What’s Your Emergency?

For those unfamiliar with the phrase that is the title of this blog post, it’s the question you get when you dial 911 in America; “911, what’s your emergency?” Why am I bringing 911 (9/11) up now, you ask? Ordinarily, I wouldn’t have brought it up or even have thought about it since so many realities have washed it out since that fateful day nearly thirteen years prior. But, some people, obviously, can’t let it go. Like barnacles to whales, it’s become the source of their psychical existence — without the 911 of 9/11, they have no definition to their lives, meaning it defines them since they’ve invested so much time and psychical energy into solving it, as if it could ever be solved, or better yet, as if solving it would actually affect the current pervasive lie of a reality many times removed from the reality that predominated immediately pre and post 9/11.

What specifically prompted this post, and it’s yet another thing — one of so many things these days — that makes me laugh, is a blog post by the highly-coveted The Saker at his blog The Vineyard of the Saker here entitled Short non-Ukrainian sidebar: nukes on 911?. Too funny. This is a blog presumably read, respected and linked to by such serious analysts as our very own PailiP and David Habakkuk who has….….recently graced us with his presence (Litvinenko poisoned himself fame) or better yet, Pat Lang who thinks The Saker is in Austria versus Florida driving around in his work van posting blog posts incessantly several times a day between deliveries. Here’s the post quoted from the link. Try not to laugh. It’s impossible — well, it was impossible for me, but obviously not a few around here and these other haunts lack a sense of humor. They’re not laughing. Their loss.

Many of you have commented on Gordon Duff, Press TV and the “Dimitri Khalezov theory” about nukes being used on 911. I just want to tell you that I rate the credibility of Press TV as “poor”, of Gordon Duff and “Veterans Today” as “terrible” and Dimitry Khazelov as “unknown”. However, one should rate the source and the information given by the source. So to this I will say that

a) there is no physical evidence of the use of a nuke on 911.
b) there is overwhelming evidence of the use of explosives (probably a mix of various types) on 911.

Also, there is the pesky problem of WTC7 which was a very different building from WTC1 and WTC2 whose collapse mechanism was clearly different. Explosives can – and have – explained it. The nuke hypothesis does not.

I don’t think that I have the time to go into a detailed discussion of 9/11 now, but for those of you who might wonder why I believe, please see this post (the links in the post are dead, but if there is a demand for it, I can re-upload the documents in question).

As for some US officials selling nukes I will say this: I rate Sibel Edmonds as a “good” source and the info she provides is compatible with what I know. However, it is one thing to sell nuclear technology to Israel or Turkey and quite another to make it widely available. In other words, I am not at all sure that the sale of these technologies has been nearly as big as some might believe.

Generally, I dislike sensationalism. I try to keep an open mind, but as Carl Sagan liked to say, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. I am willing to consider pretty much any theory about 9/11, except the ridiculous official fairytale of course, but it better be backed by some solid research and good evidence. Right now, I see the “controlled demolition” as proven far beyond reasonable doubt, so any other theory would have to do better, which would be very hard indeed.

Kind regards,

The Saker

Whew! It sure is comforting to know The Saker hasn’t undermined “his” impeccable John Hopkins’ reputation by advocating nukes were used at Ground Zero on 9/11. The Saker was smart to distance himself from such conspiratorially speculative nonsense. But he doesn’t distance himself from implying 9/11 was something other than the official version of events, and asserts explosives were used to take down the towers, especially the infamous WTC7. Applying David Habakkuk’s line of reasoning in the Litvinenko case, I suppose we can now assume that Habakkuk, Lang, Ali and PailiP et al are all guilty of embracing the conspiracy that 9/11 was an “inside job.” Afterall, Habakkuk and his friend David Loepp in this European Tribune linked article not only advocate Litvinenko poisoned himself, but also postmortemly indict him for Scaramella’s damning calumny via guilt by association. Per the link:

In an interview on the BBC Russian Service on 11 November 2006 Litvinenko endorsed suggestions made on obscure websites linked to the Chechen insurgents when they broke the story of his poisoning earlier the same day, that the likely culprit was Scaramella1. A diary in December 2008 exposed as disinformation an attempt by an associate of Litvinenko to explain away the incrimination of Scaramella, and to claim that he actually pointed the finger of suspicion at Andrei Lugovoi, the figure whom the British police have accused of committing the supposed murder. This is only one of a whole series of attempts by the dead man’s associates to claim that he incriminated Lugovoi, none of which has been supported by anything more than uncorroborated hearsay.

This makes it of particular interest that the various ‘interested persons’ at the inquest – among them Lugovoi – will by now be in possession of a transcript of what, supposedly, Litvinenko told the police. Without wanting to give hostages to fortune, it seems to us highly unlikely that it will show him incriminating Scaramella. However, that does not make what Litvinenko claimed when the story of his poisoning was broken irrelevant. The evidence from the recently concluded aggravated calumny case against Scaramella, together with other evidence discussed in our previous diary, establishes that he and Litvinenko had a record of framing people with bogus accusations of involvement in nefarious plots orchestrated by the Russian security services.

In the initial reports incriminating Scaramella, it was suggested that he had been the instrument of just such a plot. Particularly given the peculiar implausibility of the notion of his Italian associate as a Russian hit man, it seems overwhelmingly probable that this was the last, and most bizarre of Litvinenko’s frame-ups. If however one asks why one partner in crime might have chosen to frame another, a natural possible interpretation is that he did not want to be candid about what he thought had have happened to him. And this, of course, would fit in quite well with the claim made by Lugovoi’s lawyers that Litvinenko might not have been murdered at all – that his death might have been either an accident or suicide.

There’s the logic, or lack thereof. Either way, if we apply it to Lang, PailiP, FB Ali, Habakkuk and a bevy of others who hold The Saker and “his” blog in high esteem, then all of them are guilty of embracing the tinfoil hat conspiracy that Bush, and The Neocons in general, pulled off 9/11 as an “inside job.” Just as Litvinenko is guilty of calumny because someone (Scaramella) who solicited him to testify before the Mitrokhin Commission was eventually charged and found guilty of calumny. Guilt by association. By virtue of the six degrees of separation rule, I suppose we’re all guilty of every crime and/or injustice to some degree, but certainly the lesser the degree of separation, the more guilty. But at least Litvinenko distanced himself from Scaramella once he realized he was used and admitted he was duped and denounced Scaramella as a scoundrel. The aforementioned individuals, and the remaining army of their ilk, have done no such thing with The Saker and have no intention of distancing themselves. In fact, quite the opposite. Instead, they reduce that degree of separation even further thus making guilt by association a sure bet. And if you don’t believe me, review the comment section at The Vineyard of the Saker. Per your review, if you conducted it diligently, you’ll notice Habakkuk treats The Saker with kid gloves respect — something he did not do with me at this space. Not that I care. I don’t want that kind of respect, if any respect. It’s phoney, false and sycophantic. It precludes objectivity. It’s a burden, so please, no respect. Save it for Putin.


