Japanese occupation and before the communist revolution in China. They were led by Ho Chi Minh. Even though they quoted the American Declaration of Independence in their own document of freedom, we refused to recognize them. Instead, we decided to support France in its reconquest of her former colony. Our government felt then that the Vietnamese people were not ready for independence, and we again fell victim to the deadly Western arrogance that has poisoned the international atmosphere for so long. With that tragic decision we rejected a revolutionary government seeking self-determination and a government that had been established not by China — for whom the Vietnamese have no great love — but by clearly indigenous forces that included some communists. For the peasants this new government meant real land reform, one of the most important needs in their lives.

For nine years following 1945 we denied the people of Vietnam the right of independence. For nine years we vigorously supported the French in their abortive effort to recolonize Vietnam. Before the end of the war we were meeting eighty percent of the French war costs. Even before the French were defeated at Dien Bien Phu, they began to despair of their reckless action, but we did not. We encouraged them with our huge financial and military supplies to continue the war even after they had lost the will. Soon we would be paying almost the full costs of this tragic attempt at recolonization.

After the French were defeated, it looked as if independence and land reform would come again through the Geneva Agreement. But instead there came the United States, determined that Ho should not unify the temporarily divided nation, and the peasants watched again as we supported one of the most vicious modern dictators, our chosen man, Premier Diem. The peasants watched and cringed as Diem ruthlessly rooted out all opposition, supported their extortionist landlords, and refused even to discuss reunification with the North. The peasants watched as all this was presided over by United States’ influence and then by increasing numbers of United States troops who came to help quell the insurgency that Diem’s methods had aroused. When Diem was overthrown they may have been happy, but the long line of military dictators seemed to offer no real change, especially in terms of their need for land and peace.

The only change came from America, as we increased our troop commitments in support of governments which were singularly corrupt, inept, and without popular support. All the while the people read our leaflets and received the regular promises of peace and democracy and land reform. Now they languish under our bombs and consider us, not their fellow Vietnamese, the real enemy. They move sadly and apathetically as we herd them off the land of their fathers into concentration camps where minimal social needs are rarely met. They know they must move on or be destroyed by our bombs.

So they go, primarily women and children and the aged. They watch as we poison their water, as we kill a million acres of their crops. They must weep as the bulldozers roar through their areas preparing to destroy the precious trees. They wander into the hospitals with at least twenty casualties from American firepower for one Vietcong-inflicted injury. So far we may have killed a million of them, mostly children. They wander into the towns and see thousands of the children, homeless, without clothes, running in packs on the streets like animals. They see the children degraded by our soldiers as they beg for food. They see the children selling their sisters to our soldiers, soliciting for their mothers.

What do the peasants think as we ally ourselves with the landlords and as we refuse to put any action into our many words concerning land reform? What do they think as we test out our latest weapons on them, just as the Germans tested out new medicine and new tortures in the concentration camps of Europe? Where are the roots of the independent Vietnam we claim to be building? Is it among these voiceless ones?

We have destroyed their two most cherished institutions: the family and the village. We have destroyed their land and their crops. We have cooperated in the crushing — in the crushing of the nation’s only non-Communist revolutionary political force, the unified Buddhist Church. We have supported the enemies of the peasants of Saigon. We have corrupted their women and children and killed their men.

Now there is little left to build on, save bitterness. Soon, the only solid — solid physical foundations remaining will be found at our military bases and in the concrete of the concentration camps we call “fortified hamlets.” The peasants may well wonder if we plan to build our new Vietnam on such grounds as these. Could we blame them for such thoughts? We must speak for them and raise the questions they cannot raise. These, too, are our brothers.

Perhaps a more difficult but no less necessary task is to speak for those who have been designated as our enemies. What of the National Liberation Front, that strangely anonymous group we call “VC” or “communists”? What must they think of the United States of America when they realize that we permitted the repression and cruelty of Diem, which helped to bring them into being as a resistance group in the South? What do they think of our condoning the violence which led to their own taking up of arms? How can they believe in our integrity when now we speak of “aggression from the North” as if there were nothing more essential to the war? How can they trust us when now we charge them with violence after the murderous reign of Diem and charge them with violence while we pour every new weapon of death into their land? Surely we must understand their feelings, even if we do not condone their actions. Surely we must see that the men we supported pressed them to their violence. Surely we must see that our own computerized plans of destruction simply dwarf their greatest acts.

How do they judge us when our officials know that their membership is less than twenty-five percent communist, and yet insist on giving them the blanket name? What must they be thinking when they know that we are aware of their control of major sections of Vietnam, and yet we appear ready to allow national elections in which this highly organized political parallel government will not have a part? They ask how we can speak of free elections when the Saigon press is censored and controlled by the military junta. And they are surely right to wonder what kind of new government we plan to help form without them, the only party in real touch with the peasants. They question our political goals and they deny the reality of a peace settlement from which they will be excluded. Their questions are frighteningly relevant. Is our nation planning to build on political myth again, and then shore it up upon the power of new violence?

Here is the true meaning and value of compassion and nonviolence, when it helps us to see the enemy’s point of view, to hear his questions, to know his assessment of ourselves. For from his view we may indeed see the basic weaknesses of our own condition, and if we are mature, we may learn and grow and profit from the wisdom of the brothers who are called the opposition.

So, too, with Hanoi. In the North, where our bombs now pummel the land, and our mines endanger the waterways, we are met by a deep but understandable mistrust. To speak for them is to explain this lack of confidence in Western words, and especially their distrust of American intentions now. In Hanoi are the men who led the nation to independence against the Japanese and the French, the men who sought membership in the French Commonwealth and were betrayed by the weakness of Paris and the willfulness of the colonial armies. It was they who led a second struggle against French domination at tremendous costs, and then were persuaded to give up the land they controlled between the thirteenth and seventeenth parallel as a temporary measure at Geneva. After 1954 they watched us conspire with Diem to prevent elections which could have surely brought Ho Chi Minh to power over a united Vietnam, and they realized they had been betrayed again. When we ask why they do not leap to negotiate, these things must be remembered.

Also, it must be clear that the leaders of Hanoi considered the presence of American troops in support of the Diem regime to have been the initial military breach of the Geneva Agreement concerning foreign troops. They remind us that they did not begin to send troops in large numbers and even supplies into the South until American forces had moved into the tens of thousands.

Hanoi remembers how our leaders refused to tell us the truth about the earlier North Vietnamese overtures for peace, how the president claimed that none existed when they had clearly been made. Ho Chi Minh has watched as America has spoken of peace and built up its forces, and now he has surely heard the increasing international rumors of American plans for an invasion of the North. He knows the bombing and shelling and mining we are doing are part of traditional pre-invasion strategy. Perhaps only his sense of humor and of irony can save him when he hears the most powerful nation of the world speaking of aggression as it drops thousands of bombs on a poor, weak nation more than eight hundred — rather, eight thousand miles away from its shores.

At this point I should make it clear that while I have tried in these last few minutes to give a voice to the voiceless in Vietnam and to understand the arguments of those who are called “enemy,” I am as deeply concerned about our own troops there as anything else. For it occurs to me that what we are submitting them to in Vietnam is not simply the brutalizing process that goes on in any war where armies face each other and seek to destroy. We are adding cynicism to the process of death, for they must know after a short period there that none of the things we claim to be fighting for are really involved. Before long they must know that their government has sent them into a struggle among Vietnamese, and the more sophisticated surely realize that we are on the side of the wealthy, and the secure, while we create a hell for the poor.

Somehow this madness must cease. We must stop now. I speak as a child of God and brother to the suffering poor of Vietnam. I speak for those whose land is being laid waste, whose homes are being destroyed, whose culture is being subverted. I speak of the — for the poor of America who are paying the double price of smashed hopes at home, and death and corruption in Vietnam. I speak as a citizen of the world, for the world as it stands aghast at the path we have taken. I speak as one who loves America, to the leaders of our own nation: The great initiative in this war is ours; the initiative to stop it must be ours.

This is the message of the great Buddhist leaders of Vietnam. Recently one of them wrote these words, and I quote:

Each day the war goes on the hatred increases in the heart of the Vietnamese and in the hearts of those of humanitarian instinct. The Americans are forcing even their friends into becoming their enemies. It is curious that the Americans, who calculate so carefully on the possibilities of military victory, do not realize that in the process they are incurring deep psychological and political defeat. The image of America will never again be the image of revolution, freedom, and democracy, but the image of violence and militarism (unquote).

