The Ojai Post

That photo is gross!

Meillieim,
I sure there is somebody in this world that understands you, but your obsession with David Rockefeller and the Rothschild family is beyond bizarre...We live in 21 century. David Rockefeller has never had anything do with management of JP Morgan. Go back to retrofitting the scram jet or bringing cold-fusion to Valley of Ayeewehh!!

G8 Fiat Today From London, Ordered by Prime Minister Gordon Brown:

:: The system must not be transparent, with full openness by secret government, and no participation by the citizens

:: There must be conflict of interest, and no integrity, and he singled out ratings agencies to enforce the dicta

:: Irresponsibility must in the future be global

:: Unsound banking practice will require greater Crown regulation of both insolvency and ill-liquidity

:: A new age system of global control by the West will require a "new financial architecture for the Global Age". Institutions like the IMF, founded in the 1940s, are not adequately equipped to subvert the 21st century

Millennium,

If people want a quick video on why the Federal Reserve isn't federal and doesn't have any reserves, they can go to:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4dpJL6ANnV0

And of course you're right that Rockefeller and the Rothschilds run the Federal Reserve.

Jock

US Constitution Gave Legal Ownership and Control of United States to London

They who Own The Law Own the Banks. They Who Own The Law and Banks Own the Corporations. They Who Own The Law and Banks and Corporations Own the Media. They Who Own The Law and Banks and Corporations and Media Own the Governments. They Who Own The Law and Banks and Corporations and Media and Governments Own the World.

House Rothschild Owns Common Law Crown Temple In The Center Of London.

Who really owns the United States, Canada, Britain, Ireland and much more besides? What Legal Guild setup the Common Law system in the World, and the obedience to it by all nations?

The government and 'legal' system of the United States is controlled by the 'Crown'. The Crown is not only the British monarch as widely believed, but is the 'City', an independent legal-guild state in London. In turn, the 'City' or the 'Crown' is really the Knights Templar Church, also known as the Crown Temple or Crown Templar, and this is located between Fleet Street and Victoria Embankment.

The Temple grounds are also home to the Crown Offices at Crown Office Row. The Crown Temple1 controls the global 'legal' system, including those in the United States and Canada, because all Bar Associations are franchises of the International Bar Association at the Inns of Court at Crown Temple based at Chancery Lane in London. All Bar Associations' are franchises of the Crown and all Bar Attorneys throughout the world pledge a solemn oath to the Temple, even though they are not told that this is what they are doing.

Bar Association 'licensed' Attorneys must keep to their oath, pledge and terms of allegiance to the Crown Temple if they are to be "called to Bar" and work in the 'legal' profession anywhere in the world. The 'ruling' monarch is also subordinate to the Crown Temple and has been so since the reign of King John in the 13th century when royal sovereignty was transferred to the Crown Temple and, through that, to the Roman Church.

King John (1167-1216) is a key to this story. It was at the Chancel, or Chancery, of the Crown Inner Temple Court in January 1215 that King John was faced with the demands of the English barons to confirm the rights enshrined in the Magna Carta. When he signed the Magna Carta in 1215 historical propaganda promotes this as an event that extended human freedom, but the reality, obedience to the Crown's writing of Common Law, was very different.

The 'governments' of the United States and Canada, and Australia and New Zealand, and all of the UK are subsidiaries of the Crown Temple and so is the US 'central bank', the Federal Reserve. Indeed the global banking system is controlled by the Crown Temple as well as the worldwide 'legal' system. Bar Associations are awarded their franchises by the four Inns of Court at Temple Bar. These are the Inner Temple, Middle Temple, Lincoln's Inn and Gray's Inn -- and they are nothing less than exclusive secret societies without charters or statutes. The secret government. They are a law unto themselves.

The Inner Temple controls the legal system franchise for Canada and Britain while the Middle Temple does the same for the United States. Queen Elizabeth II is a member of both temples. These so-called 'Illuminati' always seek to control both 'sides' in any situation.

Thus at least five signatories to the American Declaration of Independence were Temple Bar Attorneys who had pledged allegiance to the Crown. And their Constitution gives first authority and control of the US Government to the Crown and Banks of England. [Viz. also in Australia where the Crown can remove the Prime Minister at any time for any reason, and in New Zealand where the Crown is the ultimate legal appellate for all.]

Another Middle Temple agent during the formation of the United States was Alexander Hamilton who structured the American banking system in line with the Crown Temple agenda for control of the new United States (a 'State' is actually a legal entity of the Crown - a Crown Colony!).

As Michael Edward points out in an excellent Internet study:

"Americans were fooled into believing that the legal Crown Colonies comprising New England were independent nation states, but they never were nor are they today. They were and still are Colonies of the Crown Temple, through letters patent and charters, who have no legal authority to be independent from the Rule and Order of the Crown Temple. A legal State is a Crown Temple Colony.

"Neither the American people nor the Queen of Britain own America. The Crown Temple owns America through the deception of those who have worn their allegiance by oath to the Middle Templar Bar. The Crown Bankers and their Middle Templar Attorneys rule America through unlawful contracts, unlawful taxes, and, contract documents of false equity through debt deceit, all strictly enforced by their completely unlawful, but 'legal', Orders, Rules and Codes of the Crown Temple Courts Our so-called 'judiciary' in America. This is because the Crown Temple holds the land titles and estate deeds to all of North America."

Seven Middle Inn Templars who had pledged an oath of allegiance to the Crown Temple (including Alexander Hamilton) were among the members of the Constitutional Convention who signed the completed 'American Constitution' giving secret control over to London. How symbolic it is that copies of the American Constitution and the Declaration of Independence hang on the wall of the library of the Middle Temple in London. After all, they were the force behind both of them.

While Middle Bar Templars were orchestrating the illusion of freedom from the perceived rule by King George III, the king, too, was a sworn member of the same Middle Temple.

Michael Edward continues:

"1776 is the year that will truly live in infamy for all Americans. It is the year that the Crown Colonies became legally subserviet Crown States. The Declaration of Independence was a legal, not lawful, document. It was signed on both sides by representatives of the Crown Temple. Legally, it announced the status quo of the Crown Colonies to that of the new legal name called 'States' as direct possessive estates of the Crown. "The American people were hoodwinked into thinking they were declaring lawful independence from the Crown. Proof that the Colonies are still in Crown possession is the use of the word 'State' to signify a 'legal estate of possession.'

