RE: 9-11, GWB, the War, and Patiotism--Martin Michaels

[Guest guest]

Curtis, et al,

 

Curtis Burns [curtisburns]

Tuesday, September 24, 2002 6:11 PM

gjlist

[GJ] 9-11, GWB, the War, and Patiotism--Marti Michaels

 

To wit: 9-11 was a colossal failure on the part of the US

Intelligence

system, there is indeed a dragon at out gates which would make 9-11

pale in

comparison. There still is almost no defense measures taken which

would

include sealing up our borders apparently because making trillions

of

dollars is more important than national security--that is

mismanagement

number one.

I agree that there ARE serious flaws (holes) in our security "system". But,

to propose "closing the borders" is ludicrous. That would BE the terrorists

 

victory. Why? - because it would for all intents and purposes shut down not

 

only our OWN economy, but the economies of many, if not MOST, other

countries

in the world. It is more important that people learn to be aware of their

surroundings and become "citizen-soldiers". Perhaps that is too strong a

phrase, but I think my point is made. I believe Jefferson was right, "The

least government is the best government." I also believe that (forgive me,

I can't remember the author of this one, and it's a paraphrase), "When we

limit freedom in the name of liberty, there is no liberty."

 

Our response has seemed to look good, but apart from mud huts in

Afghanistan being blown up, AlQuada is still in operation and the

Islamic

world is only more in league against us--mismanagement number two.

Of course we didn't get them all. But, the message was sent and received --

that we will not be idle if you attack US. Al Qaeda, you hear that?

 

The terrorist network is only the effect and not the cause of the

problem,

the way to kill this beast is to stop its money flow and training

nexus,

for that we would have to start attacking the Russian and Chinese

presence

in terrorist nations. Are we going to do that?

It may have begun with the Russians, Chinese (and even in the case of ObL)

the US. But it is NOT in either of their best interest at this point to

have

the US in turmoil of this kind. The Russians, in particular, are

embarrassed

by the terrorists, since they are trying desperately to join the world

community. BUT, on the other hand - I agree we need to hit the SOURCES -

these would be Hussein, Khadaffi, and probably even Arafat. And I believe

GWB is taking the right tack, in general.

 

No GWB won't do that but he will kill any number of innocent Iraqis,

and

crush the hapless Iraqi military in a completely vain show of

force. American feel strong for a while, but the enemy is only

hardened

against us.

The intent is NOT to kill innocent Iraqis. And as far as "crushing the

hapless Iraqi (Army) - again, it's a message, apparently not heard well

enough

last time. Yes, Oil was involved to some extent certainly. But, the basic

message was "Keep away from my friends." The loss of Kuwaiti oil would have

had

little effect on oil prices. No, this was just a case of spanking a bully.

I loathe bullies. In my opinion, he should have been killed or tried THEN.

NOW, it is necessary to prevent more of the same as with 9/11.

 

There was no conspiracy? It sounds like you get your information,

from the

television, Marti, and it stops there. You have to do some more

thinking

for yourself and investigating the evidence. A quick search on the

Internet for "conspiracy" and "9-11" will bring up an abundance of

evidence

to consider.

 

I do not say that there was a conspiracy, I do say that the chart of

the

9-11 attack WOULD POSSIBLY IMPLY such a thing, and that a true

assessment

of the state of the world would only corroborate such a thing.

Okay, I can see that. But it is certainly not on the agenda of the US

government to allow as many as 50,000 people to die in one fell swoop. And

yes,

I still think it's ridiculous to even imply such a thing. Oh! and by the

way,

I read nearly everything I see on this, and I watch very little television.

I

believe in astrology as a tool - but not to the exclusion of life. Ya gotta

 

look at the ground once in a while, too - not just the stars.

 

How could it be "unforgivable" for me to raise such questions? Are

we not

a free country? Are my statements "incorrect"? Sorry to be tough

here,

but think harder, Marti! Get out of your patriotic/Republican box!

I didn't say it was unforgivable to discuss it. But, to imply them as

anything

other than possibilities is just plain stupid. There is NO evidence that

the attacks were ALLOWED to happen as there was for Pearl Harbor. Yes,

there

were indicators of information withheld (by fools, no doubt), but NONE that

the information was ever SEEN by anyone high enough to make a difference.

There WAS a conspiracy - by the terrorists, unfortunately well executed.

and as far as my politics are concerned, I AM a patriot (a proud one). I

have

lived in more than twenty countries - none touches the US for freedom. But

I

vote the MAN, not the PARTY. But I will NEVER vote for a Clinton or Al

Gore.

If ever one of them is elected to the Presidency, I will move my family back

 

Australia, because we DO get the government we deserve. Mr. Bush was a

better

choice by far. Not perfect - but a good man.

 

As far as an astrological early warning system, read my newsletter

for the

past 2 years; there was an abundance of indicators: Saturn and Pluto

in

opposition aligned with the US Ascendant, Mars conjunct Ketu in Mula

 

opposite Jupiter in Ardra, and a realistic assessment of

geo-political

affairs. THAT IS THE BEST WE CAN HOPE FOR.

Here, I agree with you. And I tried to make sure you understood I was not

attacking YOU, just the rather foolish idea that we would plan our own

destruction.

 

Now I already said that in this forum but already no one apparently

heard

it. People just don't want to hear about such things, they like to

occupy

themselves with more "pleasant" things, they prefer to stay in the

dark. 9-11 was a cosmic lightning bolt of warning and illumination,

if

nothing else is done then 9-11 will only be the beginning.

And again, I agree with you. But I have more faith in us as a people than

you apparently do.

