The New Year’s day now before us:
To review the relevant history:
The most important evidence gathered during the passage of this midday’s discussions among our leading circles now concerns the revolutionary statements from a collection of associated nations assembled explicitly around President Putin’s Russia and a group of associated nations being apparently gathered together as a newly re-defined gathering among nations ranging along the northern Coast of Eurasia from Belarus to the Pacific coast, affirming their respects for the sovereignty of the nations to the south of those particular borders.
The probably indicated borders are not settled matters, but the suggested outcomes of what remain more or less settled directions of concluded intentions, have, to say the least, strong indications, and should be assessed with due modesties, accordingly, for purposes of current discussions.
The pivotal implication for this moment, is that the attempted trans-Atlantic capture of Ukraine by the de facto trans-Atlantic western alliance, has been rather decisively set back thus far, and that there are crucially important other indications that the new eastern arrangements reflect a rising physical-economic advantage gained by the indicated Eurasian partisans, with respect to the accelerating physical-economic collapse underway under the reign of the Anglo-American faction and its suggested current parameters.
By no means does this mean a victory of the trans-Eurasian over the trans-Atlantic sector at this time. What Russia’s current proposals represent is re-establishment of a sovereign region of economic cooperation amounting to a revised approach toward the same political-economic systems of cooperation which had been reached between U.S. President Franklin Roosevelt and among the allies associating themselves with the leadership of U.S. President Franklin Roosevelt’s guidance. The essential feature of that tendency is toward re-assembly of the allied powers under the leadership-role of President Franklin Roosevelt, as opposed to the implicitly treasonous factors introduced under the Churchill-Truman atrocity.
I direct our recollections of the relevant facts of history, to a moment when the leadership of the U.S. World War II command under President Franklin D. Roosevelt, expressed the fear that President Franklin Roosevelt was about to die, and of pre-prepared disaster for both the United States and most of the allies, which would be set into confusion among one another. On this account, view President Putin’s arguments accordingly. It is not the same package presented by U.S. President Franklin D Roosevelt, but it was the agreement which President Roosevelt had secured, and which the British empire’s Winston Churchill, and such Churchill accomplices as former Hitler supporters, Prescott Bush and his London-Cabal cronies, had conspired to destroy at the relevant times.
By the time that a new U.S. election had occurred, not only had a new party established a pro-Churchill grip within the U.S. government of President Franklin Roosevelt, but the right-wing Anglophile opportunists were entrenched; only President Franklin Roosevelt’s administration now existed to defend the essential interests of the United States against the anglophile opportunists gathered around the British imperialist faction gathered around the eternal British imperialist Winston Churchill and Churchill’s Wall Street cronies.
The head of the OSS had muttered along the corridor leading to the White House exits (to my friend): “It’s over … ” “It’s all over.” Essentially, what the OSS chief had muttered to his companion, then, has proven to have been thoroughly all-too-true, to the very present day!
To speak honestly and very plainly, the founders of the United States, both the founders of the original Massachusetts government, and the United States, would have considered the present U.S. governments under George W. Bush, Jr. and Barack Obama as worse than treasonous. The evidence is solid, but most of the populist opinion on that subject currently, would be very sinfully, worse than silly at the very best. Most of it is far worse than silly; there is a large dose of treason mixed in, even among the ranks of the Presidency and other notable institutions.
In these present times, virtually no political voice in the United States will actually tell the truth about anything of national importance. They have claimed to have found an alternative to truth, a rejection of any real meaning of truth, which has been rejected in favor of “popular opinion.”
For, consider what is permitted in institutions such as schools, that at various stages of behavior. There are sometimes truthful statements made, (but rarely publicly); but our educational institutions do not believe in a principle of truth. The prevailing statement of education even among what might be considered well-meaning instructors and even some students, is that a supposed reliance on teaching “the truth” is masked by the demand that the teacher dictate the truth to the student, and that the textbooks should dictate (usually) to the teachers. Thus, the changing opinion among those who prize favorable gradings, over telling the truth, has successfully driven the currently educated bodies of our graduates who are presumed to be certifiably educated, to an accelerating current rare of disintegration of the minds of the current crop of products of accepted standards of educational practice.
Take, for example, the particular case of secondary school geometry. What is taught? Usually, Euclidean geometry, a fraud which had become virtually the universal standard of teaching of science in what was miraculously regarded as Secondary School education, and, has been often experienced from the mouths of even relevant leading university professors. Take the case of even many regarded as leading scientists in Europe since no later than leading scientists’ opinions during the post-World War II education under Britain’s frankly, mass-murderously evil Bertrand Russell, as contrasted to such true scientists as Bernhard Riemann, Max Planck, or Albert Einstein, against the usual trash still taught as “scientific principles” then and now.
All that I have said, in these opening remarks here, presently, is true; but, that, in a certain, very significant degree, does not yet address the underlying frauds which continue to dominate even the supposedly leading circles of public belief and opinion.
The essential issue, which I will now introduce, having stated my preceding remarks, is rarely acknowledged as even existing. Hence, the prevalence of fraud in nearly all high-rankling opinion. The subject which must be forced into view, is the subject of the difference between the consistent lying of Zeus and the persistent honor of Prometheus.
I explain, as appropriately, as follows.
The contrast between Zeus and Prometheus has been a relatively new phenomenon in the attributable history of mankind as a species. The actual origin of the pure uniqueness of the human species is ancient, and appears as a point of distinction of man from the beast, a distinction of mankind’s attribute of cooking food. From such origins as that, the characteristic of mankind’s survival and progress as a species, is distinguished best by reference to the table of chemistry. Man evolves willfully by impulses toward rising to successively higher levels of heat. That is not merely “heat” as heat as-such, but the ingenious means of man’s utilization of the application of heat. Man’s relatively recent mastery of the use of the nuclear and thermonuclear powers of practice, marks the future of the destiny of mankind within the Solar system (and implicitly beyond), as a metrical standard for the evolutionary revolutions expressed as the rise of the human species from lower to higher standards of achievement.
Therefore, whence the contrary expressions respecting the limits self-imposed by some relatively inferior parts of human behavior, which fail to meet the standards of limitless progress for the role of the human species per capita? It is precisely that factor, which distinguishes the inherent bestiality of the intentions of the (frankly Satanic) Zeus from the fiery passions of Prometheus-the-fire-bringer. That is, not so incidentally, the essentially practical distinction of the British empire (for example) from the tendency of the intention underlying the purposes of such as the creation of the North American republic of (already) the Massachusetts Bay settlement, against the inherent bestialities of the Anglo-Dutch imperialist systems.
The distinction which I have just emphasized as a matter of illustration, is also an expression of the same difference which separates the same Principle of Prometheus from the intrinsic principles of evil at the root of the expressed intentions of a Zeus. It is the distinction of the effects of devotion to progress through advances in the creative use of fire by the human species. The oligarchy, by contrast, is committed to the bestial Zeus’s intention to prevent man’s evolutionary progress toward the achievement of higher qualities of the existence of man within the universe which he occupies. President Barack Obama’s suppression of accomplishments in astronomy is specifically an expression of the intrinsic folly represented by the policies of practice prescribed by Obama. All of the unnecessary suffering of human beings throughout the planet which we represent, is fairly compared to the intrinsic principle which Obama, among others, have already devoted their present intentions.
Consider the elementary facts respecting the origins of Christianity, as in opposition to the Roman empire’s role. Rome is the child of Zeus, and the enemy of the mission of Jesus.