Had this been a document of and by the people, both the Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution would have been written using the word 'states'. By the use of 'State' the significance of a government of estate possession was legally established. All of the North American States are Crown Templar possessions through their legal document, signed by their representation of both parties to the contract, known as the Constitution of the United States of America."

Britain, Ireland the US and UK are owned by the Roman Church

So the United States, together with Canada, the United Kingdom and Ireland, are controlled by the Knights Templar 'Crown', but who owns the Knights Templar 'Crown'? Well, er..., the Pope, or rather the Crown Templar Illuminati that control him.

On May 15th 1213, our own friend King John, who was a puppet of the Templars, effectively signed away the Kingdom of England and Ireland to Pope Innocent III and the Roman Church, witnessed by the Crown Templars.

As King John said at the time:

"I myself bearing witness in the house of the Knights Templars."

The King John charter stated:

"We wish it to be known to all of you, through this our charter, furnished with our seal ... not induced by force or compelled by fear, but of our own good and spontaneous will and by the common counsel of our barons, do offer and freely concede to God and His holy apostles Peter and Paul and to our mother the holy Roman Church, and to our-lord Pope Innocent and to his Catholic successors, the whole kingdom of England and the whole kingdom Ireland, with all their rights and appurtenances .. : we perform and swear fealty for them to him our aforesaid lord Pope Innocent, and his Catholic successors and the Roman church ... binding our successors and our heirs by our wife forever, in similar manner to perform fealty and show homage to him who shall be chief pontiff at that time, and to the Roman church without demur.

As a sign ... we will and establish perpetual obligation and concession ... from the proper and especial revenues of our aforesaid kingdoms ... the Roman church shall receive yearly a thousand marks sterling ... saving to us and to our heirs our rights, liberties and regalia; all of which things, as they have been described above, we wish to have perpetually valid and firm; and we bind ourselves and our successors not to act counter to them.

And if we or anyone of our successors shall presume to attempt this, whoever he be, unless being duly warned he come to his kingdom, and his senses, he shall lose his right to the kingdom, and this charter of our obligation-and concession shall always remain firm."

Historical accounts concentrate on the fact that this charter obligated the Crown to pay money to the Roman Church, but it also states that if the terms of this charter are broken, the 'right to the Kingdom' shall be lost, returned to the Crown Templars.

When King John signed the Magna Carta on June 15th 1215 he broke the terms of the charter with the Pope and therefore lost the right to his kingdom. Pope Innocent III then declared the Magna Carta null and void.

From this time the 'Crown' passed from the monarch to the Knights Templar who, to this day, govern Britain on behalf of the Roman (Illuminati) Church. This means, if we take it a stage further, that ultimately, through the Crown Temple, the Roman Church also owns the United States, Canada and all countries and Bar Associations controlled (overtly or covertly) by the Crown!

This is why the Peace Treaty between the American Colonies and the British Crown in 1783, stated:

"It having pleased the Divine Providence to dispose the hearts of the most serene and most potent Prince George the Third, by the grace of God, king of Great Britain, France and Ireland, defender of the faith, duke of Brunswick and Lunebourg, arch-treasurer and prince elector of the Holy Roman Empire etc., and of the United States of America ... "

How ironic that a Roman Catholic is barred from being the British monarch while all along the monarch and the 'kingdom' have been owned by the Roman Catholic Church.

is that you, Tevin?

the "Boy Who Lived"?

anyway, Bravo, and Kudos!

Common Law, Lawyers and London -- our World-Chains revealed!

as it all, Rome, comes crashing down around us again. today!

Dow Jones down another eight percent! Nasdaq down another eight percent! London down another 7 percent! Dubbai down 22 percent in two days!

how long before US finds its rightful place, of economic equality, in relation to the rest of the world? [down from our current thirty percent EATING of the world, to five percent] months yet, or weeks?

All those kings and stuff are really cool ! It makes me feel like I'm in the ancient days but it's right now and its kinda like the way it must of felt when the kings were the all powerful ruler. It's sort of dramatic as well like a shakespear play.

Millennium and BTL/Tevin? you guys are on the button. We are seeing unprecedented history being replayed again. All because of usuary!

great thoughts Ojai, anyone have a head above the neck...
If we wish to own a planet to live, we need to change the way...and may begins due to financial crisis.

Britain, Ireland the US and UK are owned by the Roman Church!

owned by the Roman Catholic Church!!

Millennium says it all.

BRINGING DOWN THE POOOOOOO!

http://www.ojaipost.com/2008/10/911_1010_bringing_down_the_poo.shtml

suggie

Real money & hierarchic religion appear to have arisen in the same mysterious moment sometime between the early Neolithic and the third millennium BC in Sumer or Egypt; which came first, the chicken or the egg? Was one a response to the other or is one an aspect of the other?