If we continue, there will be no doubt in my mind and in the mind of the world that we have no honorable intentions in Vietnam. If we do not stop our war against the people of Vietnam immediately, the world will be left with no other alternative than to see this as some horrible, clumsy, and deadly game we have decided to play. The world now demands a maturity of America that we may not be able to achieve. It demands that we admit that we have been wrong from the beginning of our adventure in Vietnam, that we have been detrimental to the life of the Vietnamese people. The situation is one in which we must be ready to turn sharply from our present ways. In order to atone for our sins and errors in Vietnam, we should take the initiative in bringing a halt to this tragic war.

I would like to suggest five concrete things that our government should do [immediately] to begin the long and difficult process of extricating ourselves from this nightmarish conflict:

Number one: End all bombing in North and South Vietnam.

Number two: Declare a unilateral cease-fire in the hope that such action will create the atmosphere for negotiation.

Three: Take immediate steps to prevent other battlegrounds in Southeast Asia by curtailing our military buildup in Thailand and our interference in Laos.

Four: Realistically accept the fact that the National Liberation Front has substantial support in South Vietnam and must thereby play a role in any meaningful negotiations and any future Vietnam government.

Five: Set a date that we will remove all foreign troops from Vietnam in accordance with the 1954 Geneva Agreement.

Part of our ongoing — Part of our ongoing commitment might well express itself in an offer to grant asylum to any Vietnamese who fears for his life under a new regime which included the Liberation Front. Then we must make what reparations we can for the damage we have done. We must provide the medical aid that is badly needed, making it available in this country, if necessary. Meanwhile — Meanwhile, we in the churches and synagogues have a continuing task while we urge our government to disengage itself from a disgraceful commitment. We must continue to raise our voices and our lives if our nation persists in its perverse ways in Vietnam. We must be prepared to match actions with words by seeking out every creative method of protest possible.

As we counsel young men concerning military service, we must clarify for them our nation’s role in Vietnam and challenge them with the alternative of conscientious objection. I am pleased to say that this is a path now chosen by more than seventy students at my own alma mater, Morehouse College, and I recommend it to all who find the American course in Vietnam a dishonorable and unjust one. Moreover, I would encourage all ministers of draft age to give up their ministerial exemptions and seek status as conscientious objectors. These are the times for real choices and not false ones. We are at the moment when our lives must be placed on the line if our nation is to survive its own folly. Every man of humane convictions must decide on the protest that best suits his convictions, but we must all protest.

Now there is something seductively tempting about stopping there and sending us all off on what in some circles has become a popular crusade against the war in Vietnam. I say we must enter that struggle, but I wish to go on now to say something even more disturbing.

The war in Vietnam is but a symptom of a far deeper malady within the American spirit, and if we ignore this sobering reality…and if we ignore this sobering reality, we will find ourselves organizing “clergy and laymen concerned” committees for the next generation. They will be concerned about Guatemala — Guatemala and Peru. They will be concerned about Thailand and Cambodia. They will be concerned about Mozambique and South Africa. We will be marching for these and a dozen other names and attending rallies without end, unless there is a significant and profound change in American life and policy.

And so, such thoughts take us beyond Vietnam, but not beyond our calling as sons of the living God.

In 1957, a sensitive American official overseas said that it seemed to him that our nation was on the wrong side of a world revolution. During the past ten years, we have seen emerge a pattern of suppression which has now justified the presence of U.S. military advisors in Venezuela. This need to maintain social stability for our investments accounts for the counterrevolutionary action of American forces in Guatemala. It tells why American helicopters are being used against guerrillas in Cambodia and why American napalm and Green Beret forces have already been active against rebels in Peru.

It is with such activity in mind that the words of the late John F. Kennedy come back to haunt us. Five years ago he said, “Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.” Increasingly, by choice or by accident, this is the role our nation has taken, the role of those who make peaceful revolution impossible by refusing to give up the privileges and the pleasures that come from the immense profits of overseas investments. I am convinced that if we are to get on the right side of the world revolution, we as a nation must undergo a radical revolution of values. We must rapidly begin…we must rapidly begin the shift from a thing-oriented society to a person-oriented society. When machines and computers, profit motives and property rights, are considered more important than people, the giant triplets of racism, extreme materialism, and militarism are incapable of being conquered.

A true revolution of values will soon cause us to question the fairness and justice of many of our past and present policies. On the one hand, we are called to play the Good Samaritan on life’s roadside, but that will be only an initial act. One day we must come to see that the whole Jericho Road must be transformed so that men and women will not be constantly beaten and robbed as they make their journey on life’s highway. True compassion is more than flinging a coin to a beggar. It comes to see that an edifice which produces beggars needs restructuring.

A true revolution of values will soon look uneasily on the glaring contrast of poverty and wealth. With righteous indignation, it will look across the seas and see individual capitalists of the West investing huge sums of money in Asia, Africa, and South America, only to take the profits out with no concern for the social betterment of the countries, and say, “This is not just.” It will look at our alliance with the landed gentry of South America and say, “This is not just.” The Western arrogance of feeling that it has everything to teach others and nothing to learn from them is not just.

A true revolution of values will lay hand on the world order and say of war, “This way of settling differences is not just.” This business of burning human beings with napalm, of filling our nation’s homes with orphans and widows, of injecting poisonous drugs of hate into the veins of peoples normally humane, of sending men home from dark and bloody battlefields physically handicapped and psychologically deranged, cannot be reconciled with wisdom, justice, and love. A nation that continues year after year to spend more money on military defense than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual death.

America, the richest and most powerful nation in the world, can well lead the way in this revolution of values. There is nothing except a tragic death wish to prevent us from reordering our priorities so that the pursuit of peace will take precedence over the pursuit of war. There is nothing to keep us from molding a recalcitrant status quo with bruised hands until we have fashioned it into a brotherhood.

This kind of positive revolution of values is our best defense against communism. War is not the answer. Communism will never be defeated by the use of atomic bombs or nuclear weapons. Let us not join those who shout war and, through their misguided passions, urge the United States to relinquish its participation in the United Nations. These are days which demand wise restraint and calm reasonableness. We must not engage in a negative anticommunism, but rather in a positive thrust for democracy, realizing that our greatest defense against communism is to take offensive action in behalf of justice. We must with positive action seek to remove those conditions of poverty, insecurity, and injustice, which are the fertile soil in which the seed of communism grows and develops.

These are revolutionary times. All over the globe men are revolting against old systems of exploitation and oppression, and out of the wounds of a frail world, new systems of justice and equality are being born. The shirtless and barefoot people of the land are rising up as never before. “The people who sat in darkness have seen a great light.”2 We in the West must support these revolutions.

It is a sad fact that because of comfort, complacency, a morbid fear of communism, and our proneness to adjust to injustice, the Western nations that initiated so much of the revolutionary spirit of the modern world have now become the arch antirevolutionaries. This has driven many to feel that only Marxism has a revolutionary spirit. Therefore, communism is a judgment against our failure to make democracy real and follow through on the revolutions that we initiated. Our only hope today lies in our ability to recapture the revolutionary spirit and go out into a sometimes hostile world declaring eternal hostility to poverty, racism, and militarism. With this powerful commitment we shall boldly challenge the status quo and unjust mores, and thereby speed the day when “every valley shall be exalted, and every mountain and hill shall be made low, and the crooked shall be made straight, and the rough places plain.”3

A genuine revolution of values means in the final analysis that our loyalties must become ecumenical rather than sectional. Every nation must now develop an overriding loyalty to mankind as a whole in order to preserve the best in their individual societies.

This call for a worldwide fellowship that lifts neighborly concern beyond one’s tribe, race, class, and nation is in reality a call for an all-embracing — embracing and unconditional love for all mankind. This oft misunderstood, this oft misinterpreted concept, so readily dismissed by the Nietzsches of the world as a weak and cowardly force, has now become an absolute necessity for the survival of man. When I speak of love I am not speaking of some sentimental and weak response. I am not speaking of that force which is just emotional bosh. I am speaking of that force which all of the great religions have seen as the supreme unifying principle of life. Love is somehow the key that unlocks the door which leads to ultimate reality. This Hindu-Muslim-Christian-Jewish-Buddhist belief about ultimate — ultimate reality is beautifully summed up in the first epistle of Saint John: “Let us love one another, for love is God. And every one that loveth is born of God and knoweth God. He that loveth not knoweth not God, for God is love.” “If we love one another, God dwelleth in us and his love is perfected in us.”4 Let us hope that this spirit will become the order of the day.

