The Axis of Evil

Always in history it is said, that the winners write the history. But lately, I've become to question this statement ... the reason is that I don't think it's the winner who writes history, but the public read the history they want to believe in.

I intend to write about the World superpowers, and I intend to make the claim that they are indeed in bed with each other. It is my intention to state, that they make up an Axis of Evil ... and that what we are experiencing today, and opposing, is actually an agreement that they have made between themselves. An agreement, that isn't public.

But I intend to make the statement, that what we read is not what we are fed with ... but it is, what we want to read. We aren't being lied to, but told what we want to hear.

This is going to take some time, so bear with me a while ...

---

I noticed something about Icelanders. In Iceland, they used to call danes for Beans. The Icelandic version, is that this is because the Hansa traders, used to sell bad beans to Icelanders. In reality, Hansa tranders out of Hamburg in Germany, were Germans.

A more subtle reason, is the following. In the city of Copenhagen, in Denmark. The people were city-folks, that looked down on peasants. And Icelanders, who often went to Copenhagen to study, were ... peasants. Now, the word for a "peasant" in danish, sounds exactly like the word for "bean".

So, an Icelander hearing the word "peasant" as a degrading term, got offended and called the danes for "beans" instead. Because they didn't make a distinction between the words. And the story about the Hansa traders, is more pleasant for the Icelanders to believe in, because it doesn't include Icelanders being called degrading terms.

---

In sweden, the populace read Romantic stories from Jan Guillou, and in reality believe them to be historically accurate. In fact, if asked, they often refer to that Jan Guillou is equivalent to the icelandic ancient writer Snorri Sturluson. However, one wrote about actual people and events, and staged the human relation involved. While Jan Guillou, stages not merely the human relations, but the people and the events as well.

The reality of it all is, that the Icelandic sagas say very clearly that the people of Iceland originate from Asia, while the modern population of Scandinavia is predominantly German. And oddity of history, that prompts modern scholars to throw away old icelandic scriptures, even though these scriptures describe events that modern science has proven to be correct.

All these scriptures, were collected over a 20 year period and sent to denmark. Only to burn in the fire in Copenhagen. But, even a more interrresting part ... is that almost exclusively the oldest scriptures, got burned.

---

The story about Edvard, King of England is also of interrest. In this situation, I came across several individuals who stated that he abdicated, because the House didn't want him. Because he had Nazi friends, so the house forced him to abdicate, and that it really had little to do with Miss Simpson. While history books, say quite a different story. That his "simpathies" came later on, during his service in WWII. That his "sympathese" were only known then, and were the reason he was never given an office after that.

---

All these are examples of history, where it isn't the writer that choses what we believe. But that we, ourselves, read the books we want to read. What is appealing to our emotions, or what we want to perceive as truth, is what is predominant.

But, what does this have to do with the Axis of Evil?

Well, in history we read that the Soviet Union fell. In our minds, WE, the western word won, and the Soviet Union lost.

But, what if it isn't this simple ...

Europe and the Soviet Union, or Russia today. Are connected with enormous pipelines carrying gas and oil to Europe, and through Afghanistan to Asia.

The point of it all is, that the Soviet Union was involved in modernising Afghanistan prior to the US invading Afghanistan. Their presense there has the same goal, to modernise and educate the nomads into citizens, that are better managable.

As a side note, I would make the remark, that Afghanistan and the Middle East, as well as a lot of the world. Is very equivalent to America, when westerners first came there. They are religious, with their holy ground, and their holy temples. And it isn't possible to talk with them, on business or evolutionary notes, as they are pre-dominantly biased towards their traditions.

---

Now, I'd like to skip in a note on Christianity.

Most of the people in Northern Europe, during the Viking era. Believed in dying for their ancestors. Dying on a sickbed, was a bad thing ... dying during war, was an honor. It would secure you a place with Odin.

Despite the common "belief", older stories say that these people were Asian. Very warrior like, and that the reason for the viking era, was translocation of people across Europe, and not the commonly believed adventurism.

I'll hop over that part, and go directly to the part of christianising these "nomads". It makes much more sense, that the reason for christinisation, was to tame these barbarians. Now, if we assume that this was the real reason for the Viking era, just humor me here. Doesn't it then make sense, that if ancient books explaining the reasons here, found in icleand ... that these would be selectively collected (we are actually talking about a unique event, where a person spends 20 years, going from one end of the country to the other, collecting every single copy), and then selectively destroyed.

---

What I am saying here, that what is occuring in Afghanistan is an event that occured prior in America. Both south and North, with the selective sloughter of Indians. And one that occurred prior to that in Northern Europe, and in Europe proper prior to that.

And that history is not made up. But that WE, ourselves are not the aboriginals of these countries ... but that we are the ancestors of the cross-bred population, that no longer has blood relations with the original population. And perhaps even very little genetic relation, except for maybe token relation ... and that *^this* is why we read history as we want it.

We read history, because WE want to read OUR version of it. I assume, maybe wrongly, that there are many works of art and history, written by aboriginals, indians in north america as well as other places in the world. But that these books do not make it to the general concesus of the public. Not because nobody wants to publish them, but because nobody wants to read them.

We are not creating diversity, we are devouring it ... we are not for liberty, we are BORGS. We assimilate everything, and we've been doing it, for the past 3 thousand years, at least. And that in our minds, as time passes, we only read what we want to read ... because in our animalistic mind, the one beneath our conscious self. We know, what side we belong to.

Sorry for the delay, but I'll continue ...

Our recent history points to WWII, the big war as it is described. Also the war to end all wars, alas it hasn't in reality ... but what I find interresting about WWII, and the results from it, is the following.

The US uses a nuclear weapon against Japan, and this weapon then is distributed amongst its allies. In the end, we have 5 nations with nuclear capability. Russia, China, US, Britain and France.. During WWII, the US provided weapons and provisions both to China and Russia. So, realistically these nations are the victorers of WWII.

Facts also tell us, that China was the quickest from Fusion to Fission, in it's creation of the hydrogen bomb. This would be virtually impossible, without some knowledge of the other nations, experimental results. That would allow them to fast forward.

At the same time, we have nations like N.Korea, Iran, striving to develope even the smallest atom bomb, for decades.

The only logical conclusion here, is that these 5 nations shared the results of their experiments.

Now, if we take Afghanistan, as another example. During the Soviet Union being involved in Afghanistan, both the US, Britain and China, were involved in supporting the Mujahedeen. Irrelevant how much support China supported, wether only token support or otherwise, it is notable that after the Soviet Union leaves, that the western countries take over. Today, the presence of the western nations in Afghanistan have nothing to do with the hunt for Usama, and hasn't had any for more than a year.

In both cases, it's a puppet government, that is asking it's pupeteer, for support against rogue opposition elements.

Case in point being, we are doing the same thing ...

So, between these nations that supposedly are enemies (on paper), we have sharing of weapons, experiments and exploration.

However, the most compelling arguement that I find .... is Syria, and Lybia.

The war on terror, that has been fought for a decade. Finally comes to a conclusion, where the terrorists Al Qaida, are actually aiding NATO in Lybia. There is no question about it, that Al Quaida is the group that is supporting the elements that cause the uprising in Lybia. And NATO are the force, that come along and give Lybia the final death blow, being effectively allies. Wether this alliance, is a conscious alliance, or wether one is being used by the other ... is really not of an issue.

What we have, is that China and Russia, make an agreement with the US. That basically allows the US to go to war in these nations.

An Axis of Evil ...

China voices one political propaganda about it's decision, Russia voices yet another ... but the fact remains, that these are working in coherence with the US. Just like Al Qaida, they voice some opposition, giving people like the Syrians false hope of support ... then make a deal with the US, about how to split the spoils of war.

The question about the pipeline in Afghanistan, will be beneficial for Europe, Russia and even Asia alike. Is no longer a speculation.

reply to post by bjarneorn


You say that they comprise an axis of evil...is it evil because it harms the world in a legitimate way, or is it evil just because you don't like what they're doing?

In matters of good and evil, people will always label it according to their own feelings, perspective and understanding before they consider how it treats the rest of the world. So when we say, "That's evil" we are really saying, "I don't like that, so I'm calling it evil." And when we say "That's good", we're saying, "I like that, so it must be good."

We must differentiate between our perspective on worldly repercussions and the big picture of worldly respercussions. Otherwise, we'll see a woman killing a child and call it evil, without knowing that in 20 years, that child may have become a terrorist and murdered hundreds of others. With THAT in mind, was the woman evil, or a patriot?

These labels are most commonly based in our own emotional reactions, our own understandings. Rely too much on emotion, and you lose control of your faculties. Emotions are like light. Enough of it can help you see, and give you strength to continue...but too much can blind you. And at that point, you'll close your eyes to stop seeing.

Ah yes, the dreaded Axis of Evil...
About this Axis of Evil Thing
Apparently not being under the direct control of the World Bank or the IMF is what qualifies you for being a part of it, check out the Link OP.