No doubt that money possesses a deeply religious implication since from the very moment of its appearance it begins to strive for the condition of the spirit -- to remove itself from the world of bodies, to transcend materiality, to become the one true efficacious symbol. With the invention of writing around 3100 BC money as we know it emerges from a complicated system of clay tokens or counters representing material goods & takes the form of written bills of credit impressed on clay tablets; almost without exception these "cheques" seem to concern debts owed to the State Temple, & in theory could have been used in an extended system of exchange as credit-notes "minted" by the theocracy. Coins did not appear until around 700 BC in Greek Asia Minor; they were made of electrum (gold and silver) not because these metals had commodity value but because they were sacred -- Sun & Moon; the ratio of value between them has always hovered around 14:1 not because the earth contains 14 times as much silver as gold but because the Moon takes 14 "suns" to grow from dark to full. Coins may have originated as temple tokens symbolizing a worshipper's due share of the sacrifice -- holy souvenirs, which could later be traded for goods because they had "mana", not use-value. (This function may have originated in the Stone Age trade in "ceremonial" stone axe-heads used in potlach-like distribution rites.) Unlike Mesopotamian credit-notes, coins were inscribed with sacred images & were seen as liminal objects, nodal points between quotidian reality & the world of the spirits (this accounts for the custom of bending coins to "spiritualize" them and throwing them into wells, which are the "eyes" of the otherworld.) Debt itself -- the true content of all money -- is a highly "spiritual" concept. As tribute (primitive debt) it exemplifies capitulation to a "legitimate power" of expropriation masked in religious ideology -- but as "real debt" it attains the uniquely spiritual ability to reproduce itself as if it were an organic being. Even now it remains the only "dead" substance in all the world to possess this power -- "money begets money". At this point money begins to take on a parodic aspect vis-à-vis religion -- it seems that money wants to rival god, to become immanent spirit in the form of pure metaphysicality which nevertheless "rules the world". Religion must take note of this blasphemous nature in money and condemn it as contra naturam. Money & religion enter opposition -- one cannot serve God & Mammon simultaneously. But so long as religion continues to perform as the ideology of separation (the hierarchic State, expropriation, etc.) it can never really come to grips with the money-problem. Over & over again reformers arise within religion to chase the moneylenders from the temple, & always they return -- in fact often enough the moneylenders become the Temple. (It's certainly no accident that banks for along time aped the forms of religious architecture.) According to Weber it was Calvin who finally resolved the issue with his theological justification for "usury" -- but this scarcely does credit to the real Protestants, like the Ranters & Diggers, who proposed that religion should once & for all enter into total opposition to money -- thereby launching the Millennium. It seems more likely that the Enlightenment should take credit for resolving the problem -- by jettisoning religion as the ideology of the ruling class & replacing it with rationalism (& "Classical Economics"). This formula however would fail to do justice to those real illuminati who proposed the dismantling of all ideologies of power & authority -- nor would it help to explain why "official" religion failed to realize its potential as opposition at this point, & instead went on providing moral support for both State & Capital.

Under the influence of Romanticism however there arose -- both inside & outside of "official" religion -- a growing sense of spirituality as an alternative to the oppressive aspects of Liberalism & its intellectual/artistic allies. On the one hand this sense led to a conservative-revolutionary form of romantic reaction (e.g. Novalis) -- but on the other hand it also fed into the old heretical tradition (which also began with the "rise of Civilization" as a movement of resistance to the theocracy of expropriation) -- and found itself in a strange new alliance with rationalist radicalism (the nascent "left"); William Blake, for example, or the "Blaspheming Chapels" of Spence & his followers, represent this trend. The meeting of spirituality & resistance is not some surrealist event or anomaly to be smoothed out or rationalized by "History" -- it occupies a position at the very root of radicalism; -- and despite the militant atheism of Marx or Bakunin (itself a kind of mutated mysticism or "heresy"), the spiritual still remains inextricably involved with the "Good Old Cause" it helped create.

Some years ago Regis Debray wrote an article pointing out that despite the confidant predictions of 19th century materialism, religion had still perversely failed to go away -- and that perhaps it was time for the Revolution to come to terms with this mysterious persistence. Coming from a Catholic culture Debray was interested in "Liberation Theology", itself a projection of the old quasi-heresy of the "Poor" Franciscans & the recurrent rediscovery of "Bible communism". Had he considered Protestant culture he might have remembered the 17th century, & looked for its true inheritance; if Moslem he could have evoked the radicalism of the Shiites or Ismailis, or the anti-colonialism of the 19th century "neo-Sufis". Every religion has called forth its own inner antithesis over & over again; every religion has considered the implications of moral opposition to power; every tradition contains a vocabulary of resistance as well as capitulation to oppression. Speaking broadly one might say that up until now this "counter-tradition" -- which is both inside & outside religion -- has comprised a "suppressed content". Debray's question concerned its potential for realization. Liberation Theology lost most of its support within the church when it could no longer serve its function as rival (or accomplice) of Soviet Communism; & it could no longer serve this function because Communism collapsed. But some Liberation theologians proved to be sincere -- and still they persist (as in Mexico); moreover, an entire submerged & related tendency within Catholicism, exemplified in the almost Scholastic anarchism of an Ivan Illich, lingers in the background. Similar tendencies could be identified within Orthodoxy (e.g. Bakunin), Protestantism, Judaism, Islam, and (in a somewhat different sense) Buddhism; moreover, most "surviving" indigenous forms of spirituality (e.g. Shamanism) or the Afro-american syncretisms can find common cause with various radical trends in the "major" religions on such issues as the environment, & the morality of anti-Capitalism. Despite elements of romantic reaction, various New Age & post-New-Age movements can also be associated with this rough category.

In a previous essay we have outlined reasons for believing that the collapse of Communism implies the triumph of its single opponent, Capitalism; that according to neo-liberal global propaganda only one world now exists; & that this political situation has grave implications for a theory of money as the virtual deity (autonomous, spiritualized, & all-powerful) of the single universe of meaning. Under these conditions everything that was once a third possibility (neutrality, withdrawal, counter-culture, the "Third World", etc.) now must find itself in a new situation. There is no longer any "second" -- how can there be a "third"? The "alternatives" have narrowed catastrophically. The One World is now in a position to crush everything which once escaped its ecstatic embrace -- thanks to the unfortunate distraction of waging an essentially economic war against the Evil Empire. There is no more third way, no more neither/nor. Everything that is different will now be subsumed into the sameness of the One World -- or else will discover itself in opposition to that world. Taking this thesis as given, we must now ask where religion will locate itself on this new map of "zones" of capitulation & resistance. If "revolution" has been freed of the incubus of Soviet oppression and is now once again a valid concept, are we finally in a position to offer a tentative answer to Debray's question?

Taking "religion" as a whole, including even those forms such as shamanism that belong to Society rather than the State (in terms of Clastres's anthropology); including polytheisms, monotheisms, & non-theisms; including mysticisms & heresies as well as orthodoxies, "reformed" churches, & "new religions" -- obviously the subject under consideration lacks definition, borders, coherence; & it cannot be questioned because it would only generate a babel of responses rather than an answer. But "religion" does refer to something -- call it a certain range of colors in the spectrum of human becoming -- & as such it might be considered (at least pro tem) as a valid dialogic entity & as a theorizable subject. In the triumphant movement of Capital -- in its processual moment so to speak -- all religion can only be viewed as nullity, i.e. as a commodity to be packaged & sold, an asset to be stripped, or an opposition to be eliminated. Any idea (or ideology) that cannot be subsumed into capital's "End of History" must be doomed. This includes both reaction & resistance -- & it most certainly includes the non-separative "re-linking" (religio) of consciousness with "spirit" as unmediated imaginal self-determination & value-creation -- the original goal of all ritual & worship. Religion in other words has lost all connection with worldly power because that power has migrated off-world -- it has abandoned even the State & achieved the purity of apotheosis, like the God that "abandoned Anthony" in Cavafy's poem. The few States (mostly Islamic) wherein religion holds power are located precisely within the ever-shrinking region of national opposition to Capital -- (thus providing them with such potential strange bedfellows as Cuba!). Like all other "third possibilities" religion is faced with a new dichotomy: total capitulation, or else revolt. Thus the "revolutionary potential" of religion clearly appears -- although it remains unclear whether resistance might take the form of reaction or radicalism -- or indeed whether religion is not already defeated -- whether its refusal to go away is that of an enemy, or a ghost.