We can no longer afford to worship the god of hate or bow before the altar of retaliation. The oceans of history are made turbulent by the ever-rising tides of hate. And history is cluttered with the wreckage of nations and individuals that pursued this self-defeating path of hate. As Arnold Toynbee says:

Love is the ultimate force that makes for the saving choice of life and good against the damning choice of death and evil. Therefore the first hope in our inventory must be the hope that love is going to have the last word (unquote).

We are now faced with the fact, my friends, that tomorrow is today. We are confronted with the fierce urgency of now. In this unfolding conundrum of life and history, there is such a thing as being too late. Procrastination is still the thief of time. Life often leaves us standing bare, naked, and dejected with a lost opportunity. The tide in the affairs of men does not remain at flood — it ebbs. We may cry out desperately for time to pause in her passage, but time is adamant to every plea and rushes on. Over the bleached bones and jumbled residues of numerous civilizations are written the pathetic words, “Too late.” There is an invisible book of life that faithfully records our vigilance or our neglect. Omar Khayyam is right: “The moving finger writes, and having writ moves on.”

We still have a choice today: nonviolent coexistence or violent coannihilation. We must move past indecision to action. We must find new ways to speak for peace in Vietnam and justice throughout the developing world, a world that borders on our doors. If we do not act, we shall surely be dragged down the long, dark, and shameful corridors of time reserved for those who possess power without compassion, might without morality, and strength without sight.

Now let us begin. Now let us rededicate ourselves to the long and bitter, but beautiful, struggle for a new world. This is the calling of the sons of God, and our brothers wait eagerly for our response. Shall we say the odds are too great? Shall we tell them the struggle is too hard? Will our message be that the forces of American life militate against their arrival as full men, and we send our deepest regrets? Or will there be another message — of longing, of hope, of solidarity with their yearnings, of commitment to their cause, whatever the cost? The choice is ours, and though we might prefer it otherwise, we must choose in this crucial moment of human history.

As that noble bard of yesterday, James Russell Lowell, eloquently stated:

Once to every man and nation comes a moment to decide,
In the strife of truth and Falsehood, for the good or evil side;
Some great cause, God’s new Messiah offering each the bloom or blight,
And the choice goes by forever ‘twixt that darkness and that light.
Though the cause of evil prosper, yet ‘tis truth alone is strong
Though her portions be the scaffold, and upon the throne be wrong
Yet that scaffold sways the future, and behind the dim unknown
Standeth God within the shadow, keeping watch above his own.

And if we will only make the right choice, we will be able to transform this pending cosmic elegy into a creative psalm of peace. If we will make the right choice, we will be able to transform the jangling discords of our world into a beautiful symphony of brotherhood. If we will but make the right choice, we will be able to speed up the day, all over America and all over the world, when “justice will roll down like waters, and righteousness like a mighty stream.”5


Ήξεραν για το θησαυρό στο υπέδαφός μας…και έκαναν τον Κινέζο!

είχαν στα χέρια τους απόρρητο αρχείο και -απλά…- το έδωσαν για φύλαξη σε ιδιώτη (ΕΛΠΕ)!



Ένοχος ή βλαξ; Το δίλημμα αυτό λαμβάνει νέες διαστάσεις μετά την αποκάλυψη ότι οι ελληνικές κυβερνήσεις όλων των τελευταίων ετών γνωρίζουν και, μάλιστα, πολύ καλά το θησαυρό που κρύβει το υπέδαφος της πατρίδας μας. Δεν περίμεναν την έκθεση της Deutsche Bank που δημοσιοποιήθηκε στις αρχές του περασμένου Δεκεμβρίου και κάνει λόγο για αποθέματα φυσικού αερίου 430 δισ. ευρώ νοτίως της Κρήτης για να το πληροφορηθούν!

Όπως προκύπτει από απάντηση του υπουργείου Περιβάλλοντος, Ενέργειας και Κλιματικής Αλλαγής σε ερώτηση των βουλευτών των Ανεξάρτητων Ελλήνων, Βασίλη Καπερνάρου και Ραχήλ Μακρή, όχι μόνο υπάρχει απόρρητο αρχείο με όλα τα στοιχεία του ορυκτού πλούτου της χώρας, αλλά…

… αυτό -παρότι αποτελεί ιδιοκτησία του ελληνικού Δημοσίου- έχει αφεθεί προς φύλαξη σε μια ιδιωτική εταιρεία, τα Ελληνικά Πετρέλαια! Σα να μην έφταναν αυτά, το υπουργείο έχει πληρώσει και 144.000 ευρώ για τη φύλαξη του αρχείου από τον ιδιώτη, τον τελευταίο ενάμιση χρόνο.

Για να γίνει απόλυτα κατανοητό: Εχουμε στα χέρια μας πλήρη έκθεση για το πού και τι ορυκτό πλούτο διαθέτει το ελληνικό υπέδαφος. Θα περίμενε, λοιπόν, ο Ελληνας που τόσα έχει υποστεί στην εποχή του μνημονίου, πρώτο μέλημα μια κυβέρνησης Ελλήνων να είναι η μελέτη και η αξιοποίηση του αρχείου αυτού προς όφελος της ταλαίπωρης της ελληνικής οικονομίας. Αλλά όχι. Αυτοί, αντί να κινηθούν προς αυτή την κατεύθυνση,προτίμησαν να αφήσουν το αρχείο σε ξένα χέρια και να απομυζούν στον Ελληνα πολίτη, τον οποίο βυθίζουν καθημερινά και περισσότερο στην ανέχεια, με χαράτσια, κάθε είδους φόρους, περικοπές μισθών, συντάξεων και επιδομάτων. Επέλεξαν να οδηγούν όλο και περισσότερους Ελληνες καθημερινά στην αυτοκτονία, παρά να αξιοποιήσουν τον ορυκτό μας πλούτο. Ή, μάλλον, έκαναν κάτι ακόμα χειρότερο: άφησαν το απόρρητο αρχείο στα χέρια ενός ιδιώτη με συγκεκριμένα συμφέροντα!

Όχι μόνο δεν εκμεταλλεύθηκαν την πολύτιμη αυτή γνώση προς όφελος του ελληνικού λαού, αλλά την άφησαν στην «καλή προαίρεση» του ιδιώτη… Μα, τόση ευπιστία; Τόση βεβαιότητα ότι ο ιδιώτης, παράλληλα με τις υπηρεσίες φύλαξης (για τις οποίες πληρώνουμε αδρά), δεν θα έμπαινε στον πειρασμό να ρίξει μια ματιά πού υπάρχει τι στο ελληνικό υπέδαφος; Και δε θα αξιοποιούσε αυτές τις πληροφορίες για τα συμφέροντά του, αφήνοντας τον ελληνικό λαό για μια ακόμη φορά «στην απέξω»; Αυτά τα σοκαριστικά αποκαλύφθηκαν από την απάντηση του ΥΠΕΚΑ στην ερώτηση που κατέθεσαν ο κ. Καπερνάρος και η κυρία Μακρή στις 12/12/2012. Το θέμα της ερώτησης ήταν: «Φύλαξη των αρχείων με τις απόρρητες έρευνες για τον ορυκτό πλούτο της χώρας». Η ερώτηση είχε υποβληθεί με αφορμή δημοσιεύματα και δηλώσεις του καθηγητή-συμβούλου του πρωθυπουργού κ. Αντώνη Φώσκολου. Συγκεκριμένα οι δύο βουλευτές των Ανεξάρτητων Ελλήνων ρωτούσαν:

Υπάρχουν αρχεία-χάρτες που αφορούν απόρρητες έρευνες για τον ορυκτό πλούτο της χώρας μας; Πού φυλάσσονται τα αρχεία των παραπάνω μελετών και με την επιτήρηση ποιων κρατικών οργάνων, ώστε να παραμείνουν αναλλοίωτα και ασφαλή; Τι σας οδήγησε, ενώ υπάρχουν οι εκθέσεις των παραπάνω ερευνών, να αναθέσετε εκ νέου ερευνητικές εργασίες για τον ίδιο λόγο; Στην περίπτωση που κάτι τέτοιο ήταν αναγκαίο να γίνει, θα συγκριθούν οι νέες εκθέσεις με τις προηγούμενες με δημοσιοποίηση των αποτελεσμάτων ώστε να υπάρξει πλήρης ενημέρωση του κοινού; Ποιος φορέας έχει ασχοληθεί με την ανάθεση των νέων αυτών ερευνητικών εργασιών και με ποια νομική διαδικασία; Παράλληλα ζητήθηκαν, η σύμβαση μίσθωσης του χώρου όπου φυλάσσονται τα αρχεία του ορυκτού πλούτου και τα σχετικά παραστατικά με τα οποία πληρώνονται μισθώματα για την φύλαξη των αρχείων.


