Pearl Harbor Defense

In article , Denyav
writes
If you're so keen on spreading your message to the world, why don't you
tell us what he said?

Well,I thought that only Americans are not allowed to read serious books.(If
they get smarter,herding of them would become harder,you know).
But you are posting from UK ?.
You can find this book in any library.(at least in US)

It (the book) is actually the blueprint for the events that happened after 2000
and the event are going to to happen in next year.

If you read the book (published in 1997) carefully you could easily understand
that Anglos did not occupy or plan to occupy Eurasian countries because the
terrorists came from these areas,but other way around,terrorists came from
these areas because Anglos selected these areas as the playing ground for the
next round of the Great Game.

Wow.

Brzenzinki sheds also light why 9/11 was required not only for the realization
Anglo foreign policy goals but also for the solving of Anglo domestic policy
goals.

Ouote:
"Democracy is inimical to IMPERIAL mobilization" page 35

Is it? Why?

Quote:
"The attitude of American public toward the external projection of American
power has been much more ambivalent .The public supported Americas engagement
in WWII largely because of SHOCK effect of Japanase attack on Pearl Harbor."
page24

Quote:
"Moreover,as America becomes an increasingly multicultural society ,it may find
it more difficult to fashion a consensus on foreign policy issues ,EXCEPT in
circumstances of a truly massive and widely perceived foreign threat" page235


This is the blueprint for 9/11 and the events prior after 9/11 not something
that necons (whatever or whoever they might be) did or said.


I would understand what he said if you could quote it in a
comprehensible form.

OK, the words of Rhodes in 1877:

"Why should we not form a secret society with but one object of furtherance of
the British empire and the bringing of whole uncivilized world under British
rule for the recovery of the United States for making ANGLO-SAXON RACE but
ONE EMPIRE"

Still did not understand?


No. You still don't make sense. There appear to be words missing.
Anyway, why shouldn't they have? It fitted in with the thinking of the
time.

Might the fact that the USA has English as its official language just
have something to do with its history as an English colony?
Just imagine the history of the USA if the French or Spanish had been
the major power there. Or even the Germans.

Well,I wonder in which part of Britain Latin,or at least Italien, is the
official language?

That's a poor argument. The Romans left Britannia in the 5th century,
but still left their mark on the evolution of the English language. The
British settlers and their descendants were the major factor in founding
the USA, and stayed in the country. You leave, and, unless everybody has
learnt your language in the meantime, it goes with you as far as the
majority of the population is concerned.

In history there are several great empires and all of them used different ways
to maintain their superiority.

Most of them fell. The British gave theirs away/back.

For example the main chracteristics of the famous Roman Empire were superior
military organisation AND cultural appeal.
Main chracteristics of British empire was superior military organization AND
cultural assertiveness.period.

I hope you know the difference between "appeal" and "assertiveness",becuse
thats the reason why nobody in Britain speaks italian, wheras almost everybody
in US,India etc speaks English.

No it isn't. See above. The situations can't be compared. The social and
cultural conditions were very different in the 1st to 5th century Roman
Empire and 16th-20th century India and USA. Nobody else in Europe has
Latin as their daily language either. Few people outside the clergy and
the upper classes spoke Latin, just like now.

The British Empire was acquired largely accidentally. The language does
tend to follow the colonisers/occupiers, not the other way around.

There is not much space for accidents in history,for example the creation of
Soviet Union was a road accident,but not British Empire.

Oh yes it was. History is more or less accidental where the majority of
events is concerned.

Then how do you know that you're not part of it as well?

You may never know it,I am pretty sure that neither Confederates nor Nazis ever
realized that they were indeed Anglo proxies.

Yeah, right. King George V sponsored Hitler. Get a grip, for goodness'
sake. Why did the Allies spend so much time, money and effort, lose so
many lives and endure such suffering to rid the world of him? To make
Henry Ford rich? You've been reading too many thrillers.

I said before several times,I admire Great Game playing skills.

The Great Game was specifically in 18th/19th century India. Stopping the
French, and even more so the Russians, from taking over there.

That was the first chapter of the Great Game,The Great Game or if I use
Brzezinkis words "Grand Chessboard" never ended there,First and second WWs were
only another chapters of the Great Game now we see the most recent chapter.

leading? World domination by some
undefined group of goodness-knows-what? Once "they" have the world in
their grasp, what then? Brainwashing, Big Brother (Orwell, not Endemol)?

Anglos dominate the world for centuries already,struggle is to save Anglo
dominance.

Sounds OK to me. Problem is, the Queen's a German and the PM's more or
less a Scot. Rather messes things up.
Anyway, as I already asked, what happens then? Everybody is forced to
drink tea?

I have a good idea why the signs might have been there, but I didn't see
them.

I am sure you wont see any of them in Britain,Australia or New Zeeland as all
of these countries are (still) Anglo countries,not an Anglo dominated country
like US.

There really is little to say in response to that one, except: ********!

I like having a laugh at a conspiracy theory as much as anyone, but
yours seems a bit lacking in practicality. You need more detail (apart
from one quote from Cecil Rhodes and vague prattling from Brzenzinki).
Contemplating nebulous aspirations such as world domination doesn't
really appeal if there's no substance and no obvious purpose except the
idea for its own sake.

And you still haven't told me what an "Anglo" is.
--
Peter

Ying tong iddle-i po!