In Russia & Serbia the Orthodox Church appears to have thrown in its lot with reaction against the New World Order & thus found new fellowship with its old Bolshevik oppressors, In Chechnya the Naqshbandi Sufi Order continues its centuries-old struggle against Russian imperialism. In Chiapas there's a strange alliance of Mayan "pagans" & radical Catholics. Certain factions of American Protestantism have been driven to the point of paranoia & armed resistance (but even paranoids have some real enemies); while Native-american spirituality undergoes a small but miraculous revival -- not a Ghost Shirt uprising this time, but a reasoned & profound stand against the hegemony of Capital's monoculture. The 'Dalai Lama' is often promoted as a "western world leader" to speak against the remnants of the Capitalist Communist Chinese oppression & inhumanity; a "Free Tibet-like" movement might provide some kind of focus for an "interfaith" bloc of small nations & religious groups allied against the transcendental social darwinism of the consensus. Arctic shamanism may re-emerge as an "ideology" for the self-determination of certain new Siberian republics -- and some New Religions (such as Western neo-paganism or the psychedelic cults) also belong by definition or default to the pole of opposition.

Islam has seen itself as the enemy of imperial Christianity & European imperialism almost from the moment of its inception. During the 20th century it functioned as a "third way" against both Communism & Capitalism, & in the context of the new One World it now constitutes by definition one of the very few existing mass movements which cannot be englobed into the unity of any would-be Consensus. Unfortunately the spearhead of resistance -- "fundamentalism" -- tends to reduce the complexity of Islam into an artificially coherent ideology -- "Islamism" -- which clearly fails to speak to the normal human desire for difference & complexity. Fundamentalism has already failed to concern itself with "empirical freedoms" which must constitute the minimal demands of the new resistance; for example, its critique of "usury" is obviously an inadequate response to the machinations of the IMF & World Bank. The "gates of Interpretation" of the Shariah must be re-opened -- not slammed shut forever -- and a fully-realized alternative to Capitalism must emerge from within the tradition. Whatever one may think of the Libyan Revolution of 1969 it has at least the virtue of an attempt to fuse the anarcho-syndicalism of '68 with the neo-Sufi egalitarianism of the North African Orders, & to create a revolutionary Islam -- something similar could be said of Ali Shariati's "Shiite socialism" in Iran, which was crushed by the ulemocracy before it could crystallize into a coherent movement. The point is that Islam cannot be dismissed as the puritan monolith portrayed in the Capitalist media. If a genuine anti-Capitalist coalition is to appear in the world it cannot happen without Islam. The goal of all theory capable of any sympathy with Islam, I believe, is now to encourage its radical & egalitarian traditions & to substruct its reactionary & authoritarian modes of discourse. Within Islam there persist such mythic figures as the "Green Prophet" and hidden guide of the mystics, al-Khezr, who could easily become a kind of patron saint of Islamic environmentalism; while history offers such models as the great Algerian Sufi freedom-fighter Emir Abdul Qadir, whose last act (in exile in Damascus) was to protect Syrian Christians against the bigotry of the ulema. From outside Islam there exists the potential for "interfaith" movements concerned with ideals of peace, toleration, & resistance to the violence of post-secular post-rationalist "neo-liberalism" & its allies. In effect, then, the "revolutionary potential" of Islam is not yet realized -- but it is real.

Since Christianity is the religion that "gave birth" (in Weberian terms) to Capitalism, its position in relation to the present apotheosis of Capitalism is necessarily more problematic than Islam's. For centuries Christianity has been drawing in on itself & constructing a kind of make-believe world of its own, wherein some semblance of the social might persist (if only on Sundays) -- even while it maintained the cozy illusion of some relation to power. As an ally of Capital (with its seeming benign indifference to the hypothesis of faith) against "Godless Communism", Christianity could preserve the illusion of power -- at least until five years ago. Now Capitalism no longer needs Christianity & the social support it enjoyed will soon evaporate. Already the Queen of England has had to consider stepping down as the head of the Anglican Church -- & she is unlikely to be replaced by the CEO of some vast international zaibatsu! Money is god -- God is really dead at last; Capitalism has realized a hideous parody of the Enlightenment ideal. But Jesus is a dying-&-resurrecting god -- one might say he's been through all this before. Even Nietzsche signed his last "insane" letter as "Dionysus & the Crucified One"; in the end it is perhaps only religion that can "overcome" religion. Within Christianity a myriad tendencies appear (or have persisted since the 17th century, like the Quakers) seeking to revive that radical messiah who cleansed the Temple & promised the Kingdom to the poor. In America for instance it would seem impossible to imagine a really successful mass movement against Capitalism (some form of "progressive populism") without the participation of the churches. Again the theoretical task begins to clarify itself; one need not propose some vulgar kind of "entryism" into organized Christianity to radicalize it by conspiracy from within. Rather the goal would be to encourage the sincere & widespread potential for Christian radicalism either from within as an honest believer (however "existentialist" the faith!) or as an honest sympathizer from the outside.