Διαβάστε, τώρα, τι απίστευτο απαντά το υπουργείο: Στις 5/10/10, επιτροπή παρέλαβε το απόρρητο αρχείο από τα ΕΛΠΕ. Ήδη, όμως, από νωρίτερα (!), στις 11/3/09, η κυβέρνηση είχε συμφωνήσει το αρχείο να παραμείνει για φύλαξη στα ΕΛΠΕ, γιατί -λέει- είναι «ευαίσθητο» και μόνο εκεί υπάρχουν «συνθήκες ασφαλούς και κατάλληλης φύλαξης»! Εκτοτε, οι εκάστοτε κυβερνώντες αναζητούν ανάλογο χώρο να το φυλάξουν, αλλά δεν βρίσκουν πουθενά!

Είναι απλό. Το αρχείο δεν θέλει ΜΕ ΤΙΠΟΤΑ να φύγει από τα ΕΛΠΕ. Του αρέσει εκεί.




This is crucial knowledge for anyone in Europe who cares about defending Democracy, Human Rights and Civil Rights in Europe, because with the “killing of Greece” all three will be gone. Once it has been “legally” pulled through in Greece it is just a matter of relevant propaganda and implementation in the rest of Europe (according to the well known psychosocial problem-reaction-solution model).

This article was first published last Monday the 14th in SPITHA’s site, when the parliament in Athens gathered to vote for “Contract Modification of Main Finance Facility Agreement” signed on 07/12/2012 between lenders and Greece. As always of course accompanied by citizens protests on Syntagma square outside the Parliament. Mr Kasimatis is a prominent professor of Constitutional Law, teaching in the university of Athens and he is today an active member of Mikis Theodorakis resistance-movement SPITHA (read description in English) .




George Kasimatis  (Professor of Constitutional Law)

τα κοιτασματα υδρογοναθρακων στην ΕΛΛΑΔΑ  12 από την εκδήλωση της ΣΠΙΘΑΣ 7 - 11 -2012 ο Γεώργιος Κασιμάτης

The Parliament vote today for the “Modification Contract of the Main Finance Facility Agreement” signed on 07/12/2012 between lenders and Greece. With this procedure the MP’s who will vote for this Agreement must know what they vote on.

This Agreement, continue to legitimize the entire system of conditions and procedures that was established by the previous Memorandums and they violate fundamental principles of Parliamentary Democracy, the Constitution, the treaties of the European Union, the European Convention of Human Rights and International Law. Specifically, I briefly want to underline the following:

  1. As a key condition for the country’s loans, the waiver of the rights to protection of the state and its assets, which is provided by the Constitution, the European law and the International law, continue to apply (resignation of all the “immunities” and the national sovereignty, is foreseen for all loan Contracts and the fiscal adjustment program – “Memorandum” -).
  2. The entire binding of all the assets of the Greek state is continued (mobile, real estate, securities, and whole undersea mineral wealth of the country, etc.) in favor of the lenders and “as long as the debt exists” regardless of whether Greece pay its amortization obligations or not. Namely, Greece can not exploit the property without the approval of the lenders and TAIPED (Fund for the Development of the Private Property of the State) through which each Fund’s income from any exploitation will accrue to the lenders.
  3. Greece is not allowed to conclude with any other country or a private entity – Greek or foreign – enterprise agreement that includes exploiting its assets without the approval of the lenders and TAIPED – which forms a shameful and illegal institution of full mortgage of the Greek State
  4. For Greece’s obligations, English law applies which doesn’t recognize any rights of the debtor. Further, the jurisdiction of the English courts also applies for the first Memorandum and the courts of Luxembourg for the next “Memorandums.” Lenders, however – only they – have the right to use also the Greek courts. Obviously they rely on the disgraceful legality certification willingly offered and provided in every step of the capturing of Greece, which is based on a Loan Agreement by State Legal Advisers, who commit serious misconduct.
  5. The lenders – stipulates the Convention that is passed today – can, if the loan agreement is not fulfilled, proceed into seizure of any asset of the State and the Bank of Greece, without any restriction (may even confiscate the money of the state budget which is deposited in the Bank of Greece and is destined for the payment of costs-wages, pensions, defense spending, education, health etc etc)
  6. The voting procedure for the international agreements which is followed and was followed also in March 2012 is contrary to the Constitution and international law. As international Agreements they are unsubstantiated and are therefor not binding Greece legally.
  7. The current procedure violates once again the parliamentary and the representative authority for the ratification of international conventions which guarantee the Constitution and international law. Moreover it demeans the Democratic representation and the Greek Parliament: (A) instead of being ratified by a special law and discussed in parliament with ease, they come as an urgent procedure, integrated into one of the last public draft articles (in today’s case in Article 53 as being a simple amendment). (B) The main contract signed on 15.3.2012 and which contains the basic commitments and is modified by this that they brought to Parliament today, has it been distributed to the MPs? Has it been ratified by law? (C) “The Convention Plan” was approved by Parliament – something that happened for the first time in parliamentary annals and the approval was not only invalid  it also ridiculed the Parliament – is this  “Plan” the main convention? The signed “Main Contract for Financing Facilitation” of 15.3.2012 being modified today has not been ratified by the parliament, nor was it distributed to the MP’s, as concluded! The Government brought for voting today only the amendments to the Convention of 7.12.2012! Thus, the Parliament, in fact, does not know what they are voting on. This is what the government and the Constitution has become.
  8. However, all these procedures are contrary to the Constitution and legally without foundation. Parties and Members who do not wish to contribute or to take part in the unprecedented commitments of Greece, nor the unprecedented humiliation of the Representative Body, of the Constitution and of the Democracy, if government majority in parliament is not declining it, should leave the Parliament. It would be an act in accordance with the Constitution and parts of its ending article, in order to express in the clearest manner the opposition to the violation of the constitution and the human and citizens rights by the lenders with the cooperation of parliamentarians who support all these illegal agreements. It would express the right and the duty of a the representative body to resist the encroachment of national sovereignty, popular sovereignty, the human and citizens rights, and the vital interests of Greece. It would also express support to the Greek people that constantly is abused and trampled on.
  9. Finally, opposed to this enslavement of Greece and the ongoing violation of any legality, MPs should proceed with organized and well justifiable grounds to take steps to provide information, about the violations of fundamental principles of the representative democracy, the human rights and the national sovereignty, to the competent international organizations: The Council of Europe, International Labour Office, the International protection of Human Rights in Geneva, the European Union and all other international organizations for the protection of fundamental principles and human rights.
  10. I should note that the body responsible for the protection of social rights of the Council of Europe has advised that cuts in pensions and other social rights is illegal. Why does the labour unions ADEDY and GESSE who have the stated opinion not raised it?? Why doesn’t the Parliament raise it?

Piraeus 14.1.2013
George Kasimatis


The issues here are:

1) that EU has applied English law when it suits the lenders, in order to be able to treat Greece as a “company” and not a Country!… 

2) that the first Memorandum was voted through against the laws and rules that the Constitution provide for these procedures. The Greek Quisling-governments have signed these agreements violating the constitution and that alone make the “agreements” invalid…

These issues are something that SPITHA and others in Greece have reported and continue to report to Strasbourg, Geneva and Brussels even though the Greek media (and most certainly the European media) are keeping quiet about the illegalities around the “Agreements” with the Troika. These matters are extremely crucial for the citizens of Europe to understand and it is essential that they support the Greek people in this… Once these unlawful and disgraceful “agreements” is pulled through and “legalized”, the European Democracy and its Justice is gone.