But since The Saker has broken out the tinfoil, let’s rip off a few sheets of Reynolds® Wrap Aluminum Foil, or hell, let’s use the whole roll. Why let it go to waste?

Traditionally, conspiracy theories concerning 9/11 typically blame one, or all, of a few favorite tin_foil_hatscapegoat groups and/or people.

1. George W. Bush
2. The Neocons
3. The Jews
4. All of the above‎

But why not the Russians and Putin? That’s the beauty of conspiracy theorizing — the sky’s the limit. Keep throwing spaghetti at the wall and see what sticks. Cook it long enough, and the whole damn pot of pasta sticks, so thick is the starch. The spaghetti that is Putin’s Russia sticks as well as any of the other noodles that have been thrown at the Wall of Misfortune (or is it fortune?), so let’s take a look, shall we? On a lark, I did a Google search, and what do you know, there are a handful who have already considered Putin’s Russia as the mastermind behind 9/11. Take this link, for example. There are not a few Russians per that link who believe Putin’s Russia was not only capable of doing it, but they predicted it — in specific detail just like Sesame Street did in 1976. Here’s some choice quotes from that link:

If you are serious about the global war, let us try and think strategically. The most important strategic target in that war is the Kremlin. That is not only the best way to start winning it, but, as far as I can see, the only way. Paraphrasing Alexander (Litvinenko), we can say it is impossible to destroy international terrorism even in a century unless you disband the Russian secret services first.

– Pavel Stroilov, a Russian exile in London and the editor and translator of Alexander Litvinenko’s book, Allegations, The Putin-Osama Connection, FrontPage Magazine, 1/16/08

Who am I, or you, to argue with a Russian about Putin’s Russia? There’s more — there’s always more.

September 11, 2001 was directly rooted in a joint Soviet/Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) operation conceived in the aftermath of the 1967 Six-Day Arab-Israeli War. The object of this joint operation was to repair Moscow’s prestige by turning the Islamic world against Israel and by creating a rabid and violent hatred for its main supporter, the United States. The strategy was to portray the US, this land of freedom, as a Nazi-style “imperial-Zionist country” financed by Jewish money and run by a rapacious “Council of the Elders of Zion” (the Kremlin’s epithet for the US Congress), the aim of which was allegedly to transform the rest of the world into a Jewish fiefdom. In other words, the heart of the joint plan was to convert the historical Arab and Islamic hatred of the Jews into a new hatred of the United States. We threw many millions of dollars at this gigantic task, which involved whole armies of intelligence officers.

– Ion Mihai Pacepa, former acting chief of Communist Romania’s espionage service, From Russia With Terror, FrontPage Magazine, 3/1/04

That was from the Chief, not some low-level nobody like Litvinenko. No doubt the Putin apologists will find a way to call up down and black white. It’s the world we live in now.

Mohammed Atta, the pilot of the first plane to crash into the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001, had met with a senior Iraqi intelligence agent in Prague, Czech Republic, five months before the attack. But Iraqi intelligence was just a client of Russia’s intelligence service. It brings a new understanding to the fact that President Putin was the first foreign President to call President Bush on 9/11. One may conjecture that he knew in advance what was to happen.

– Konstantin Preobrazhensky, former Lt. Colonel in the KGB who defected to the United States in 1993, “Russia and Islam are not Separate: Why Russia backs Al-Qaeda”

Yes, we may conjecture since this is tinfoil time, so we will. There’s still plenty of aluminum foil left, so let it roll, baby, roll.

I do not know how or when World War Three will start. I do not know exactly how the Soviet high command plans to make use of spetsnaz in that war: the first world war in which spetsnaz will be a major contributor. I do not wish to predict the future. In this chapter I shall describe how spetsnaz will be used at the beginning of that war as I imagine it. It is not my task to describe what will happen. But I can describe what might happen.


The plane takes off and disappears into the sky….The plane climbs to about 200 metres and immediately begins to descend in the direction of the White House. A minute later a mighty explosion shakes the capital of the United States. The screaming of sirens on police cars, fire engines and ambulances fills the city.

Three minutes later a second plane sweeps across the centre of the city and there is a second explosion in the place where the White House once stood…

– From GRU defector Viktor Suvorov’s 1987 book, Spetsnaz. The Story Behind the Soviet SAS, Chapter 15: “Spetsnaz’s First World War”

Tomorrow is the 9th anniversary of the 9/11 terrorist attacks that so galvanized America to take a stand against the perceived enemy of “Islamofascism” thus leading to the War On Terror and the subsequent U.S. invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq.

But did we get it right?

The inconvenient truth is that “The Old Enemy” responsible for 9/11 remains unrecognized.

On 9/11, the World Trade Center towers were destroyed and the Pentagon seriously damaged. These were ultimate symbols of American “Capitalism” and “Imperialism” in the eyes of the Communist powers-of-old and for this attack to occur in an underhanded manner such that Islamic militants were blamed rather than the Kremlin would be a source of great pride for Russia’s secret services. (That the Jews and America itself are blamed for 9/11 by so many is an even larger feather in their cap!)

Notably, 9/11 is the birthday of KGB founder Felix Dzerzhinsky

If you find it difficult to believe that Russia would be behind terrorist operations against the West, I suggest you consider what FSB defector Alexander Litvinenko had to say about Al Qaeda and Ayman al Zawahiri, al Qaeda’s supposed #2 leader and the effective operational leader of this now infamous international terrorist network (see quotes above). Indeed, many believe Osama bin Laden is simply a figurehead of al Qaeda (who may be dead), and that it is Zawahiri who is really running the show. Litvinenko, who was assassinated by Russian secret services with radioactive Polonium in 2006 (I ran the Litvinenko Chronicles before he was murdered), pointed out that Ayman al Zawahiri was trained by the KGB and that Al Qaeda is a Kremlin proxy being used to strike the West underhandedly. This is also the opinion of other key defectors from Russian intelligence such as Ion Pacepa, ex-chief of Romanian intelligence, and Stanislav Lunev, the highest ranking defector from the GRU, Russia’s military intelligence service.

Here’s another link to an analysis that asserts 9/11 was a Russian false flag operation.

Were the 9/11 terror attacks false flag operations orchestrated by Russia?

Guest post by James Simpson

Following World War II, practically every terrorist organization in the world, whether it be Islamist or Communist, was financed, trained, armed and advised by Soviet intelligence or one of its proxies. There is nothing new or even noteworthy about this fundamental fact. I have written about it for years, most notably regarding Yasser Arafat, al Qaeda and radical Islam in general. The theme was covered exhaustively last summer in a conference sponsored by Cliff Kincaid’s America’s Survival. I wrote about that conference in a two part report, here and here.
The story below by J.R. Nyquist, reprinted here with permission, is one in a series and picks up on that theme, but adds new dimension and depth. J.R. is one of the most brilliant and knowledgeable geopolitical analysts in the United States and you will thank me for introducing him to you. Unfortunately, his analysis is seldom politically correct or convenient for the chattering classes, so our nation suffers, feted instead with fact-free.tripe from DC insiders and other fools with all kinds of ulterior motives.