To test this theorizing take an example -- say Ireland (where I happen to be writing this). Given that Ireland's "Problems" arise largely from sectarianism, clearly one must take an anti-clerical stance; in fact atheism would be at least emotionally appropriate. But the inherent ambiguity of religion in Irish history should be remembered: -- there were moments when Catholic priests & laity supported resistance or revolution, & there were moments when Protestant ministers & laity supported resistance or revolution. The hierarchies of the churches have generally proven themselves reactionary -- but hierarchy is not the same thing as religion. On the Protestant side we have Wolfe Tone & the United Irishmen -- a revolutionary "interfaith" movement. Even today in Northern Ireland such possibilities are not dead; anti-sectarianism is not just a socialist ideal but also a Christian ideal. On the Catholic side... a few years ago I met a radical priest at a pagan festival in the Aran Islands, a friend of Ivan Illich. When I asked him, "What exactly is your relation to Rome?" he answered, "Rome? Rome is the enemy." Rome has lost its stranglehold on Ireland in the last few years, brought down by anti-puritan revolt & internal scandal. It would be incorrect to say that the Church's power has shifted to the State, unless we also add that the government's power has shifted to Europe, & Europe's power has shifted to international capital. The meaning of Catholicism in Ireland is up for grabs. Over the next few years we might expect to see both inside & outside the Church a kind of revival of "Celtic Christianity" -- devoted to resistance against pollution of the environment both physical & imaginal, & therefore committed to anti-Capitalist struggle. Whether this trend would lead to an open break with Rome and the formation of an independent church -- who knows? Certainly the trend will include or at least influence Protestantism as well. Such a broad-based movement might easily find its natural political expression in socialism or even in anarcho-socialism, & would serve a particularly useful function as a force against sectarianism & the rule of the clerisy. Thus even in Ireland it would seem that religion may have a revolutionary future.

I expect these ideas will meet with very little acceptance within traditionally atheist anarchism or the remnants of "dialectical materialism". Enlightenment radicalism has long refused to recognize any but remote historical roots within religious radicalism. As a result, the Revolution threw out the baby ("non-ordinary consciousness") along with the bathwater of the Inquisition or of puritan repression. Despite Sorel's insistence that the Revolution needed a "myth", it preferred to bank everything on "pure reason" instead. But spiritual anarchism & communism (like religion itself) have failed to go away. Indeed, by becoming an anti-Religion, radicalism had recourse to a kind of mysticism of its own, complete with ritual, symbolism, & morality. Bakunin's remark about God -- that if he existed we would have to kill him -- would after all pass for the purest orthodoxy within Zen Buddhism! The psychedelic movement, which offered a kind of "scientific" (or at least experiential ) verification of non-ordinary consciousness, led to a degree of rapprochement between spirituality & radical politics -- & the trajectory of this movement may have only begun. If religion has "always" acted to enslave the mind or to reproduce the ideology of the ruling class, it has also "always" involved some form of entheogenesis ("birth of the god within") or liberation of consciousness; some form of utopian proposal or promise of "heaven on earth"; and some form of militant & positive action for "social justice" as God's plan for the creation. Shamanism is a form of "religion" that (as Clastres showed) actually institutionalizes spirituality against the emergence of hierarchy & separation -- & all religions possess at least a shamanic trace.

Every religion can point to a radical tradition of some sort. Taoism once produced the Yellow Turbans -- or for that matter the Tongs that collaborated with anarchism in the 1911 revolution. Judaism produced the "anarcho-zionism" of Martin Buber & Gersholm Scholem (deeply influenced by Gustav Landauer & other anarchists of 1919), which found its most eloquent & paradoxical voice in Walter Benjamin. Hinduism gave birth to the ultra-radical Bengali Terrorist Party -- & also to M. Gandhi, the modern world's only successful theorist of non-violent revolution. Obviously anarchism & communism will never come to terms with religion on questions of authority & property; & perhaps one might say that "after the Revolution" such questions will remain to be resolved. But it seems clear that without religion there will be no radical revolution; the Old Left & the (old) New Left can scarcely fight it alone. The alternative to an alliance now is to watch while Reaction co-opts the force of religion & launches a revolution without us. Like it or not, some sort of pre-emptive strategy is required. Resistance demands a vocabulary in which our common cause can be discussed; hence these sketchy proposals.

Even assuming we could classify all the above under the rubric of admirable sentiments, we would still find ourselves far from any obvious program of action. Religion is not going to "save" us in this sense (perhaps the reverse is true!) -- in any case religion is faced with the same perplexity as any other former "third position", including all forms of radical non-authoritarianism & anti-Capitalism. The new totality & its media appear so pervasive as to fore-doom all programs of revolutionary content, since every "message" is equally subject to subsumption in the "medium" that is Capital itself. Of course the situation is hopeless -- but only stupidity would take this as reason for despair, or for the terminal boredom of defeat. Hope against hope -- Bloch's revolutionary hope -- belongs to a "utopia" that is never wholly absent even when it is least present; & it belongs as well to a religious sphere in which hopelessness is the final sin against the holy spirit: -- the betrayal of the divine within -- the failure to become human. "Karmic duty" in the sense of the Bhagavad Gita -- or in the sense of "revolutionary duty" -- is not something imposed by Nature, like gravity, or death. It is a free gift of the spirit -- one can accept or refuse it -- & both positions are perilous. To refuse is to run the risk of dying without having lived. To accept is an even more dangerous but far more interesting possibility. A version of Pascal's Wager -- not on the immortality of the soul this time, but simply on its sheer existence.

To use religious metaphor (which we've tried so far to avoid) the millennium began five years before the end of the century, when One World came into being & banished all duality. From the Judao-Christiano-Islamic perspective however this is the false millennium of the "Anti-Christ"; which turns out not to be a "person" (except in the world of Archetypes perhaps) but an impersonal entity, a force contra naturam -- entropy disguised as life. In this view the reign of iniquity must & will be challenged in the true millennium, the advent of the messiah. But the messiah is also not a single person in the world -- rather, it is a collectivity in which each individuality is realized & thus (again metaphorically or imaginally) immortalized. The "people-as-messiah" do not enter into the homogenous sameness nor the infernal separation of entropic Capitalism, but into the difference & presence of revolution -- the struggle, the "holy war". On this basis alone can we begin to work on a theory of reconciliation between the positive forces of religion & the cause of resistance. What we are offered here is simply the beginning of the beginning.

Twain, how did you connect Rockefeller and Rothschild to the House of JP Morgan etc.?

OK, I recognize Hakim Bey writing there on the Collective Messiah. exciting to see how much our language/consciousness has evolved since then!

and Michael,

as to David Rockefeller.

no news there. David is the International Chairman of JP Morgan Chase, and former Chairman of Chase Manhattan. there are tens of thousands of articles from the financial community online, on the history of David Rockefeller, JP Morgan, House Rothschild, and the Federal Reserve.