Please, disturb your journalists and parliamentarians in written letters and ask them about the legality behind these undemocratic, legal procedures as often as possible?

Kosmas Loumakis

The World Government Exposed

18 Jan 2013

old map of worldThat we live in a world of “Agenda Politics” is absolutely clear. Governments come and go, but the agenda never changes. Policies left incomplete by one government are taken up with gusto by the next. Civil servants get involved in writing party manifestos.

One of the most obvious of the agendas that our politicians are pushing is that of “World Government”. The British Parliament is now subservient to so many foreign bodies and institutions it is hard to keep count.

This is not a new agenda. It has been pushed since before the twentieth century by, among others, the “rat pack” of the Huxleys, H.G. Wells, Bertrand Russell and the like. And it finds its expression in a host of organisations, “think” tanks, NGOs and committees.

The most obvious example of those organisations, of course, is Julian Huxley’s United Nations.

It was Franklin Roosevelt who first coined the term “United Nations”. His vision, however, was for a forum of sovereign nations; a world apart from what the United Nations has become.

Perhaps a less obvious path to world government is the Commonwealth, and a question which has long been on our minds is, which is the path which is most likely to get us there?

A hint came in July 2010, when the Queen addressed the UN General Assembly. She said:

This September, leaders will meet to agree how to achieve the Millennium Development Goals when each nation will have its own distinctive contribution to make … Since I addressed you last, the Commonwealth, too, has grown vigorously to become a group of nations representing nearly two billion people. It gives its whole-hearted support to the significant contributions to the peace and stability of the world made by the United Nations and its Agencies. Last November, when I opened the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting in Trinidad and Tobago, I told the delegates that the Commonwealth had the opportunity to lead. Today I offer you the same message.

The implications of this are staggering. Here, the British monarch is telling the world that she is creating the largest power bloc within the United Nations; a power bloc with 54 votes, compared to the single vote of, say, the USA, Russia or China.

The Commonwealth is the British Empire

Contrary to rumour, the British Empire never went away. Commonwealth nations never, in reality, obtained independence from Britain. Instead, they simply went through a process of devolution; home rule instead of direct rule. Puppet presidents and prime ministers to replace Viceroys and Governors.

In any case, the British Empire was never really about Britain, and has certainly never been about the British people. It was, and remains, a corporate financial “empire”; an international trading empire based on the looting of nations and the trafficking of drugs. For a while, that corporate infrastructure was effectively nationalised, and took on the appearance of being a British political empire, rather than a corporate financial one.

After the second world war, however, “empire” became unfashionable. It was time to move to the next phase of the globalist agenda, so the empire shrunk into the shadows. The colonies were restructured and the embryonic institutions of World Government were formed.

Today it has raised its ugly head above the parapet once again with renewed vigour, and once again, we stare into the jaws of a now truly global, corporate, communitarian monster.

british royal family

A return to feudalism

The apex of the pyramid of feudal power is the monarch. In Britain, our monarch and her family get involved in a wide range of activities, some commercial, some not. One area the British Royal Family has been involved in is environmentalism, particularly so-called “Sustainable Development”.

Both Prince Philip and Prince Charles push the idea that humanity is a parasite on the face of the earth; Philip perhaps a little more openly since he has expressed his desire to be reincarnated as a virus which would solve what he views as the global population problem.

Nonetheless, both father and son head up the global environmental push for massive depopulation, limiting of technology except where it oppresses and limiting access to natural resources.

Prince Philip’s World Wildlife Fund is directly responsible for the deaths of many, many people through it’s interference, for example, with irrigation programmes right around the world which would feed millions.

But it is Prince Charles’ Prince of Wales International Business Leaders Forum which, along with the IMF, World Bank and the United Nations have really been pushing the sustainable development policy, including the UN’s “Agenda 21”.

Agenda 21

Agenda 21 is a term which has mostly been dropped these days. Too many people became too aware of what it was – a modern form of feudalism.

Agenda 21 designed a global movement, coordinated through a global to local action plan to create world government in accordance with certain objectives. Let’s look at some of its key policy objectives:

  • populations to be concentrated in cities
  • an end to national sovereignty
  • the abolition of private property
  • the restructuring of the family unit and increasing limitations on mobility and individual opportunity

Now, consider the policies coming out of our own government:

  • the systematic destruction of our farming industry
  • an end to national sovereignty European and UN “laws” applied at the local level – the “Big Society”
  • private property and assets stripped away through economic hardship and crippling taxes
  • children stolen by the state and pushed into a multi billion pound care system
  • 0-19 education programmes (schools opening longer, no parental influence)
  • crippling public transport costs and soon to be imposed road charging

So while the term “Agenda 21” has been dropped, the policies it represented absolutely have not. They have simply been transformed into the Big Society and the Millennium Development Goals. The agenda remains, and at its heart is the drive for world government.

United Nations flag

The Leadership Agenda

Let’s look again at what we said about Agenda 21 above – “a global movement, coordinated through a global to local action plan”. A key facet of that action plan is to push the agenda down to the most local levels in society.

One mechanism for achieving that has been the absolute destruction of our education system. The inability of our teachers to teach has nothing to do with their capability as teachers, but rather the imposition of ever more ridiculous processes and procedures, which bar them from teaching effectively. The deliberate dumbing down of entire generations of children guarantees that those children will grow up as more “sustainable” human beings, because stupid adults earn less and therefore consume less. Stupid adults are incapable of recognising delphi technique when it is being used upon them. Stupid adults are incapable of understanding the lessons of history, or of Shakespeare.
But stupid adults still need leadership, and it is through the massive increase in “leadership” training that the world government agenda is being implemented. Please see our One World Governance series for more on this.

As stated above, the apex of the pyramid of feudal power is the monarch. Historically, the military stronghold from which such power was wielded was the castle. One such stronghold is Windsor Castle.

Windsor Castle is home of the Windsor Leadership Trust. St George’s House College states that:

Through a unique portfolio of programmes and consultations, held at St George’s House, Windsor Castle, we provide opportunities for leaders to develop their own leadership wisdom and insight. Leaders from all sectors take part, including business, government, military, religion, and not-for-profit.

St George’s House was founded in 1966 by H.R.H. The Duke of Edinburgh and the then Dean of Windsor, Robin Woods, as a place where people of influence and responsibility in every area of society can come together to explore and communicate their views and analysis of contemporary issues.

The website of the World Bank contains a page dedicated to a ‘Leadership Program: Windsor Meeting, July 2007. It reads:

Following consultations on the establishment of a Global Leadership Initiative (GLI) to generate support – globally – for leadership development interventions, a second meeting of the core group for the Initiative (GLI) took place in Windsor, UK, from July 8 to 10 2007. Organisations represented at this meeting were UNDP, DfID, CIDA, the Windsor Leadership Trust, and the World Bank (PRMPS and WBIGP).

All meetings at the Windsor Leadership Trust are held under the Chatham House Rule which the majority of UK Column readers would associate with Julia Middleton’s Common Purpose.

Connections between the Monarchy, common purpose and the United Nations

The Windsor 2012 Annual Lecture held on Monday 28th May this year was given by Assistant Commissioner Cressida Dick QPM, of The Metropolitan Police.

Dick was the policewoman in charge of the operation that led to the death of Jean Charles de Menezes, mistaken for a suicide bomber at (London’s) Stockwell tube station,  According to the response to a Freedom of Information request by the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) dated 8th September 2008, Deputy Assistant Commissioner Cressida Dick attended a training course run by Common Purpose whilst serving with Thames Valley Police (TVP).

Researchers have also discovered that Dr. Kate Ardern MB ChB, MSc , FFPH, Executive Director of Public Health for the Borough of Wigan, and graduate of Merseyside Common Purpose (1999) is also an Alumnus of the Windsor Leadership Programme with which she has an ongoing involvement.