J.R. tells the story of Victor Kalashikov, a former KGB agent who has bravely spoken out against his former boss, and he and his wife have apparently been poisoned with mercury for their trouble. The opinions of other former KGB officers add further weight, especially that of Alexander Litvineko, poisoned in London with Polonium 210 after he revealed that Ayman al Zawahiri, number 2 in al Qaeda at the time, was in fact an old KGB agent who trained in the former Soviet Union. Read the analysis below; also read parts I and II, and spread this far and wide.

Part 3: Former KGB Colonel Victor Kalashnikov on the Dangers of Putin Worship, Russia’s anti-Western Alliance with Islam, and the Kremlin’s grand strategy.

By J.R. Nyquist

The following paragraphs serve as “background support” for Victor Kalashnikov’s thesis. Many readers of Part 2 may not have understood Victor Kalashnikov’s statement about the terrorist attack of Sept. 11, 2001. So it is time to review and explain. It is necessary to remind readers of the ABM Treaty and of the military strategy of the old Soviet Union which remains the policy of Russia today.

At the end of Part 2, in the course of our discussion, former KGB officer Kalashnikov offered the following observation. “What happened on 9/11 was just an omen of things to come,” he warned. “At the time of 9/11America’s dispute with Russia had reached its peak. George Bush was going to leave the ABM Treaty.”

The Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty restricted the number and placement of units for intercepting ICMBs (intercontinental ballistic missiles) and SLBMs (submarine launched ballistic missiles). Since Russian military power largely depends on ICBMs and SLBMs, the mass deployment of ABMs would effectively reduce Russia to a third rate military power. Kalashnikov points to Russian President Putin’s warning about Bush’s announced intention to exit from the ABM Treaty by the end of 2001. At the time Putin warned, “If you do this you will not be able to defend against new threats.” According to Kalashnikov, “You had been warned that new security challenges will emerge. But you did not listen in the summer of 2001.”

Kalashnikov’s strategic interpretation of 9/11 begs a subtle question. There is no reason a nuclear attack requires an ICBM or an SLBM. A nuclear weapon might be delivered by a terrorist rather than a missile. The United States has fairly open borders. Drugs and people are regularly smuggled across that border. And readers will note that as early as 1999 the name of Osama bin Laden was associated with nuclear terrorism (since terrorism expert Josef Bodansky’s claim that al Qaeda had as many as twenty nuclear weapons “stolen” from the former Soviet Union).

Kalashnikov’s suggestion of a Russian connection to 9/11 is far from whimsical. And he is not the first former KGB official to see a connection. In the summer of 2005 a former KGB/FSB officer named Alexander Litvinenko said he had firsthand knowledge of a connection between Russian intelligence and al Qaeda. In fact, he identified the second highest official in al Qaeda, Ayman al-Zawahiri, as a “longtime agent of Moscow.” In July 2005 a Polish journalist sent me the following translation of Litvinenko’s interview with fakt.pl, which took place after a terrorist attack on the London subway.

FAKT: Alexander, who, in your opinion, is the originator of this [London] terrorist attack?

A. Litvinenko: You know, I have spoken about it earlier and I shall say now, that I know only one organization that has made terrorism the main tool of solving political problems. It is the Russian special services. The KGB was engaged in terrorism for many years, and mass terrorism. At the special department of the KGB they trained terrorists from practically every country in the world. These courses lasted, as a rule, for a half-year. Specially trained and prepared agents of the KGB organized murders and explosions, including explosions of tankers, the hijacking of passenger airliners, strikes on diplomatic, state and commercial organizations worldwide.

FAKT: Could you name … some of the terrorists prepared at the “special courses” of the KGB-FSB?

A. Litvinenko: The bloodiest terrorists in the world were or are agents of the KGB-FSB. These are well-known, like Carlos Ilyich Ramiros, nicknamed “the Jackal,” the late Yassir Arafat, Saddam Hussein, Adjalan (he is condemned in Turkey), Wadi Haddad, the head of the service of external operations of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, Hauyi, the head of the communist party of Lebanon, Mr. Papaionnu from the Cyprus, Sean Garland from Ireland and many others. All of them were trained by the KGB, received money from there, weapons and explosives, counterfeit documents and communication equipment for carrying out of acts of terrorism worldwide.

FAKT: Some may object that each of the listed figures, and the forces supporting them, were engaged in solving their own political problems.

A. Litvinenko: Certainly, all these figures and movements operated under their own slogans; however, none of them especially hid their “intimate” … relationship with the Kremlin and Lubyanka. There is a simple question: whether the Russian special services would train and finance people and groups that were not supervised by Lubyanka and did not serve the interests of the Kremlin? You understand perfectly, they would not. Each act of terrorism made by these people was carried out as an assignment and under the rigid control of the KGB of the USSR. And [the terrorism] … is not casual after the disintegration of the USSR and [reform of the KGB]….

FAKT: Every terrorist you have named is from ‘the old staff’ of the KGB. Could you name someone from recent history?

A. Litvinenko: Certainly, here it is. The number two person in the terrorist organization al Qaeda, who they are crediting with the series of explosions in London, Ayman al-Zawahiri, is an old agent of the FSB. Being sentenced to death in Egypt for terrorism and hunted by Interpol, Ayman al-Zawahiri, in 1998, was in the territory of Dagestan, where for half a year he received special training at one of the educational bases of the FSB. After this training he was transferred to Afghanistan, where he had never been before and where, following the recommendation of his Lubyanka chiefs, he at once … penetrated the milieu of bin Laden and soon became his assistant in al Qaeda.

FAKT: Could you hint at least, where this data comes from?

A. Litvinenko: I can. During my service in one of the most secret departments of the FSB, top officials from the UFSB of Dagestan, who had directly worked with Ayman al-Zawahiri … were called to Moscow and received high posts.

FAKT: What can you say concerning the acts of terrorism in London ? From what region and with what forces was this strike directed?

A. Litvinenko: In reply to this question I can definitely say that the center of global terrorism is not in Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan or the Chechen Republic. The terrorist infection is spread worldwide from Lubyanka Square and the Kremlin cabinet. And until the Russian special services are outlawed, dispersed and condemned, the terrorism will never stop: bombs will blow up and blood will be shed. Terrorism has no expiration date…. I would like to repeat, that all the terrorists, whom I have named, were supported by the heads of the Soviet and Russian special services – Yuri Andropov, Vladimir Putin, Nikolay Patrushev and others. These people are the main terrorists…. And until we condemn them … global terrorism will continue.