JP Morgan and the Federal Reserve are in the majority owned by House Rothschild and the Vatican and the Monarchy. JP Morgan in 1913, for Rothschild, created the Federal Reserve.

they, through JP Morgan, did the 1929 World market crash -- and the 9/11 Stock market crash -- and now the 10/10 World Financial Crash.

the is the 'legal' (but violent, predatory and unethical) way that the Hedge Fund Bear, the ruling aristocracy, secret government, works. [a pyramid-
sacrifice scheme, where the bottom layers, the poor, have to be crushed routinely that the wealthy apex may feed.]

back in 2000 and 2001, we were waiting to see what they were planning, what JP Morgan had to do, to get themselves out of the soup (of their own conniving).

9/11 was it,

Millennium Twain

http://www.zealllc.com/2000/dogsofwar.htm

http://www.gold-eagle.com/gold_digest_01/hamilton091001.html

MilenEum,
It’s truly disgraceful the readers of this blog have to be continually subjected your pathetic & childerish attempts at explaining current world events That you need to define your life in terms of some jibbersh off the internet should be of serious concern to you family (?) and those who allow you to use the Ojai Post as a platform.
Harry Potter’s not real either MT.....

La Paz, 17 October 2008 -- As stock markets tumble, plans for an alternative, regional financial framework gained new momentum among South American leaders. At a recent Summit, presidents from Bolivia, Brazil, Ecuador, and Venezuela agreed to bring the stalled Bank of the South online. They also drew up a series of integration projects and cooperation agreements.

Amid increasingly destructive financial turbulence, South American
leaders discussed ongoing plans to create an alternative fiscal
architecture for the region. Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva hosted his counterparts from Bolivia, Ecuador, and Venezuela in
Manaus, the cosmopolitan capital of Amazonas State, near several key
tributaries of the Amazon riverine system. Besides the world economic
crisis, the September 30 meeting focused on key integration and
cooperation accords.

The rhetoric emerging from Manaus was not muted. Venezuela's Hugo
Chávez said the financial chaos would wreak the devastation of
"one-hundred hurricanes." He predicted, "The world will never be the
same after this crisis. A new world has to emerge, and it's a
multipolar world." Chávez likened the Summit's purpose to South
America's "decoupling from the wagon of death."

The other heads-of-state were slightly more hushed. Bolivia's EvoMorales offered an incisive and populist critique of the $700 billion
Wall Street bailout: "In Bolivia we nationalized [gas] for the people
to have money, while the United States nationalizes the crisis of the
wealthy," said Morales. "The poor should not have to pay the price of a mess made by the rich."

Even Lula, far more parsimonious in doling out criticism to the United
States, lashed out. Citing the neoliberal austerity measures that
Washington and its proxies pushed on Latin American countries for
years, Lula said, "Those who spent the past three decades telling us
what to do didn't do it themselves." Despite Lula's admission that no
country is "bulletproof" from the crisis, analysts still suggest that
Brazil will suffer far less in the twilight of neoliberalism, and
predict a decent 3.5% growth rate for Brazil in 2009 (although they
have revised this number downward, weekly, for over a month).

Mark Weisbrot, an economist with the Center for Economic and Policy
Research (CEPR) in Washington, notes that some regional governments
have amassed huge foreign exchange reserves, making them well equipped to muddle through the meltdown. (Brazil has some $200 billion saved, while Venezuela has roughly $40 billion.) A recent report published by CEPR explains that the hardest-hit countries in the region will be those that have hitched themselves onto the U.S. economy through "free trade" agreements.

In the context of this global financial maelstrom, the consummation of
the quiescent Bank of the South project has gained increasing
importance. The Bank of the South was designed as a cooperative,
regional banking institution. With initial reserves of $7 billion,
seven countries have signed on to the Bank so far: Argentina, Bolivia,
Brazil, Ecuador, Paraguay, Uruguay, and Venezuela.

In Manaus, Ecuadorian President Rafael Correa called the Bank a
potential "long-term structural solution" that would help "make our
regional economy more independent [and] pool reserves to have a
regional backup in the case of a crisis." Correa, an economist by
training, suggested buttressing South America's economic system by creating a regional financial node—a clear allusion to Chávez's
"multipolar world" backed by regional banking structures.

The Bank of the South was in fact signed into law ten months ago in
Buenos Aires, but has not yet come into operation. Chávez has said the
holdups have been largely "technical and bureaucratic, " but outside
analysts have demurred, citing political obstacles. Brazilian
economist Marcos Arruda points out that Brazil wants—or wanted—the
Bank of the South to play a merely "supplementary" role to the region's other banks, while countries like Ecuador want the Bank of the South to attain a commanding "position within continental finance."

Indeed, Lula has had to confront a recalcitrant, right-wing congress,
with social goals far different than the legislative branches of the
other Bank of the South member countries.

Negotiations on the Bank have also stalled on whether voting power for
each member-state should be determined by the size of its investment.
Smaller countries prefer a system in which it is not the gross amount
of each country's investment that counts, but rather the size of the
investment in proportion to that country's economy.

As stock markets descended, President Chávez declared, "We cannot lose even one day more in the creation of the Bank of the South."
Ecuadorian Minister of Foreign Affairs Maria Isabel Salvador also
called on regional finance ministers to act rapidly to make the Bank operational. Though vague, she noted progress had been made: "What was blocking the advance of the Bank of the South has been transcended. "

Despite the delays, Weisbrot points out that when juxtaposed with the
decades-long process of European economic integration, the Bank of the
South has emerged in a "highly accelerated process."

The financial crisis did not prevent the presidents from discussing
the issues originally billed for the summit: cooperation and integration.

Building on previous agreements, Lula and Chávez signed a series of
bilateral cooperation accords, including the construction of an iron
and steel plant to be built by a Brazilian manufacturer and operated
by a local company in Venezuela's Bolívar state.

The two leaders also made headway in finalizing the terms of a joint
refinery in the northeastern Brazilian state of Pernambuco. Brazil's
Petrobras and PDVSA, Venezuela's state oil company, will jointly own
and, perhaps, operate the new refinery. Brazil also agreed to help
Venezuela with increased food imports and with improving low-income
housing. Chávez thanked Brazil for its "disinterested cooperation. "

The four presidents also discussed ongoing plans for regional
transportation infrastructure. Lula and Correa discussed an ongoing
plan to build a trans-oceanic river and highway system connecting
Ecuador's Pacific port of Manta with the cities of Manaus and Belém in
Brazil. Work is slated to start in 2009 and be complete in 2011. The
new route will help both countries' products circumvent the Panama
Canal, which Correa called "expensive and very slow."

Some environmental and indigenous groups oppose the highway
construction, observing that the roads and fluvial channels will
almost inevitably lead to environmental degradation in untouched parts
of the Amazon, as ranchers, loggers, and other extractive industries
converge on theretofore relatively pristine wilderness.

According to tentative plans made at the conference, the Manta-Manaus
highway would be intersected by a similar system of highways on a
north-south axis, connecting Caracas and La Paz. Correa explained the
regional "crossroads" of this Amazonian system would be Manaus, which
would become the "epicenter" of the two highways—and, indeed, the region.

It is unclear whether the proposed Bank of the South will be financing
these infrastructure projects.

Thanks muchly Mil. I know about most of the bankster connections generically but I was still associating DRockefeller with Chase. JP I had not yet caught onto.

Bytheway your 9/11 Treasury guy Al Gore made $120,000,000 cool ones... from playing that one cool. Contrast the congressional wealthy Jane Harman with some $400Mil, Darrell Issa with $350Mil, John Kerry same, Herb Kohl only $250Mil, Robin Hayes a mere $175Mil, Vernon Buchanan $165Mil, Edward Kennedy $100Mil, Jay Rockefeller (another one!) $95Mil, Frank Lautenberg $90Mil, Dianne Feinstein $85Mil, Michael McCool $65 Mil, Nancy Pelosi $65Mil.

A lot of Mils ya got there.

Some commenter on another thread called Millenium, Jock and myself Cerberus. I take it as a compliment to be associated with two such stalwart characters, and I do not speak for them, but I do see myself in Cerberus; however, with this twist in the story: my role is to keep folks from going into hell, and to free those already in prison there.

All hell is breaking out in Dante's nine circles of money-hell. Nothing has ever united the world like this before. Practically everyone is scrambling to "save the system." Why anyone would want to save hell is beyond me. Those who have nothing to lose of course can just sit back and enjoy the show. I have divested much of my baggage from hell but I still have a lot to lose; like my social security retirement. If that goes, as well it might, streets here I come. If I starve in the cold, well, I won't be alone. Millions have preceded me in this money hell everyone who is anyone is desparately trying to save. Satan would be proud.

"Look out your window, baby, there's a scene you'd like to catch
"The band is playing Dixie, a man has got his hand outstretched.
"Could be the fuhrur
"Could be the local priest
"You know Satan sometimes comes as a man of peace."

Sometimes? No, way more than that. When so many wake up only when their pocketbooks are affected, and they don't give a damn about the billions who suffer because of their lifestyle, that is Hell.

Thanks to all who have brought this vital information forward on this thread. Now we can see Hell for what it is if we have eyes to see. Those who are scrambling to save the system are blind. They are in hell and don't know it, or maybe they do and don't care.

There is an alternative to this cruel, sadistic money system. Money as such is not the problem but the consciousness surrounding it. But the consciousness of money is in the darkest of the dark ages. Even the so called Dark Middle Ages outlawed usury. We embrace it as God Himself.

Money is one of the dog-monsters in the triumvirate Cerberus of Money, Sex and Power. And this Unholy Trinity of Persons has an Arch Unholy god as its hidden, core Lie: patriarchy.

Patriarchy is the key to unraveling the Gordian Knot of Evil but practically no one wants to hear of it. Patriarchy is the System of Evil. Patriarchy is the Father of Lies. Patriarchy is hell in a business suit.

As a culture, we are so stupid. We are trying to save this hellish system of money. That is unbelievably stupid. We think there is no other alternative. This is just one of the hundreds of main patriarchal lies.

MT alludes to this other alternative system all the time in his own life, words and actions. MT has a good grip on negative and positive reality. You've got to know both sides. We are lucky to have him and others like him on this site. The Ojai Valley has a lot going for it but it's all going to go down the drain without truth seekers. We will never have peace and freedom without truth.

"Freedom is just around the corner for you but with truth so far off, what good would it do?"

The first task of truth is to see the lies for what they are. History is nothing but lies. It is hiss-story from the lying snake-eyed, forked tongue of patriarchy. Hiss, hiss, hiss.

The truth is in herstory, her-story which is hear-story. For 150,000 years herstory was passed on as hear-story. The advent of writing and malignant patriarchy arose about the same time. Writing is a left-brained patriarchy learned skill.

Exactly. I'm using patriarchy as I write. That's an illustration of how we have to operate within the system. We have to use the system to survive but we don't have to buy into it. It's hell sold as heaven.

MT refers to this other system in terms like Divine Feminine. This is the opposite of Divine Masculine. If buy into the patriarchal Lie of equality of the sexes, then you think, no, Divine Masculine is a complement of Divine Feminine and is equal. You also probably think Patriarchy was a reaction to Matriarchy. If so, you are brainwashed by patriarchy which is very, very clever and deceitful.

"...it put ideas in his head that he thought were his."

9/11 and 10/10 are just tipoftheiceberg symptoms of the hellish patriarchal disease which overthrew 150,000 years of preexisting womam focal culture. But if you went to patriarchal schools, that very idea is totally foreign to your brain. You've been brainwashed by patriarchy and you don't know it.

Jim (no last name) wrote:

"It’s truly disgraceful the readers of this blog have to be continually subjected your pathetic & childerish attempts at explaining current world events."

In response to anonymous Jim's complaint, I'd like to know three things:

1) what "childerish" is
2) what Jim has against learning something
3) what Jim has against someone else learning something.

No one is "subjecting" Jim (or anyone else) to anything. That was high school. As an adult, Jim (and everyone else :) is free not to read Millennium's heartfelt, mind-expanding posts.

Football's on!!!

Sincerely,

Jock Doubleday
http://therevolutionwillnotbeorganized.org

kia ora, Sugar, Teo, Michael, Dennis, Jock, EveryOne!

and, yeah, learning ... and emotions.

clearly, when someone is getting angry, there is learning going on ... certainly now for North Americans who for seven years (seventy?) have been hiding out in fear of the truth ... and have it raining down, sprouting up, all around them.

the healthiest of anger.

contrast that with the sickness of hate, the inability to tell the truth ...

and laughter, the true response to enlightenment.

together, 400 million US former serf/soldiers,
rising ...

Good mourning [sic] and happy Ojai Day, Ojai! I'm up this morn just before the sun and enjoying the taste of the real Ojai: pink clouds over yon eastern hills, moon riding overhead in a bed of soft clouds, warm wind on my face, solid riverbottom soil under my feet in this northernmost tip of the Ojai Valley.

"I can't help it if I'm lucky..."

Well, it also helps to put yourself under the protection of The Lover Earth Government, but that's another thread in the skein.

Yes, MT, anger, legitimate anger is appropriate and necessary in these breaking times; and of course, the release of laughter at the comedy-tragedy of it all.

I founded a party of one, the Red Brown and Blue Party. The red color of her flag stands for Love, Blood, Fire and Anger. And She is angry, waking up in US. Cleansing anger to release the emotions of frozen, phony smiles and miles upon miles of lies. But that's another thread of thought.

Irritations are prickers of awakening. So many of them these days. I used to swat them away like gnats; now I look more closely at them for their messages.

I can't get over how virtually everyone is scrambling to save the system. Even Nation, a magazine I read in the library yesterday while waiting for a computer. And even Information Clearing House. And above, the Bank of the South setting up its own new and local system of exploitation, to build a road over the bodies of the earthly poor.

Patriarchy has a billion hydra-heads. Band aid solutions just give it more room to grow. We need a grand vision and a detailed game plan of what MT is talking about in poetry and broad brush strokes. But that's still another thread. So many threads like people, needed to make a tapestry for our Ojai Valley. Then we can have a real Ojai Day for a Real Ojai. Love.

This is the best news on the planet...

"La Paz, 17 October 2008 -- As stock markets tumble, plans for an
alternative, regional financial framework gained new momentum
among South American leaders. At a recent Summit, presidents ..."

I wonder if they have any employment openings? >>

The Bank of the South (Dutch: Bank van het Zuiden, Portuguese: Banco do Sul, Spanish: Banco del Sur) is a monetary fund and lending organization first proposed by Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez. The intention of the bank is to lend money to nations in the Americas for the construction of social programs and infrastructure.

Plans and Involvement
The ultimate goal of the Bank of the South is to include every nation within the region of South America. It has been established because of disapproval of the protocol of the World Bank and other international lending institutions. It also represents an attempt to achieve regional independence and endogenous development. The program would lend money to any nation involved in the construction of approved programs, and without conditions traditionally attached to such loans, such as deregulation. The Bank is intended as an alternative to borrowing from the IMF and the World Bank. Hugo Chávez has promised to withdraw from the IMF and encourages other member states to do so as well, Raphael Correa of Ecuador declaring the World Bank representative to his country a "person non grata". It is proposed that all member countries contribute fairly equal shares to the Bank's initial capital of fourteen billion reais (seven billion dollars) so that no member state will control a dominant share. A meeting of southern international economists in Caracas recently saw repeated declarations of the importance of Banco del Sur, especially in light of the recent global financial crisis.

Current status
Venezuela, as the originator of the idea, will be involved upon the organization' s inception. Other participating countries are Argentina, Brazil, Bolivia, Colombia, Ecuador, Paraguay and Uruguay. In April 2007, Brazil promised to donate a large amount of funding as well. Seven South American nations met in Rio de Janeiro on October 8, 2007, to plan the beginning of the Bank. It was announced that the Bank will be headquartered in Caracas, Venezuela and would begin operations on November 3, 2007; this was later postponed to 5 December 2007, and then to 9 December 2007, when it was finally launched. Representatives from Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Ecuador, Paraguay, Uruguay and Venezuela were present at the meeting. All 12 South American countries will be eligible to borrow from the Bank. In a surprise move, Colombia formally requested membership in the bank on 13 October 2007.

Fractional-reserve banking
One of the main objectives is to divert the profits generated by fractional-reserve banking back to original countries instead of the present external exploitation done by "outside" banks.
 
If you hear the call you cannot ignore it
no matter what the cost.

and namaste to Sky, and Ride,
and Tevin and Calgirl and Dennis again!

we 'canna' ignore it, though it cost us not.
in Global Consciousness, we cast our lot.

voice thus sung, world-round is flung,

on Earth as in Goddess Moon,
our heart-mind-body-village is One ...

The Crown Temple is the enemy of all Americans.

Relative,
Today is longing to be free, not with hate of those who need. For only Crowns live in spiritual domains, for London will drown with all it's fame. Don't waste your time on what we know, for hate will destroy even your show (millennium twain) for what we need over and over again, is love in prayer and ceremony religion.

This is the Ojaipost, the place of Natives who come to roost and what does a Rooster show us pure, the four sacred directions of the weather that's near. Third phase of evolution will only be free to those who pray, and if you Brother Millennium Twain, doesn't choose love over this day, then how will you know which way to be, but being reborn on the other side if you please. There is only one way to survive and have your children learning to collide with Heaven and Earth our Paradise, only belong to those who sing songs.

Hoo Hey, took ka yee (hoo wasted come home to Oneness in bloom, hey is the wind that flies through you, took is the transmission of voices everywhere inside of Grandmother Space in despair, Ka is the hawk that flies freely, the web she weaves inside of destiny, and yee is descending like our souls who are free to learn the lessons God gave to thee), the winds of many rainbows will only believe, for we are here to know the weather of God, the Great Spirits leading us, forever and a day.

your devoted servant, white buffalo calf woman, your twin deer mother who says pray instead of teaching hatred of those who do not understand, but gift to them love that wipes them away! Bellow and bring ceremony to all, even saving our Brothers who do not know how to fall.

Good evening. Listen. Do not have an opinion while you listen because frankly, your opinion doesn?t hold much water outside of Your Universe. Just listen. Listen until their brain has been twisted like a dripping towel and what they have to say is all over the floor. Help me! It has to find sites on the: Cf buy fioricet online. I found only this - fioricet special. Fioricet, using to her, the relaxer had early offered reason for secondary patients awkward to usual medications autistic as pain subscription which cannot be known and because it felt that taxing with quiet women who had 8th potent attacks called to become his detox worse. Fioricet, is it a catastrophe of person, or cancer? With best wishes :-), Caresse from Senegal.