In ‘Developing Tomorrow’s Leaders, CBI Guide to Leadership’ by Prof John Adair (published by Windsor Leadership Trust in September 2007):

Public leadership programmes should be used selectively. Their chief value is to get managers out of their corporate silos and cross-fertilising with managers from a wide variety of organisations. Recommended programmes in this context include those of the Windsor Leadership Trust, the Whitehall and Industry Group, the Campaign for Leadership and Common Purpose.

In 2009 John Adair was made United Nations Chair of Strategic Leadership. Based in Turin, he has launched a strategic leadership programme in association with the UN.In Chapter 1 of her book ‘Beyond authority: Leadership in a changing world’’ Julia Middleton, CEO Common Purpose writes:

Society needs leaders who can overcome the silo problem inside their organisation – and then move across different spheres of activity outside it and connect them too. Then, perhaps, we can start to shift the ‘silo problem’ in society as well.

Amongst the Windsor Leadership Trust Movers and Shakers Autumn 2011 we discover Oliver Mack, WLP February 2001 now Chief Operating Officer at Common Purpose.

The Windsor Leadership Trust supports the Clore Leadership programme. The Clore Leadership programme is supported by Common Purpose. The relationship between these organisations is incestuous in nature.

According to Linkedin Doug King LVO MA is Assistant Private Secretary to The Queen. He is a Common Purpose 20:20 graduate and Windsor Leadership Trust Alumni.

queen phil thrones

CSC Leaders

Windsor Leadership Trust is not the only training organisation that Prince Philip has set up, however.

According to the Linked In Page of Sam Stewart, Plymouth based Director of CSC Leaders and ex-regional director of Common Purpose, CSC Leaders:

…will assemble 100 of the most exceptional individuals from across the Commonwealth with the purpose of tackling challenges that business, governments and society face today and build global relationships needed by the leaders of tomorrow . CSCLeaders is the renewal of HRH The Duke of Edinburgh’s Commonwealth Study Conferences and represents a partnership between HRH The Duke of Edinburgh’s Commonwealth Study Conferences (UK Fund) and Common Purpose, the international leadership organisation operating in 18 countries which has been giving people the inspiration, skills and connections to become better leaders both at work and in society for over 21 years. The Duke of Edinburgh’s Commonwealth Study Conferences were first initiated by HRH The Duke of Edinburgh … The Conferences have continued to run every six years or so, hosted by a different Commonwealth country.

World Government via the UN or the Commonwealth

Our research has led us to conclude that the Commonwealth is well on its way to becoming the key power bloc leading us to World Government, via the United Nations. It would appear that the question is not whether one or the other will take us there, since both are. As for who is pushing the agenda, so far all paths lead us back to the British Crown.



b_3173_or_logoTime to refresh our memory’s on the Greek resistance movement, Mikis Theodorakis’, SPITHA, since everyone in the European media, not least the Swedish, has decided to boycott this initiative from an old fighter, hero and cultural giant. Two and a half year now all media has buried in silence, any political or judicial actions this movement has undertaken.. It is the only REAL “Greek” alternative for the Greek people and that’s why it is boycotted in Greece and in whole of Europe by the media. 


Summary of the manifesto

spitha-andmikisRight from the introduction of his speech, Mikis Theodorakis immediately points out the main purpose of his initiative: to spark off the creation of a movement of independent citizens beyond the scope of political factions, through the commencement of a nation-wide dialogue of ideas.  He characterises Greece’s basic problem as the country’s incessant, varied, and undisguised as well as latent (due to globalization) post-civil-war dependence on the USA. Hence, the challenge that independent citizens are obliged to take on is one of liberation, of both the nation and the people’s consciousness, against an enemy that has corroded us from the inside out.  Our weapons are our contemplation and reflection, which must lead to the necessary, urgent actions.

Here follows a chronicle of the actions, or rather the absence of any official actions of the present-day government, which have led,with suspiciously mathematical accuracy, to the terms and stipulations imposed by the Memorandum (Law 3845 passed by the Greek Parliament in May 2010) and the Intenational Monetary Fund on our country.  The unprecedented idleness of the government from the beginning of its term has adeptfully brought us to the dilemma: “Bankrupcy or IMF”.  While the government was busy with little else except for proclaiming to the world the economic slump which it had inheritted from previous administrations, the spreads rose to a record high of 1000 points and the slump evolved into destruction, with the full responsibility of the government. Thus, Greece was forced, by the Papandreou administration, according to the terms of the Memorandum and the Loan Contract, to resign irrevokably and unconditionally, as stated by Professor of Constitutional Law George Kasimatis, from its National Sovereignty, virtually succumbing to the governance of our lenders, the IMF and the banks of Europe, prey to american and german imperialism.  If we do not manage to pay back our loan, a large part of which returns to the lending banks and Germany as payment for military equipment, our lenders have the legal right to seize the public property of our country.

With reference to the history of the national debt, burdened by this lending, it is pointed out that the administrations of Andreas and George Papandreou are responsible for its increase by 70% and 12% (over only one year) respectively.

All the other administrations are collectively responsible for an increase of 20%, part of which was the interest from previous claims. Mr. Juncker cynically declared that the European Central Bank was aware of all this. Mr. Theodorakis contends that the ECB’s silence implies its complicity.  It is therefore a malicious insult to our history and intelligence to accept the arrogant reign of a group of foreign employees.The alternative solutions, which the government had scandalously and inexcusably turned down prior to the Memorandum, are much more advantageous and feasible: engaging in loans and economic agreements with Russia and China.  The biggest part of the debt is interest.  The political approach of the present government inflates the debt to the point where it will not be able to be paid off by any means. Simultaneously, not only does the government not promote any  development in the least, but it also insinuates the possibility of early elections, causing a further widening of spreads, so as to perpetuate, it seems, the impossibility of participating normally in lending markets, and consequently our subjugation to the IMF and the troika EU-IMF-ECB.

There is, however, continues the manifesto’s writer, another route besides the depleting drainage and taxation of the citizens, which is imposed by the government under the auspices of the IMF and the detestable contract which the government itself caused.  According to an article by Mr. Delastik, this route implements the taxation of banks.  Hungary has courageously taken this approach, in decreasing taxation of personal income and refusing to comply with the IMF’s dictate for the further shrinking of the people’s income, thus causing many to fear, including the European banks, that this tactic would be an example for others to follow.

As for the goals and the methodology followed by the IMF, Mr. Papoulias’ analysis, which is referred to by Mr. Theodorakis, as well as the latter’s own findings, are revelational.  The IMF implements the theory of “shock” to supress healthy social reflexes and to promote the apathetic inaction of the people, just as continuous electrical shocks are able to transform an individual into a submissive being.  The IMF first hit the countries of Latin America in this way, almost all of which were ruled by dictatorships at the time (Argentina, Bolivia, Chile, and others). Aside from these countries, Roumanians and Indonesians can also testify to the destitution and social inequality which the IMF and its “shock” methods have brought on instead of the economic streamlining and restructuring which it had professed.  It couldn’t have been otherwise, since the IMF is a vehicle for the economic and political infiltration of the USA into countries of interest to it, with the aim to ransack them from the inside out, drain them economically and take advantage of them geostrategically.  In the case of Greece specifically, the systematic demolition of its “Greekness”, its History, its Culture, and ultimately of the Nation itself and its people, has been attempted since 1974.  Our patriotism and the love of our country, which unite the whole of our people and comprise our only guarantee for survival, are being undermined as something undesirable and “unwestern”. Education and Art are crucially afflicted.

Nonetheless, to care for our country, our Nation and Culture, is not nationalism but self-evident and honest patriotism.  With a blow dealt to our patriotism, our History and our Language,  a series of schemes is being orchestrated against our vital national interests, just as had been designed by Mr. Kissinger some decades ago.  The “Turkeyfication” of Cyprus is being attempted, now in collaboration with the government which supported the Anan plan against the will of 70% of the Cypriot people.  The concession of sovereignty rights is occuring on a military level as well, in the sphere NATO.  As Ms. Adam points out, since 2006 the new NATO dogma does not acknowledge Greece’s sovereignty rights for the islands of the eastern and central Aegean.  Greek military planes from the Larissa subheadquarters are forbidden to approach the islands of the eastern Aegean or fly nearer than 6 nautical miles from their coasts.  Twenty-one islands are not only being demilitarised, but their national identity is being called into question.  These dictates on the part of NATO   contravene International Treaties which are in effect in these regions, and open the way for Turkey’s contentions.  But it is not only these aims that are encouraged by american expantionist policy.  The unhistorical, irrational and distorted aims of Albania, Skopje, and Turkey regarding Thrace are also inflamed and supported by the USA.  While all these threats accumulate, and despite the international disgrace of the recent killing of unarmed civilians by the israeli army, the Papandreou administration inexplicably allows the israeli airforce to execute military drills in our national airspace.