Such was the fakt.pl interview with former FSB-KGB officer Litvinenko, which corroborates Kalashnikov’s suggestion above, and helps to explain why Litvinenko was fatally poisoned with radioactive polonium-210 in 2006, and why Kalashnikov himself has suffered from mercury poisoning. (Please note: Kalashnikov’s wife also suffers from mercury poisoning, and the mix of symptoms suffered by the Kalashnikovs suggests the possibility of other, unidentified elements in their poisoning. In fact, if there are any medical doctors reading this who would take an interest in their case, please write to me at jrnyquist@aol.com.)

Strategists in the West have a blind spot, especially as Russian disinformation has been successful in diverting investigators and political analysts from investigating Litvinenko’s claims. After Litvinenko’s assassination by Kremlin agents in 2006, the major news media produced a series of documentaries about his background. None of these mentioned Litvinenko’s statements about the FSB connection to al Qaeda. None dared restate Litvinenko’s accusation that Putin was the chief terrorist, or that the FSB was the main headquarters of international terrorism.

Why was the media unwilling to discuss Litvinenko’s testimony (and the possible reason for his assassination)? The reason is instinctively grasped by anyone who has worked as a journalist writing about Russia. If your writing threatens to expose Russian machinations, your career is going to suffer. A journalist who doesn’t know this (is a journalist) who doesn’t know his journalistic ABCs. If you write about Russia, be careful not to touch on certain themes.

Another former KGB officer I recently interviewed was Konstantin Preobrazhensky, who wrote an intriguing article titled “Russia and Islam are not Separate: Why Russia backs Al-Qaeda.” According to Preobrazhensky:

Mohammed Atta, the pilot of the first plane to crash into the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001, had met with a senior Iraq intelligence agent in Prague, Czech Republic, five months before the attack. But Iraqi intelligence was just a client of Russia’s intelligence service. It brings a new understanding to the fact that President Putin was the first foreign President to call President Bush on 9/11. One my conjecture that he knew in advance what was to happen.

In his article, Preobrazhensky credits Litvinenko’s testimony that Ayman al-Zawahiri and other al Qaeda terrorists were trained in Russia. (There is also Czech testimony that Atta was trained in Communist Czechoslovakia during the 1980s). Even more important, this training took place in secret and has been hidden from the world. Every journalistic attempt to expose this secret has resulted in no reaction, no further investigation from the journalistic community. We are left to suppose that Litvinenko’s claim and Preobrazhensky’s support for that claim are owing to the malice of two Russian malcontents. But this is far from the truth. The former head of Communist Romania’s foreign intelligence service, Ion Mihai Pacepa, made the following statement which was quoted in FrontPage Magazine on 1 March 2004:

September 11, 2001 was directly rooted in a joint Soviet/Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) operation conceived in the aftermath of the 1967 Six-Day Arab-Israeli War. The object of this joint operation was to repair Moscow’s prestige by turning the Islamic world against Israel and by creating a rabid and violent hatred for its main supporter, the United States. The strategy was to portray the US, this land of freedom, as a Nazi-style “imperial-Zionist country” financed by Jewish money and run by a rapacious “Council of the Elders of Zion” (the Kremlin’s epithet for the US Congress), the aim of which was allegedly to transform the rest of the world into a Jewish fiefdom. In other words, the heart of the joint plan was to convert the historical Arab and Islamic hatred of the Jews into a new hatred of the United States. We threw many millions of dollars at this gigantic task, which involved whole armies of intelligence officers.

Like other former Soviet bloc insiders, Kalashnikov emphasizes the connection between terrorism as a new form of warfare and Moscow’s overall strategy. “Lenin created a new kind of terror policy,” Kalashnikov explained. “Terror was the starting point for Bolshevik state strategy. Organized terror is the cornerstone of Soviet statehood.” Kalashnikov further stated, “Moscow wants the ABM Treaty back, otherwise you will face more trouble.”

Moscow’s message to Bush was misunderstood, however. For it was Bush’s curse to have, at his beck and call, a hapless and intellectually compromised set of advisors. With regard to terrorism, the American intelligence community has been clueless. The analysis of the CIA suffers from a general incompetence because American intelligence analysts are educated in graduate schools where a realistic appraisal of the Russian threat is generally frowned upon, and where neo-Marxism enjoys a veto over careers and advancements. American analysts are therefore indoctrinated to dismiss any notion of a Soviet policy of terrorist conspiracy, or to dismiss any claim of Russian involvement in the terrorist phenomenon of today. Just as journalists are trained to avoid a certain species of anti-Russian statements, so are the analysts of the CIA and Pentagon. In brief, there has been a tendency to willfully misinterpret Russian strategy, and this tendency has a common root in American academic culture.

With regard to American academic expertise, Kalashnikov told me, “I have a friend in America, a Russian journalist, Vladimir Baranov. And he is reporting on the Tsarnaev brothers [i.e., Boston Marathon bombers]. He mentioned this American anti-terror expert … who said the linkages between the Chechens and al Qaeda are unimportant. But this is total nonsense! Chechnya is under Russian military intelligence!”

Kalashnikov is disgusted by America’s analysts. “What I would suggest,” he said, “is that your anti-terror expert read Vladimir Lenin who provided the textbook for terrorists: How they should set up combat units; who is to be killed first and second; what strategy and tactics to adopt. Lenin developed a complete theory for using terrorism to take power and govern a huge state. That was the beginning of Soviet strategy, statehood and government, as well as international policy.”

Kalashnikov further warned against expert opinion. “Too much academic wording comes about when we use words like ‘socialism’ and ‘communism.’ Lenin was a practical politician who discovered new methods for power. He discovered that terror was the most effective tool in politics.”

And so the idea that Russia or the KGB could have no connection with 9/11 is absurd for someone who knows the role that terrorism plays in Soviet strategy.

I know. Crazy. Right? It’s so obvious and right under the noses of the vaunted Western MIC (Military Industrial Complex). Or was/is it? Have the Soviets (who are still Soviets by the way) penetrated the MIC and compromised it? Could that explain the seeming indifference to Putin’s and Russia’s covert, and recently not so covert, aggression? The Soviets have penetrated so thoroughly and successfully, that the MIC now stands down as Russia rises to its former prominence — if there ever was a former prominence. It sure does explain an awful lot. The Soviets are using a Cloward & Piven strategy to bring America and the West down. It was the Soviets, with the influence of their tens of thousands of sleeper cells awakened and activated after the alleged fall of the Soviet Union that made their way into the highest echelons of America’s and the West’s power structures, who have engineered their target host’s imminent collapse as Mother Russia rises from its purposely induced collapsed coma to rule the world. It’s brilliant, you must admit. What’s most brilliant about it is all it took was a few to get the ball rolling. Everyone else has lined up to help push along what will ultimately be their destruction. And they do it with such unwavering gusto, you must admit. Volunteers with enthusiasm. What’s not to like?

Hell, the Soviets penetrated so deep they even concocted children’s television shows like Sesame Street. The pic at the top of this post indicates the Soviets were planning 9/11 as far back as 1976. If nothing else, they sure are thorough — and patient. They waited twenty five years to execute the attack. When it comes to terrorism, the early bird doesn’t catch the worm. The cat catches the early bird. Those sly Soviets. Playing dead all this time. Well, now some of us are on to you. Some of us should have known sooner. Some of us did. Look at this Sesame Street YouTube with the Matryoshka dolls. Pure Soviet propaganda — culturally conditioning young American minds for the largely bloodless invasion and takeover that would come decades later. And here we are. You should see the comments to this video. The idiot Americans love this propaganda. They think it’s cute. The Soviets are laughing. These dolts will no doubt think their Gulag accommodations are cute & cozy as well so conditioned they are by years of Soviet propaganda. Try watching this video for the full five or more minutes and tell me you don’t feel like executing a journalist afterward or locking up a gay. It’s sickening in its duplicity.

And I’m not the only one who knows that Sesame Street, and public television in general, are Soviet/Communist propaganda. There are others who have wizened to it. Cliff Kincaid knows it and has reported on it per this link to Accuracy In Media. Even though it’s right out in the open in plain sight now, the idiot American dolts can’t comprehend it. So they ignore it. Just as the Soviets intended. These conditioned once potential American but now Soviet minds will ignore everything and anything — especially their own obvious conditioning. They have been socially engineered to resignation. Mission Accomplished. Per the link:

Foreign Propaganda Channels Target the U.S.

Big Bird came up during Tuesday night’s debate, when President Obama cited the Sesame Street character as an example of a specific budget cut proposed by Mitt Romney. The problem with taxpayer-funded public broadcasting isn’t just the money being spent, it is that we’re subsidizing content such as one-sided foreign propaganda broadcasts.

The evidence shows that while Romney is correct in saying that we are borrowing from China to pay for public broadcasting in America, the complete truth is actually more shocking—we are borrowing from China to help public broadcasting air Chinese propaganda in the U.S.

CCTV, an official propaganda arm of the Chinese government and the Chinese Communist Party, is being distributed to public television stations in the U.S. through a public television programming service called MHz Worldview, a project of MHz Networks.

Florida broadcaster Jerry Kenney has taken a look at this aspect of the bias. His analysis shows that the federally-funded Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB) funneled $27,580,113 into MHz Networks and its affiliates in fiscal year 2011.

MHz Networks is a division of Commonwealth Public Broadcasting, based in Richmond, Virginia, and distributes Al-Jazeera, the voice of the Muslim Brotherhood, the Moscow-funded Russia Today (RT) channel, and CCTV, under the rubric of “Programming for globally-minded people.” MHz Worldview calls itself “alternative programming for U.S. public TV stations and other distributors.”

All of these foreign propaganda channels are being broadcast in English. He Qinglian, a Chinese scholar who came to the U.S. after working in the propaganda department of the Chinese Communist Party, has told Epoch Times that English-language propaganda broadcasts on China being beamed into the homes of Americans are part of an effort to polish the image of the regime.

“They want to, through media propaganda, subtly and imperceptibly change people’s views of China so they’re the same as those of Xinhua [the official press agency of China] and the Chinese government,” He Qinglian said. “They want Americans to stop using American values and concepts of human rights to understand China.”

As we have previously reported, Kenney hired a lawyer to file a complaint with the Federal Communications Commission, arguing that the contracts between the public TV stations affiliated with Commonwealth are being improperly used for the purpose of broadcasting foreign propaganda in the U.S. Violations of the rules can result in financial fines and revocation of broadcast licenses. “U.S. taxpayers should not be forced to subsidize the distribution in the U.S. of another country’s propaganda,” Kenney says.

Kenney has also filed a complaint with the U.S. Department of Justice alleging that the foreign propaganda channels are violating the law by not disclosing in their propaganda broadcasts that they are agents of foreign powers.

One of the foreign propaganda channels not yet carried by MHz is English-language Iranian Press TV, which has a studio in Washington, D.C. and is available in the U.S. through YouTube and the Internet. It has a “U.S. Desk” that covers the United States, and its correspondents operate in the nation’s capital and beyond.

A mouthpiece of the Iranian regime, Press TV, claims that the Israeli government orchestrated the 9/11 attacks and ran a story insisting that “Jewish bankers” are behind the financial problems in Greece.

Kenneth Timmerman has noted, in a major investigative report for Accuracy in Media, that the Obama Administration permits Press TV “to operate on American soil without a license and in violation of U.S. sanctions regulations, which ban commercial transactions with Iran. It appears to be another example of Obama coddling the terrorist regime.”

Press TV and other Iranian channels were recently taken off the air by the British telecommunications company Arqiva, and European Satellite provider Eutelsat, in accordance with European Union economic sanctions against Iran.

The group, United Against Nuclear Iran (UANI), had urged these entities to drop Press TV and the other Iranian channels. UANI CEO, Ambassador Mark D. Wallace, said, “Arqiva has made the right decision, and we applaud it. We also applaud Eutelsat for taking these Iranian broadcasters off the European airways today. Any entity committed to free speech must completely distance itself from the Iranian regime, particularly given the regime’s libelous programming that regularly includes hate speech against religious minorities, forced confessions of peaceful dissidents and civil society activists, and show trials of political prisoners.”

The attention should now turn to Press TV operations inside the U.S.

As Timmerman reported for AIM, “Press TV has used a number of subterfuges to skirt the U.S. sanctions on commercial transactions with Iran.” It operates through the Iranian Mission to the United Nations and production companies operating in the U.S.

As this story was being written, one of Press TV’s Washington, D.C. correspondents, Marjan Asi, called AIM, asking for comment on the decision by the European satellite providers to drop the Iranian government channels. We told her that the actions were justified under the sanctions that are designed to stop her government from developing nuclear weapons. She saw it as an assault on free speech.

Asi is listed as a writer for the website of Crescent International, described as “a publication of the Institute of Contemporary Islamic Thought.”

Some of the articles on the website include:

  • EU ban on Iranian media confirms Islamic Iran’s credibility
  • Grave socio-economic injustices plague Canada
  • How the foreign-backed conspiracy to overthrow Assad is failing in Syria
  • Corporate elite try to breathe life into moribund US election campaign
  • Islamic Iran’s economic resistance continues

The website features a question of the month, which asks whether people agree, disagree, or don’t know regarding the statement, “US-Zionist threats of war against Islamic Iran are illegal and if launched could lead to the Third World War.”

Elton John wrote this song for his Soviet/Communist comrades back in 1973. Now we understand what it really means.


Well, I used the whole roll — all 200 feet. The Saker’s admirers stand convicted. They have no leg to stand on, but believe me, they will wriggle around on their stubs puffing themselves up like they’re really something when they’re nothing more than clowns.

That’s all for now. Sorry I couldn’t be more brief. I prefer boxers or nothing at all. Briefs are too binding.



19 thoughts on “What’s Your Emergency?

    • Great article. Thanks for the link. I actually read it in its entirety, but then I’m a liar, aren’t I, so we’ll, you’ll, never know the truth.

      Perhaps you didn’t read this post, but you sure as hell scanned it for grammatical errors — and this time didn’t find anything. I thought of you when I went over it the fourth time before hitting publish. Just the notion of you keeps me on my toes. You bring value. For that, I’m grateful.

  1. Well, well, Mr. Can’t-Tell-His-Arse-From-A-Hole-In-The-Field show his true colors:

    “Russians living in Ukraine and all Baltic and Balkan states should be deported to Russia immediately. They have proven they can’t live any place beside Russia so send them home where they belong and Putin can no longer use Russians living abroad as an excuse to invade and annex. The West should do this as well. All Russians must go. Crime in the mid-Atlantic cities of America will easily drop by half Russian criminals are deported to the criminal state of Russia where they belong.”

    His hate-filled ethnic-cleansing program (or pogrom) for genocide paints him in there with the Red-Browns, but as an apocalyptic horse of a somewhat different, more “liberal” color: perhaps we should call it the Blue-Brown convergence. Particularly as we see how Euro-US liberals hold hands with ease with actual neo-fascists in Ukraine. He’ll need those fascists in order to accomplish his ethnic cleansing fantasy. Somebody’s gotta do the dirty work, after all, and we know it won’t be Mr. Arse-Hole farting up himself on his comfy couch.

    He really do belong down in the sludge with the Moonies or, better yet, the perpetually racist and anti-semitic Vineyard loonies. No wonder he compulsively trolls them, effing POS.

  2. @catcher…

    I have been following your blog a short time (since Burning Down the House) and admire your skepticism and attempts at maintaining this intellectually honest approach towards all sides of issues. A similar skeptic myself, and honors WP grad, this gift led me to resign my military commission on the Saudi-Iraq border during Desert Storm after coming to the understanding that I wasn’t really the white knight in shining armor going off to save the world for life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness that I thought I was.

    Anyway, the topic of 9/11 is a fascinating one. The “grand conspiracy” idea is not probable, yet there are many aspects of the official version of the events that are equally difficult to believe based on probability. It is these glaring affronts to common sense, I believe, that stoke people’s conspiracy instincts leading to wild speculation in an attempt to make sense of things. One why leads to another, and soon, all faith is lost. It is depressing, really. Yet still, in the true skeptic, there is an inner worm that can’t help wanting to know the truth and wishing to discover it

    I am always eager to hear and gain insight from intelligent people like yourself who attempt to maintain intellectual objectivity and at least appear to try to avoid partisan spinning. Considering the profound impact that the events of 9/11 had/have on our world, I can’ t help but continue to ask myself questions such as, ” What made building 7 fall, and why?” And why was this issue never thoroughly or believably addressed by any official investigation? And if that version of events is a lie, what else is a lie, and why? It is an oily slope.

    There are other serious inconsistencies, but I think building 7 is, for the sake of argument, the best example. Since you opened this can of worms, I am seriously interested in your thoughts on what happened to building 7. I can picture you saying to yourself now that this is a waste of time, and that there are so many lies that it is useless to even attempt to make sense of things. This, perhaps, is where you and I part ways. I still want/hope/believe in truth, justice, and perhaps some small idealistic meaning in life, even if it is contrived. Millions have died and suffered as a result of the events of 9/11. Though we will not solve the whole mystery in the comments section of your blog, remember, you started it, Maybe we can illuminate, a little anyway, a very focused piece of the puzzle.

    In short, what are your thoughts on the collapse of building 7?

    • David,

      Admittedly, the footage of WTC7 falling looks peculiar — as though it were a purposeful demolition. That’s as far as I’ll go. The rest becomes the flying spaghetti monster, especially when you go from that observation to whodunnit if you theorize it was other than the official story.

      My satire in this blog post was aimed at those who would never openly admit 9/11 was something other than the official version of events, and people who will publicly chastise others who do admit it openly. It’s also aimed at those who believe 9/11 is something other than the official version and are confident, beyond the shadow of a doubt, what that something other is (The Saker and his Russian comrades who’ve taken over and directed anti-American discourse on Western blogs). The satire is not to ridicule what truly happened on 9/11, but rather to poke at the contradictions surrounding how people view it, whether they view it as an “inside job” or as the official version of events.

      Also, I will say this again. Not only will 9/11 never be solved, even if it was it wouldn’t change a thing. I know that without an ounce of doubt. There are too many variables beyond controlling and the synergy they’ve formed via their interaction is too immense and intractable.

      So, to me at least, it serves no purpose to focus on that one event or to let that one event define you. So many realities have been rolled out since and are being rolled out, if you gaze too long at 9/11, you’ll be Left Behind and increasingly irrelevant.

  3. @catcher

    Thanks for the reply – it reveals your sub-satirical good intentions. I reached, more or less, the same conclusions long ago, but there is an important value in treating the issue properly. Not everyone, including highly capable, intelligent people, have advanced as far along the path of understanding as you have. I recall the eye opening process in myself and the escape from the mental bondage of belief in the authorized truth. In the throes of such a process, one needs footholds of truth and insight to enable one to complete the awakening -much like Kurt Vonnegut described in his protagonist in The Sirens of Titan. Building 7 is one such foothold for many people. It does not take a huge leap of faith for someone who is curious enough to investigate, to realize there is something seriously wrong with this picture. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltP2t9nq9fI.

    There are far too few “awake” people, as Thoreau would describe them, out there. We need all we can get if we hope to improve our world. In that light, I encourage all those who are awake to continue illuminating the footholds in a reserved, responsible way so that others on the journey may make it across. I think that in your own way, you are doing just that with this blog. Thanks

    • David,

      I’ve researched your name, and I have to say I respect what you’ve done as far as standing up to the MIC (Military Industrial Complex) and refusing to murder on the behest of the WWON (World Wide Oligarch Network). Like Litvinenko, it took a lot of guts, but unlike Litvinenko, you didn’t allow yourself to be bankrolled by scumbags such as Bereshovsky — instead you committed to saving lives and mitigating suffering as an emergency room physician. You have that Teu Grit Q. Shtik and I were discussing in the previous thread.

      There certainly are many who aren’t awake, for lack of a better word and analogy, but there also are many who refuse to take a look because they’re afraid of what they might find or what will happen to them if they gaze too deeply into the abyss. As such, this abyss you and I are currently up to our necks and higher in is an awful lonely and confusing place compared to our previous reality of secure delusion.

      Here’s the challenge for us at this point. Once we step out into the abyss as we have and see the consensus reality for the lie it is, it causes a great deal of insecurity and discomfort at first. The umbilical cord is cut so to speak, and we’re now on our own to try to figure it out, and because that need for security and comfort is so strong, we have the propensity to grab for the first thing in the abyss that offers us that — and that is a big mistake, because this abyss that holds and produces all the delusional realities is likened to those Sesame Street Matryoshka dolls — one inside another for eternity, or so it seems.

      And that’s been one of the themes of this blog up to this point — that casting off one false reality doesn’t ensure the next will be the real deal. In fact, the probability is high it won’t be. The Saker and his ilk want us to believe, via binary dualism, that it’s black or white, paper or plastic, Russia or America — when it’s so much more than that. They do it as a form of mind-control and social engineering. It’s a terrible form of exploitation — to further exploit those seeking refuge and escape from exploitation.

      When you think you’ve escaped one holding pen, it could be you’ve just escaped one for another. That’s one of the points I’m trying to drive home. But people are passionate about what they believe. Some of the most zealous Atheists are former zealous Christians. The common denominator is the zealous part. The only difference is to what set of beliefs that zealotry is applied. Needless to say but I’ll say it anyway, the only thing I’m zealous about is not being zealous.

      • David,

        One thing I would like you to share with us here is an example of how you’ve been harassed for taking a stand against power. As you know, there are many tactics used to harass those who step out into the abyss as you and I have done. I know you’ve been harassed as I have, so would you please share at least one example of how it’s done to you.

        Thank you in advance.

        FYI, I alluded to some of this in my first post, and what it indicates is there are tremendous forces at work to keep us in place. I had such an event yesterday when I was out and about. It’s subtle but obvious if you’re the one it’s directed at. It’s meant to say, “we’re right here, just so you know and don’t forget.” It’s sadistic, and those who engage in it are deranged beyond all repair. Considering your outspokenness, I know you have to have had similar experiences — and if you related these experiences to other people who’ve never experienced it, they would consider you paranoid or insane.

  4. Speaking of examples, it’s important to provide them judiciously, so in keeping with this principle, I give you this comment from the comment section at The Vineyard of the Saker blog.

    Anonymous said…

    Let it be known throughout America, Russia and Novorossia: the Americans are cowards. They truly don’t deserve to live. The only honest Americans are those who are willing to break the law, i.e., Thomas Paine, Edward Snowden, Bob Dylan, The Black Panther Party, The Weather Underground . . . American has signed its own death warrant. – Written by an American

    29 May, 2014 05:03

    Nice. And to think, Lang, Ali, Habakkuk, PailiP et all respect that blog and Lang even highlights it as a serious space for analysis at his own blog. The Saker is consistently making illusions to his private life, I suppose to make himself appear more personal, but considering everything he divulges about himself personally, he never mentions harassment he receives from Western intelligence services. Considering what this person claims he is, and considering how controversial his blog is, I find it incomprehensible he hasn’t been harassed, and since he’s prone to discuss his personal life, he would have mentioned had he been harassed.

    I conclude two highly probable possibilities from this.

    1. The Saker is a ruse and a Western intelligence psyops.

    2. The Saker is for real, but has received no harassment because intelligence services the world over are in collusion with one another for control of hearts and minds, meaning The Saker’s disinformation is ordained, blessed and protected.

    If the latter is true, and it very well may be, it goes much deeper and is much more pernicious than any of us could ever imagine. David, if this is true, how on Earth could we possibly overcome it? What it means is, the traitors are in charge and in control and they don’t see themselves as traitors, but rather as overlords. With most people either incapable, because they lack the mental capacity, of comprehending this or refusing to comprehend it if they do have the mental capacity, I don’t really see how a few in the wilderness could possibly alter the consensus reality.

    Therefore, I prefer to just howl at the moon because howling is cathartic. Just ask the wolves.

    • @ catcher

      I was quite thoroughly “vetted” so to speak in Saudi Arabia. I had a Colonel psychiatrist follow me around/analyze me pretty much constantly. I’m fairly certain that, as an individualist/anarchist/somewhat libertarian I’m considered no serious threat. In fact, my actions probably add a certain “truthiness” to the idea of western freedom. Now if I tried to enter politics or some such thing, matters would change, I’m sure. Ironically, I feel that my approach, ” Be the change you wish to see in the world” as Ghandi would say, is the the only reliable way to true freedom.

      When I first returned from Saudi, I spent a lot of time speaking and attempting to write to “spread the word” in a naive way. There was no real internet then. Hard work, dissipating. The powers that be likely chuckling at me flailing around wasting my energy. I also came to realize that only a small percentage of people really want freedom. Most like to think they are free, but in reality, prefer a predictable routine that provides them food, shelter, safety, maybe a beer Saturday night with friends. They don’t think about things too much and would have no qualms enlisting as a drone operator and taking advantage of the soldier worship

      There is a smaller percentage of the population, probably genetic variants in some sense, that will seek justice, truth, true freedom, even at the risk of personal/professional/etc. harm. We can’t help it. We are the revolutionaries, each in our own way. We are the true guardians of the artistic and creative and inventive and the imaginative future of humanity. We prevent the complete conversion of humanity to sheeple and shepherds. Perhaps we impart some survival advantage to the species. I’d like to think so, anyway. If we garner too much attention, we become a threat to the status quo, and we are repressed as you have experienced.

      My goal is to be a hidden corrosive to the system. As Thoreau inspired Ghandi and MLK, perhaps I can in some small way, emulate them – to be an agent of positive change, but to not be discovered or taken seriously as a threat until it is too late. I feel our efforts are best directed at those on the fence, who show some real desire or at least curiosity, but whose conscience and consciousness has not been fully raised perhaps due to their upbringing ( as was the case for me). We really need those folks on our side of the fence. These are the people who read blogs like yours. Lets encourage them to not just think about it, but take individual action in their own way, to be the change they wish to see in the world

      I’m pretty sure that, at first, I was being followed socially, if not physically. I applied for a medical license in Texas. I was not turned down, just never approved. Maybe they were just hung up on the C.O. thing. Maybe more…I try not to waste my time or energy worrying about it. It is what it is, so to speak. I know for a fact that an ED group turned me down for a job (but just that one) because they saw one of my essays. There are trolls who try to dissipate my energy. Are they free agents or just agents? Whatever, I guess. There is probably more, but I don’t spend a lot of effort looking for evidence of my own persecution whatever of that exists. I will do what I can, and what I desire, and will up the effort to overcome obstacles as they present themselves. .

      Fwiw, the Saker is very biased, I agree. His is certainly a competing perspective to ABCNBCCBSFox. Is he an agent? – quite possibly, or just a very biased person on auto-mindcontrol so to speak. I read him, and put what he says into my own algorithm – just another piece of the puzzle.

      • David,

        I don’t let it bother me. In fact, it makes me laugh when I encounter it. Such effort for nothing in return. What’s the point? Either way, it doesn’t have the desired effect. It just motivates me to press further and harder.

        Considering you describe yourself as an anarchist and a libertarian, I think you’ll like my next post. It’s about Russia, The West, Afghanistan, heroin and drugs and drug policy in Russia and elsewhere. It will be yet another example of why Russia doesn’t stand for freedom, but rather the exact opposite.

        If “Russia Stands For Freedom” as The Saker insists, drugs would be legal and regulated in Russia and it wouldn’t have the drug epidemic it’s experiencing — an epidemic it likes to blame on The West in nostalgic Soviet fashion as cover for its own insidious involvement in turning a significant percentage of its population into junkies.

  5. Of course I meant anarchist in the generally nonviolent, “I don’t recognize the governments moral or intellectual authority over me, just its brute force authority. I’m looking forward to the next post. Thanks for the work

  6. I tire of the Ukraine story. Let’s talk about a side angle on the emergency that was Isla Vista:

    It’s a damn shame our society seems to produce a bumper crop of disturbed young men like Elliot Rodger. If money and looks mean anything (and they usually do) there is no obvious accounting for the rejection by women that Rodger perceived. But this is not my concern here. There will be professionals galore making examination of Rodger’s mental state a life’s work.

    I am instead focused here on the reaction of certain women to this terrible incident… those women at the college in Isla Vista and elsewhere who gravitate to academic majors such as Sociology, Gay and Gender Studies, but especially with those majoring in Misandry (aka Women’s Studies) who heap blame on the entire male gender for the acts of a few. (Imagine the outrage if courses in “Men’s Studies” were routinely available.)

    As an aside, I would suggest these women switch to Engineering or Computer Programing or the like…something for which there is demand in the job market. What does a degreed Women’s Studies major DO…other than teach Women’s Studies to other women?

    So, I read somewhere in the days following the massacre about an outraged young woman, whom I picture holding a bullhorn since being an “activist” can be another good line to get into judging by our President’s job trajectory, complaining that women have the right to use whatever hair color they want and wear whatever clothing they choose and that this should have no unintended negative consequences vis a vis men. Right there I would advise against strolling through Shop Rite in a string bikini and flip flops.

    Seriously, women majoring in Misandry need to take a look at the driving forces in the female/male dynamic that have evolved over millenniums. These women will not want to hear it stated that their primary function in life (leaving aside the complicating issue of homosexuality in some) is to attract a male mate by way of beauty and to have, feed, protect and nurture children. Men, on the other hand, seem to understand and accept as natural their role as providers supporting their mates and children. The attributes that make men desirable are strength, smarts and power. For a more thorough explication on the male/female relationship I recommend a YouTube titled Fempocalypse.

    For the female the reinforcement of what will become their role begins at birth and ends at death. In fact, now that technology allows us to know a child’s sex well before birth, preparation for female role conditioning is underway in the nest-building phase when the baby’s room is (usually) painted pink. EVERYTHING from that moment on will be related to attraction via beauty. (I hope the furious misandrists reading this will not bother to argue this point about beauty. It is so obvious in the cultures of humankind as to make examples superfluous.)

    And so, as the female struggles through life attaining or maintaining attractiveness (my mother-in-law had her last manicure one week before her death at age 92…they don’t give up easily, it is so ingrained) they should not be surprised that odds are they won’t be landing a Brad Pitt but more likely some overweight schlub with tatted “sleeves,” exposed butt-crack cleavage and shoelaces dragging on the floor. And if it’s not this sort of prize it might just be a mentally disturbed Elliot Rodger. These are the downsides of the near universal pursuit of beauty by women.

    • Sorry to hear about Sonya, Q. Shtik.

      Men, on the other hand, seem to understand and accept as natural their role as providers supporting their mates and children. The attributes that make men desirable are strength, smarts and power.

      Do they? I’m not so sure. I think many play the game to the extent it provides cover, but beyond the bare minimum, they are inadequate when it comes to truly providing because they focus on the wrong things. As far as providing in a material sense, all too often men sacrifice themselves and their soul at the office for truly Being There for their children and spouse. It’s a balancing act, but Being There increasingly gets short shrift these days, and yet it’s the most important gift we can give. It doesn’t have to be this way — but it is because far too many think it does have to be this way. So nothing changes, and in fact, things get worse. No one has time for each other. Brevity pervades all things. And then we die alone.

      • What you describe is not the experience of my immediate or extended family. The male role is far more than bringing home a pay check. We make time for one another and no one dies alone. I give my wife all the credit in the world for this.

        Thanks for remembering Sonja (yes, it’s a j not a y but it’s pronounced like a y). She passed away the evening of April 30, 3 days short of her 92nd birthday (I took the liberty of rounding off in my comment).

      • In Western society, despite the social engineering that’s taking place to change gender roles, at least traditionally, there’s been no formal ritualistic process where a male and/or a female consciously accepts their respective roles as you’ve described. It’s all done unconsciously by just going with the flow. This is not a trivial observation, because it speaks to motivation. What motivates is the compulsion to fit in, not an inherent compulsion to provide for someone other than oneself. Through reward and punishment, both extrinsic (paycheck, house, cars, vacations) and intrinsic (semblance of respect, acceptance and even admiration at times), we proceed to the next step in our lives that unfolds before us as a somewhat contained river of choices/options. We mimic each other being the social animals we are, and so we do what others around us do, first and foremost. Why? Because we want to fit in, to be accepted, because to be rejected is the worst thing that can happen to a social animal. So most everyone goes with the flow, and if you’re smart enough to get yourself into a position where you take part in developing that flow, your power is immense because you can quite literally change the world in dramatic fashion. That’s the position of media production and marketing in our society today. It’s literally changing the world by understanding the mechanism I just described, and your reaction to what it’s doing is entirely predictable and predicted.

        A backlash is to be expected. So when Ian Welsh talks about Conservative Revanchism in this post, he’s really addressing what I’ve just described here. When things change radically, from a social perspective, a recoiling to the familiar is a natural and expected reaction. What’s tragic is that in that recoiling, in the past at least, spilled blood and much unnecessary suffering and death comes with it. But the past doesn’t always predicate the future, although it can and does, so we’ll see if it does this time around. Surely you don’t wish for that though, do you?

        Keep in mind, I’m as much a male as you are so, as I’ve always done, I try to get entirely outside of myself when I discuss this. It’s why in the past, I’ve been able to take a contrary position with you even though it’s never necessarily been me. It’s an exercise in dissociative analysis. It’s not easy to pull it off, but it is worth the while. Try it sometime at your own peril if you like a good challenge.

        Imagine what fun you and I would have if you were my father-in-law?

      • and no one dies alone

        But they do. We do, for the most part. Sonja died alone. You may have been at her bedside, or in the next room, but you’re still here, aren’t you? That means she necessarily died alone. It’s why it’s vitally important to not live alone, and yet an argument can be made that in our increasingly anonymous society, we increasingly live alone, and that’s tragic since we’re already destined to die alone as I mentioned.

        Perhaps if Putin has his way, we all won’t have to die alone. We can all go together in the flash of a nuclear second. Did you know this is his favorite song, and who would deny he’s a provider with strength, smarts and power?

Comments are closed.