 

Curtis Burns

http://www.starworldnews.com

 

Best regards to all,

Martin Michaels

 

p.s. spellcheckers are free...

[Guest guest]

Marti, all...

 

Glad to have had this little discussion here. I am certainly a patriot,

Mars and Jupiter in the 4th; a conservative with libertarianist

leanings. I don't go for the global world trade dream, I fall in with Pat

Buchanan.

 

We certainly are getting off Jyotish, but in the interests of all I have

published a paper that I wrote earlier this year summarizing the global

issues and what is important for the US.

 

Is it true, or a lie? You tell me....

 

Check it out:

http://www.starworldnews.com/imperilment.htm

 

Curtis Burns

http://www.starworldnews.com

[Guest guest]

Do you know GWB personally? Or perhaps you are simply referring to a specifc,

though obscure, raja yoga -- I mean the one that makes him "a good man"?

In under two years, without a clear mandate of any kind from the American

people, this man has done more to damage environmental and civil liberties

agendas than *any* other president in recent memory. He is obviously so

incestuously connected to oil interests (as is most of his administration, in

case you hadn't noticed) that it is patently impossible for any informed person

to view his behavior in the Middle East without at least a touch of cynicism.

Maybe it's his daily Bible reading that has you convinced. Remember that the

book of Revelation is a particularly compelling reading selection for

revivalist Christians of GWB's sophistication -- and implicit in this religious

aesthetic (or lack thereof) is the notion that we should help the eschaton along

-- to do wihatever it takes to bring on Apocalypse (The place of the earth

[environment] in such a schema is kind of confusing -- guess we're supposed to

be its stewards, but that would have to take the back seat to welcoming the

Second Coming and going after the Evil One (oops -- I forgot, there's a *new*

Evil One in town now!)

What hard evidence of *any* kind do you have that Saddam is any more a threat

now than when we supplied him with the chemicals to gas his own people (and

yes, we certainly did that. Guess who, specifically?)? And I will also stick

my neck out and state that you also have *no* hard evidence that Saddam is in

cahoots with Bin Laden. Osama can't stand the total secularist Saddam, and

considers him an infidel. Maybe you've turned something up in the last 48

hours? (I heard Tony Blair is working on this. . .)

How does all of this relate to astrology? Two things.

One: To practice astrology, you need to have a world to peer out from. Anyone

who doesn't question US foreign policy since 9/11/2001 is essentially asking

for apocalypse (that is, no world as we know it), and I can't abide this.

Getting Bin Laden was supposed to be important (and I agree), and now half the

plamet is aptly critiquing GWB because he's forgotten this. If you think we

won't set off many more terrorist nightmares with a single-handed invasion of

Iraq now (well, yeah, Tony Blair will pitch in, too, but the civil unrest from

his citizens -- let alone ALL of our allies -- will ensure we will soon be

alone in this game) -- you don't know how passionate the enemy is, or what this

country has done to deserve their ire. If patriotism = nationalism =

self-interest at the exclusion of everyone else on the planet, we simply won't

have a world from which one can practice astrology.

2. The practice of astrology, and of Jyotish in particular, demands we nurture a

deep poetics and a sophisticated aesthetic. The alternative is a fundamentalist

and fatalistic _scientia_ (Vidya) rather than a humanistic one. Anyone who has

examined GWB's administration's "No Child Left Behind" blueprint for our

country's children's instruction and actually approves has no business hanging

out a shingle as an astrologer. (*And*, if Laura helped out on this, the

sweetness of her disposition will not help her out of my pedagogical doghouse!)

For those concerned that I am not providing chart analysis, I am admittedly

still working on this. What I will not say definitively now but expect to

shortly, is that the chart rather *proclaims* a puppet leader with few real

ideas of his own and a literalistic understanding of both politics and

religion. But one shouldn't need a chart to see this. Michael Moore's runaway

bestseller _Stupid White Men_ is an excellent exposition or reminder of this.

Speaking of stupid white men, I will shortly post a link to Nelson Mandela's

condemnation of Bush's position on Iraq, in which Mandela reveals that Dick

Cheney was one of the only members of Congress to oppose NM's release from

prison. He also, interestingly enough, sketches the theme that this war

operates significantly along racial lines. Yes, it IS time to introduce race

and class into this discussion. Mandela rightly notes that a white-ruled

sovereign state like the US likes to attack sovereign states with brown-skinned

people, but wouldn't even think of trying this (e.g., GWB's _nigh-criminal_ new

first-strike policy) with white people. (Anyone who disagrees should probably

seek some therapeutic comic "unrelief" from Sri Sri Sri George Carlin, who

clarifies that what the US likes to do most is "bomb the f*** out of brown

people.)

For those I've offended, this is not ad hominem hunting, and I can still love

those whose politics I condemn and abhor. In my life, my father-in-law and one

of my best friends (my old boss in my past life in insurance) provide plenty of

practice for this! In the meantime, I will assert here that the essential

argument for American reactionary politics is fundamentally a religious one --

even if often unconscious. It runs something like this: USA = Christendom.

For reactionary American Jews (as a person of Jewish descent, I know many of

these), the formula is a bit complex. But we are all under the strange

archetypal umbrella of reductionist theological mind-rule. We need to examine

why we tend to hold the USA as sacred and untouchable or unexaminable.

With metta,

J.I. Abbot

In a message dated 9/24/2002 5:54:38 PM Eastern Standard Time, mm6365 (AT) sbc (DOT) com writes:

Mr. Bush was a

better

choice by far. Not perfect - but a good man.