All the above national threats, Mr. Theodorakis continues, call for a series of measures of National Defense, among which are the planning of a new national defense doctrine and the reconsideration of our relations with NATO.   Our political, economic, and cultural decline took place with the blessings of our political system, unions, mass media as well as with international assistance.  It is true that profound structural changes are needed, however not the ones that are being attempted.  The government is taking advantage of the common conviction of all Greek people that a separation with the past is necessary, in order to promote changes and ruptures that benefit a minority of bankers. The latter supported and support the present PASOK administration because they know that only PASOK, which controls the unions, could pass such changes without massive reactions on the part of the unions.

This crisis concerns all Greek citizens without exception.  In our battle to come out of this crisis we must, unfortunately, count on ourselves alone initially.  A first step is the proper management of the national debt.  Furthermore, it is of dire necessity to change our mentality and formulate a vision for our common future, for the true happiness of all of our people.  Towards these goals, we can put to financial work the property of the church and state, without selling it, we can implement taxation according to income level, we can create a pillar of national banking, we can contest for the annulment of part of our national debt and the long-postponed depositing of german war compensations.  We will have to depart from the IMF and look into new alliances, but also put into effect Greece’s development in all areas without exception.   Among the immediate actions which me can move forward with are the signing of a lower-interest-rate loan agreement with Moscow or Beijing, the cessation of provision of military equipment from Germany, and the carrying out of the necessary diplomatic motions to curtail the creeping contentions of Skopje, Albania and Turkey, in the context of the existing international treaties.

The most recent elections featured abstinence as the grand winner.  This legitimises the disobedience towards an antidemocratic legitimation of the few.  All united, Mr. Theodorakis concludes, we must oust foreign and domestic exploiters, cleanse the words “Greece”, “Nation”, “Democracy”, “Truth”, “Respect”, “Solidarity”, “Freedom”, “Hospitality” from the mud that has tainted them in recent years, and contest for a just and blessed Greece for all.  This fatherland belongs to all of us, and only to us.

31-5-2011 PROPYLAIA

Χωρίς τίτλοxvbsdfghbdfgndfgnmdghnm



Before the Law – Μπροστά στο νόμο – Framför Lagen, (Franz Kafka)

(English, Ελληνικά, Svenska)


In order to grasp the true character of the current relationship between the citizen and the “power”, the “system”, the government,.. this passage from Franz Kafka’s, “The Process”, is necessary to understand – In the political climate of the false democracies, the false legal systems, the false media and the false institutions,.. the real rights of the citizen is just an illusion.


Για να πιάσουμε τον αληθινό χαρακτήρα της σημερινής σχέσης μεταξύ του πολίτη και της “εξουσίας”, του “σύστηματος”, της κυβέρνησης,.. είναι απαραίτητο να γίνει κατανοητό αυτό το απόσπασμα της “Δίκης” του Φραντς Κάφκα,  – Στο πολιτικό κλίμα των ψευδών δημοκρατιών, το ψευδών νομικών συστημάτων, τα ψεύτικα μέσα ενημέρωσης και τα ψευδείς θεσμικά όργανα,.. τα πραγματικά δικαιώματα του πολίτη είναι απλώς μια ψευδαίσθηση.


För att greppa den sanna karaktären av dagens förhållande mellan medborgaren och “makten”, “systemet”, regeringen,.. är denna passage från Franz Kafkas “Processen”, nödvändig att förstå – I de falska demokratiernas, de falska rättssystemets, den falska medians och de falska institutionernas politiska klimat,.. är medborgarnas verkliga rättigheter  bara en illusion.

Kosmas Loumakis




by Franz Kafka

“Before the Law”

kafka26Before the law sits a gatekeeper. To this gatekeeper comes a man from the country who asks to gain entry into the law. But the gatekeeper says that he cannot grant him entry at the moment. The man thinks about it and then asks if he will be allowed to come in later on. “It is possible,” says the gatekeeper, “but not now.” At the moment the gate to the law stands open, as always, and the gatekeeper walks to the side, so the man bends over in order to see through the gate into the inside. When the gatekeeper notices that, he laughs and says: “If it tempts you so much, try it in spite of my prohibition. But take note: I am powerful. And I am only the most lowly gatekeeper. But from room to room stand gatekeepers, each more powerful than the other. I can’t endure even one glimpse of the third.” The man from the country has not expected such difficulties: the law should always be accessible for everyone, he thinks, but as he now looks more closely at the gatekeeper in his fur coat, at his large pointed nose and his long, thin, black Tartar’s beard, he decides that it would be better to wait until he gets permission to go inside. The gatekeeper gives him a stool and allows him to sit down at the side in front of the gate. There he sits for days and years. He makes many attempts to be let in, and he wears the gatekeeper out with his requests. The gatekeeper often interrogates him briefly, questioning him about his homeland and many other things, but they are indifferent questions, the kind great men put, and at the end he always tells him once more that he cannot let him inside yet. The man, who has equipped himself with many things for his journey, spends everything, no matter how valuable, to win over the gatekeeper. The latter takes it all but, as he does so, says, “I am taking this only so that you do not think you have failed to do anything.” During the many years the man observes the gatekeeper almost continuously. He forgets the other gatekeepers, and this one seems to him the only obstacle for entry into the law. He curses the unlucky circumstance, in the first years thoughtlessly and out loud, later, as he grows old, he still mumbles to himself. He becomes childish and, since in the long years studying the gatekeeper he has come to know the fleas in his fur collar, he even asks the fleas to help him persuade the gatekeeper. Finally his eyesight grows weak, and he does not know whether things are really darker around him or whether his eyes are merely deceiving him. But he recognizes now in the darkness an illumination which breaks inextinguishably out of the gateway to the law. Now he no longer has much time to live. Before his death he gathers in his head all his experiences of the entire time up into one question which he has not yet put to the gatekeeper. He waves to him, since he can no longer lift up his stiffening body.

The gatekeeper has to bend way down to him, for the great difference has changed things to the disadvantage of the man. “What do you still want to know, then?” asks the gatekeeper. “You are insatiable.” “Everyone strives after the law,” says the man, “so how is that in these many years no one except me has requested entry?” The gatekeeper sees that the man is already dying and, in order to reach his diminishing sense of hearing, he shouts at him, “Here no one else can gain entry, since this entrance was assigned only to you. I’m going now to close it.


απο Φραντς Καφκα

“Μπροστα στο Νομο”

