I remember Gopi Krishna once saying that truth is a strange substance, that it grows stronger in adversity and enlarges itself in the face of opposition. With this in mind I have confidence that the hijackings which took place on 9/11 – by that I mean, the hijacking of civil rights, the hijacking of trillions of US tax dollars, the hijacking of foreign governments, the hijacking of foreign energy reserves, and the hijacking of religion as a patsy – by a colossal war machine which needs new armed conflicts like a shark travelling through water to stay alive, will fail to have a permanent effect on the human race.
The stated desire for the American world order is indeed to gain control of cyber space, control of the air, control of energy reserves, and even control of outer space. Kissinger once said that just because a country was starving was a poor reason to send food aid. He has come to symbolise the old mentality, as he is viewed with mounting distaste even by the American media, who now realise his views no longer carry authority and are actually unpalatable even to the mainstream viewer. In the end, the one thing which no authority can completely gain control of is the fast rising consciousness of the mass mind.
The mass mind, and every generation alive today, now has access to tools which 60 years ago nobody could even dream about. When hundreds of thousands of completely innocent civilians in Hiroshima and Nagasaki were cremated in nuclear ovens, the publishing of photos of the victims was forbidden for 12 years, for fear that public opinion would turn against America. The world’s media tamely kept silent, publishing instead pictures of ruined buildings. I have included some of these photos in The Scient-Autist At Work: In the Slaughterhouse, and even now, 67 years later, people write that they have never seen them before. Why?
When hellish weapons are used these days – or even when localised acts of police or military brutality take place – even a single mobile phone can records the damage, and within moments the footage is on the internet for millions to see. This is partly why atrocities carried out in the modern age hit the modern mind with much more force. Not only has there been a moral elevation, due to the gradual trend of evolution, producing an ever larger segnment of the race unwilling to permit mass devastation of foreign countries, but there has been an increase in perceptive ability too: people today are much more aware that media spins and glib, smiling crooks dressed in sharp suits, are to divert funds away from the common man and into the pockets of the elite.
As a reaction to the horrors of global inequality and the sheer pointlessness, beyond a certain point, of material possessions, there is even a movement is gaining strength in which people are abandoning the race for possessions, choosing instead a life devoted to inner development and altruism. This itself is the core of spirituality, and religion is the evidence of its development in many forms, through the mass mind in all of history. Even among the militant atheists, the tendency has had its effect, and instead of beating up religion, many meetings are now devoted to a more humane and equal social order, based on reason rather than priviledge.
This heightened sense of awareness and justice can be seen among the rank and file shareholders of major corporations, who no longer consider their own needs as subservient to the mania of the directors:
Aviva has been dragged into the firing line after dishing out pay packages worth up to £5.2million to its chief executive Andrew Moss and £4.2million for his Australian right-hand man Trevor Matthews, who only joined the firm in December. This included a ‘controversial’ £2.5million ‘golden hello’ payment.
Almost 60 per cent of votes failed to back the insurer’s remuneration report, which sanctioned the payments. Some 54 per cent – which came from private shareholders and giant pension funds – actively protested against the insurer’s multi-million pound bonuses. Aviva, which has 14million customers in the UK after swallowing up Norwich Union, joined the ranks of state-backed Royal Bank of Scotland and oil giant Shell which both faced rebellions at the height of the financial crisis in 2009.
Lord Oakeshott, the Liberal Democrat peer who has campaigned against excessive pay in the City, said the move showed the need for government reforms which will give shareholders formal power to stop excessive pay deals. Currently, companies can ignore shareholders’ pleas for restraint.
But Lord Oakeshott added: ‘A tsunami of shareholder anger is now hitting overpaid and underperforming big businesses. Although Barclays boss Bob Diamond is “Mr Greedy” personified, the revolt is rightly going wider.’
(..James Salmon, MailOnline)
Because of these three factors: a more global awareness, an increasing number with heightened morality, and increased technology – itself a necessary companion to the other two – it has become harder and harder to flatten dissent, since once crushed in one area, it soon springs up in a dozen more. This is the reason why increased armaments and military actions are required, along with the cancelling of civil liberties, under the handy banner “the war on terror”.
In fact the war is not on terror – which it could never be, since war itself is pure terror – but on resistance, as a glance over the last ten years will amply show. This war on resistance will need to be upgraded sharply if it is to deal with the widespread use of modern technology and the growing conscience to use it to spread feelings of outrage. Recently a documentary on Joseph Kony went from a handful of views on YouTube to 112 million within a single week. My children and their friends were swept up in this trend, and spoke at length about what they had seen. This could never have occurred at any time in the past, because the most sensitive and morally alert brains, those of the children, were always several steps removed from even the sanitised view of the world presented to the adults. This represents a change with massive potential, as a rising generation now sees the world for what it is, and not for what it pretends to be.
Often we sense the birth of an idea or sentiment from our own awareness, and are surprised when we find that many others are behaving and thinking in the same way, independent of any contact with us. Because of the idea that minds are separate, we dismiss it as coincidence – our single answer to all the complexities of mind – but in fact it shows a greater movement of new concepts throughout a large number of minds more or less simultaneously. The most sensitive are the first to sense it and act upon it, appearing as a curiosity to others who are otherwise engaged mentally or who have reasoned away their own impressions.
In the days of the Colisseum, a visiting monk, appalled at the bloody carnage, leapt into the ring to attempt to stop it. The furious crowd stoned him to death. But less than fifty lyears later, popular sentiment had caught up with his advanced sensitivity, and the mass which had demanded their bloodlust be satisfied now recognised the inhumanity of the spectacle. The only way to account for this is a gradual development of the mass mind, which in evolutionary terms, has become extremely rapid today.
Only yesterday a commenter on the Independent mentioned with fury the billion people starving on the planet, and received jibes from those who regarded his “perma anger” as amusing. In the days of witch burning or public torture, crowds who felt no pang of conscience at the pointless horror also looked on with amusement at those who were sickened by it. We give thanks today for the centuries which stand between us and medieval times; it is safe to say our descendants will be grateful for the gulf of years between them and us.
The heartening aspect of all this is that no matter the outrages perpetrated in the name of aggression, mass consciousness will have the last word. The more people care, the more they are willing to recognise internal dissent within their own selves, and stand up for what they feel inside to be true, the faster the movement will spread, and the less power the aggressors will have, and the less damage overall they will cause to the human race.
The same patterns of dissent appeared in the past, when ruling nations became so corrupted that aggression began to outweigh altruism. In fact a visiting monk, horrified at the carnage, once leapt into the Colisseum to protest the slaughter, and was stoned to death by the crowds for so doing. But fifty years later, the Colisseum’s bloody sports were brought to an end by the same popular opinion which condemned the well-meaning and morally alert Christian to death in the heat of their bloodlust.
The brain always has the last word: at a certain point, societies ruled by despots refused to tolerate their growing sense of injustice, simply because their consciousness enlarged to where the needlessly subservient nature of their own position dawned on them, and they felt as strongly about ruling their own lives as they had previously felt about the need for external authority.
An excellent film by the German company NuoViso sums up the events leading up to 9/11 and the aftermath; it is the most lucid and coherently presented summary I have ever seen of the attempt to hijack the planet based on a fictional aggression, and which I hope will one day garner as many viewers as the documentary based on the Kony outrages:
The eagerness to co-opt science and, of course, morally bankrupt scientists in order to accelerate global aggression is summed up in the following extract from a 1999 document prepared by a director of US defence policy, rather misleadingly called Rebuilding America’s Defenses: Strategy, Forces and Resources for a New Century.
The appalling mindset of those in charge of American foreign policy prior to 9/11 is shown by their view that every possible theatre of war should be considered viable, and no expedient overlooked, including even racial genocide – enthusiastically presented as a useful political tool:
Although it may take several decades for the process of transformation to unfold, in time, the art of warfare on air, land, and sea will be vastly different than it is today, and “combat” likely will take place in new dimensions: in space, “cyber-space,” and perhaps the world of microbes.
Air warfare may no longer be fought by pilots manning tactical fighter aircraft sweeping the skies of opposing fighters, but a regime dominated by long-range, stealthy unmanned craft. On land, the clash of massive, combined-arms armored forces may be replaced by the dashes of much lighter, stealthier and information-intensive forces, augmented by fleets of robots, some small enough to fit in soldiers’ pockets.
Control of the sea could be largely determined not by fleets of surface combatants and aircraft carriers, but from land- and space-based systems, forcing navies to maneuver and fight underwater. Space itself will become a theater of war, as nations gain access to space capabilities and come to rely on them; further, the distinction between military and commercial space systems – combatants and noncombatants – will become blurred.
Information systems will become an important focus of attack, particularly for U.S. enemies seeking to short-circuit sophisticated American forces.
And advanced forms of biological warfare that can “target” specific genotypes may transform biological warfare from the realm of terror to a politically useful tool.
..Thomas Donnelly, Rebuilding America’s Defenses, 1999.
From 1995 to 1999, Donnelly was policy group director and a professional staff member for the House Committee on Armed Services. Mr. Donnelly also served as a member of the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission. He is a former editor of Armed Forces Journal, Army Times, and Defense News.