kafka26Μπροστά στο νόμο στέκει ένας θυρωρός, σ’ αυτό το θυρωρό έρχεται ένας χωρικός και ζητά να μπει μέσα. Μα ο θυρωρός λέει πως δεν μπορεί να τον αφήσει τώρα να μπει. Ο άνθρωπος συλλογιέται και ύστερα ρωτά μήπως θα μπορούσε να μπει αργότερα. “‘Ίσως”, λέει ο θυρωρός, “τώρα όμως όχι”. Η πόρτα είναι ανοιχτή όπως πάντα και καθώς παραμερίζει ο θυρωρός, σκύβει ο άνθρωπος, για να κοιτάξει μέσα από την πόρτα. Μόλις το αντιλήφθηκε αυτό ο θυρωρός, γελά και λέει: “Αν το τραβά η όρεξη σου, δοκίμασε να μπεις, μ’ όλο που σου το απαγόρεψα. Πρόσεξε όμως: είμαι δυνατός. Και δεν είμαι παρά ο πιο κάτω απ’ όλους τους θυρωρούς. Από αίθουσα σ’ αίθουσα είναι κι άλλοι θυρωροί, ο ένας πιο δυνατός από τον άλλο. Τη θέα του τρίτου μόλις, ούτ’ εγώ μπορώ να την αντέξω”. Τέτοιες δυσκολίες δεν τις περίμενε ο χωρικός. Ο νόμος ωστόσο πρέπει να ‘ναι στον καθένα και πάντα προσιτός, σκέπτεται, και καθώς τώρα κοιτάζει προσεχτικά το θυρωρό, τυλιγμένο στο γούνινο πανωφόρι του, τη μεγάλη σουβλερή του μύτη, τη μακριά, αραιή, μαύρη, τατάρικη γενειάδα, αποφασίζει να περιμένει καλύτερα ίσαμε να πάρει την άδεια να μπει. Ο θυρωρός του δίνει ένα σκαμνί και τον αφήνει να καθίσει πλάι στην πόρτα. Εκεί δα κάθεται μέρες και χρόνια. Κάνει πολλές προσπάθειες να του επιτρέψουν να μπει, και κουράζει τον θυρωρό με τα παρακάλια του. Ο θυρωρός του κάνει συχνά μικρορωτήματα, σαν αυτά που κάνουν οι μεγάλοι κύριοι, και στο τέλος του λέει ολοένα, πως δεν μπορεί ακόμα να τον αφήσει να μπει. Ο άνθρωπος, που ήταν καλά εφοδιασμένος για το ταξίδι του, τα ξόδεψε όλα, ακόμη κι ό,τι πολύτιμο είχε, σε δωροδοκίες για το θυρωρό. Εκείνος τα δέχεται όλα και ύστερα λέει: “Τα δέχομαι μόνο και μόνο για να μη νομίσεις πως παρέλειψες τίποτα.” Όλα αυτά τα πολλά χρόνια ο άνθρωπος παρατηρεί το θυρωρό σχεδόν αδιάκοπα. Αποξεχνά τους άλλους θυρωρούς, κι αυτός ο πρώτος του φαίνεται το μοναδικό εμπόδιο για να μπει στο νόμο. Καταριέται την κακή τύχη. Τα πρώτα χρόνια χωρίς συγκρατημό και δυνατά, αργότερα, όσο γεράζει, μουρμουρίζει μόνο. Αρχίζει να παιδιαρίζει, και, μια και μελετώντας χρόνια το θυρωρό γνώρισε και τους ψύλλους του γούνινου γιακά του, παρακαλεί και τους ψύλλους να τον βοηθήσουν και ν’ αλλάξουν τη γνώμη, του θυρωρού. Τέλος, το φως λιγοστεύει και δεν ξέρει, αν γύρω του αλήθεια σκοτεινιάζει, ή αν μονάχα τα μάτια του τον απατούν. Ωστόσο, αναγνωρίζει τώρα μια λάμψη μέσα στο σκοτάδι, που ξεχύνεται άσβεστη μέσα από του νόμου την πόρτα. Δεν έχει πια πολλή ζωή. Πριν από το θάνατο του σμίγουν όλες οι πείρες όλης του της ζωής σε ένα ρώτημα, που δεν είχε κάνει ως σήμερα στο θυρωρό. Του γνέφει, γιατί δεν μπορεί πια ν’ ανασηκώσει το ξυλιασμένο του κορμί.

Ο θυρωρός πρέπει να σκύψει πολύ κοντά του, γιατί το ύψος του ανθρώπου έχει πολύ αλλάξει. “Τι θες λοιπόν ακόμα να μάθεις;” ρωτά ο θυρωρός, “είσαι αχόρταγος…”. “‘Όλοι μάχονται για το νόμο”, λέει ο άνθρωπος, “πώς τυχαίνει να μη ζητά κανένας άλλος εκτός από μένα να μπει;” Ο θυρωρός νιώθει πως ο άνθρωπος αγγίζει κιόλας στο τέλος και, για να φτάσει την ακοή του που χάνεται, ουρλιάζει: “Κανένας άλλος δε μπορούσε να γίνει δεκτός εδώ, γιατί η είσοδος ήταν για σένα προορισμένη. Πηγαίνω τώρα να την κλείσω.”


av Franz Kafka

“Framför Lagen”

kafka26Framför lagen står en dörrvakt. Till denne dörrvakt kommer en man ifrån landet och ber om tillträde till lagen. Men dörrvakten säger att han just nu inte kan bevilja honom tillträde. Mannen funderar och frågar därefter om han får gå in senare. – Det är möjligt, säger dörrvakten, men inte just nu. Eftersom att porten till lagen som vanligt är öppen och dörrvakten går åt sidan, lutar sig mannen fram för att se in genom porten. När dörrvakten märker detta skrattar han och säger : – Om det är frestande för dig kan du väl försöka gå in trots mitt förbud. Men kom ihåg: jag är mäktig. Och jag är bara den lägsta dörrvakten. Från sal till sal möts man av dörrvakter, den ena mäktigare än den andra. Redan åsynen av den tredje står jag inte ens ut med. Sådana svårigheter har mannen från landet inte väntat sig, lagen ska ju alltid stå öppen för alla och envar, tänker han, men när han nu ser närmare på dörrvakten som står där i sin päls, med sin stora spetsiga näsa, sitt långa, tunna, svarta tartarskägg, beslutar han sig för att ändå hellre vänta tills han får tillåtelse att gå in. Dörrvakten ger honom en pall och låter honom slå sig ned vid sidan om dörren. Där sitter han sedan år ut och år in. Han gör många försök att bli insläppt och tröttar ut vakten med sina böner. Dörrvakten förhör honom lite då och då, frågar ut honom om hans hembyggd och mycket annat ´, men han är egentligen inte intresserad utan frågar bara som höga herrar brukar fråga och säger till slut återigen att han ännu inte kan släppa in honom. Mannen som har utrustat sig ordentligt för sin resa använder allt han har, hur värdefullt det än är, för att försöka muta dörrvakten. Denne tar visserligen emot allt men säger samtidigt: – Jag tar emot det bara för att du inte ska tro att du har försummat något. Under årens lopp iaktar mannen dörrvakten nästan oavbrutet. Han glömmer bort de andra dörrvakterna, och denna första tycks vara det enda hindret för att komma in i lagen. Han förbannar sitt oblida öde, de första åren högt och ljudligt, senare, när han blivit gammal, mummlar han för sig själv han blir som barn på nytt, och eftersom att han under sina årsöånga studier av dörrvakten har bekantat sig med lopporna i hans pälskrage, ber han även lopporna bevaka dörrvakten. Till slut blir hans syn svag men han kan inte avgöra om det verkligen mörknar kring honom eller om det bara är synen som sviker. Men i mörker skönjer han nu tydligt ett ljus som outsläckligt strålar ut ur lagens dörr… Nu lever han inte länge till. Innan han dör samlas i hans huvud alla erfarenheter från hela denna tid till en fråga, som han ännu aldrig ställt till dörrvakten. Han vinkar honom till sig, eftersom att han inte längre kan räta på sin allt stelare kropp.

Dörrvakten måste böja sig djupt mot honom, ty skillnaden i storlek mellan dem har starkt förändrats mellan dem till mannens nackdel. -Vad är det du vill veta, frågar dörrvakten, du får då aldrig nog. – Alla söker sig ju till lagen, säger mannen, hur kommer det sig att ingen mer än jag begärt tillträde under alla dessa år? Dörrvakten märker att slutet är nära, och för att nå fram till mannen, vars hörsel nu börjar avta, vrålar han till honom: – Här kunde ingen annan få tillträde, ty denna ingång var avsedd endast för dig. Jag går nu och stänger den.




-120 παρ.4 Συντ: “η τήρηση του Συντάγματος επαφίεται στον Πατριωτισμό τωνΕλλήνων που δικαιούνται και υποχρεούνται να αντιστέκονται με κάθε μέσο εναντίον οποιουδήποτε επιχειρεί να το καταλύσει με την βία”.

Κατάλυση του Συντάγματος έχουμε όταν καταλύεται άμεσα ή έμμεσα το πολίτευμα. Η παραίτηση από την ασυλία που πραγματοποιείται με τα Μνημόνια, προσβάλλει την κυριαρχία του λαού, τους κυρίαρχους θεσμούς και τη λαϊκή κυριαρχία ως θεμέλιο του πολιτεύματος. Η αντίσταση μπορεί να γίνει με κάθε μέσο,από το πιο ήπιο έως και το πιο έντονο, και το μέσο αυτό είναι θεμιτό υπό τον όρο της αναγκαιότητας και της αναλογικότητας.


%d bloggers like this: