|
|
DEMOCRATIC IDEOLOGY, TERRORISM and WORLD DOMINATION
Rudolf Steiner said the following on Oct. 28th 1917 (GA 177): "It is
interesting that the excellent stateme
nt was made in 1910 [by Francis
Delaisi, La Démocratie et les Financiers, 1910]: '
that big capital
has succeeded in creating out of democracy the most wonderful, the most
effective, the most flexible instrument for the exploitation of the
population as a whole. We usually imagine that the men of finance are
opposed to democracy the author in question says in his book but
this is fundamentally mistaken. On the contrary, they lead it and
consciously promote it. For it is this meaning democracy that
provides the screen behind which they conceal their method of
exploitation, and they find in it the best means of self-defenceagainst
any popular resentment that may arise.' This shows how someone who has
woken up sees that the main thing is not to make loud speeches
proclaiming democracy; the main thing is to see clearly the reality of
the situation
namely, fromhow few centres of command events in the
world today are steered and directed
[The average person] cannot
attend [to these things], because they are smothered and buried under
the well, the same public life that is ruled over by the press."
|
Political expert and freelance journalist Wolfgang Eggert has written a
series of highly interesting books on themes of compelling relevance
today
. Of his most recent: First Manhattan, then Berlin, Emmy Prize
winner Saul Landau, professor at the California State Polytechnic
University writes: Anyone who wants to know how extreme fundamentalism
overlaps with current US policy should read this book.
Wolfgang Eggert was interviewed by Muslim-Markt on the burning problems
in the world. We hope that his startling revelations and clarifying
analyses will bring the satisfaction of new insight to our readers. And
we know do we not? that even themost unpleasant perspectives on the
future have to be confronted with our powers of understanding.
Muslim-Markt: Mr. Eggert, looking at the list of your publications, one
might be inclined to think that you are what isknown as a 'conspiracy
theorist'. How do you answer this criticism?
Wolfgang Eggert: My main area of research is the activity of organized
crime, lobby-groups, intelligence services, political Lodges, military
undercover operations, Apocalyptic sects, geopolitical networks. All of
these frequently interwoven groups work deliberately in a concealed and
conspiratorial manner. Whether it be deception or murder, the bribing
of journalists and politicians or the undermining of their reputation
and career, the organizing of putsches, pogroms, terror attacks and
wars: conspiracy is a part of their day-to-day business. Investigative
researchers into this subject have to be conspiracy theorists,
otherwise they are no more than court chronic
lers.
MM: The media are of a different opinion.
W.E.: To understand the facts one needs to be aware of the influence
exercised on the so-called free press. At the end of the 1940's the CIA
launched a real programme, "Operation Mockingbird", for the
infiltration and manipulation of the media scene. The special budgets
for the influencing of public opinion have, since then, amounted to
billions of dollars annually in the CIA. Investment in the market is
done via broadcasting or holding companies, and more rarely through
individuals. As an illustration of the latter case, Silvio Berlusconi's
vertiginous rise to the role of global player in the media business
took place directly from the P2 Lodge of the CIA. The Israeli
billionaire Haim Saban took over in a single swoop in 2003 the TV
broadcasting companies Pro7, Sat1, Cable 1, N24 and the ddp news
agency. Saban's entourage liked boasting of its connections with
Mossad, the Israeli intelligence service. Robert Maxwell too, the
European press tycoon, was a Mossad man until shortlybefore his death.
Maxwell played an influential part in the founding period of the German
Springer concern. The Springer firm is known to insist that each
employee must put his signature to five basic principles of the
company, the second of which demands "support of the Israeli people's
right to live" while the third requires "support of the trans-Atlantic
alliance and solidarity in the free commun
ity of shared values with the U.S.A.".
These words could also stand as a motto above the desk of
Rupert Murdoch. The neo-Conservative Australian was the proprietor of a
small newspaper when he made friendswith the CIA's representative in
Australia, Ted Shackley. From that moment onwards Murdoch's rise was
steep and spectacular. Today hundreds of newspapers, TV and radio
stations worldwide belong to the Murdoch concern. Similarly with
Berezhovsky and Gusinsky. So much for the top boardroom level. Of
course the horn of plenty, full to overflowing, of the intelligence
service also lets a certain amount trickle further down. Money goes to
chief editors and the members of broadcasting councils; trusts
controlled by the intelligence service give grants; think-tanks hand
out invitations and travel tokens. 'Carrot' is available inhuge amounts.
MM:
only carrot?
W.E.:
and 'stick', too, of course! Have you never wondered why so
many press publications of the old Left are pro-American today? There
is a very simple explanation for this: When in the beginning of the
1990's the CIA snatched the sensational Rosenholz files from under the
nose of Chancellor Kohl, they found themselves in possession of full
informationon covert Stasi operations in the Federal Republic. This
included the identities of the many collaborators of the MfS
(EastGerman Intelligence) in the West German media. In order not to
lose their reputation and their p
ensions they have ever since worked
free of charge for the CIA. Anyone who refuses to do so is exposed.
There are actual cases where this hashappened. "The CIA controls
everyone of any importance at all in the mass media," were the words of
William Colby, the former head of the CIA at the time of the fall of
the Berlin wall. When he was once asked whether the CIA has ever told
its undercoverpeople in the press what they are supposed to write, he
replied: "Certainly, it happens all the time." Control of the rank and
file is a part of the political game, especially in periods of tension
like the present. Even clamours for war need mouthpieces. This is the
function of the media.
MM: In your work you are mainly concerned with intelligence services.
W.E.: As a trained historian I have always had to do with the great
turning-points in our history. The most striking and physically
enduring upheavals, without question, are wars. If you make a
sufficiently intensive study of the way wars begin, you will
automatically find that they don't just "happen" like an accident at
work, or fall from Heaven as Divine retribution. If you take your
research seriously, you will discover that there is always a
warmongering side who stands to gain from the violent conflict. And
this is the one that has planned the conflict long in advance in
strategic planning circles set up for the purpose. Right down to an
event that will trigger the outbreak of war, while at the same time
legitimizing one's own actions and bringing one's opponent into an
unfavourable starting position. It is up to the intelligence services
to carry out this important task. They lay and ignite the coil that
leads to war. It was always like this, wherever you look: The
assassination in Sarajevo of the successor to the Throne, as the act
leading to the First World War; the attack on the Gleiwitz radio
transmitter, which was to justify Hitler's invasion of Poland; the
Lavon affair, when Israeli agents under a false flag bombed American
bases in Egypt, in order to draw the USA onto the "right side" in the
lead-up to the Suez War; the fabricated Tonkin incident, which
seemingly gave America the right to launch the Vietnam War; Kuwait's
provocation of Iraq and the green light given by the Pentagon to Saddam
Hussein regarding military action against his neighbour state, in order
to lend Bush Senior's first oil-Desert Storm the semblance of an "act
of liberation"; the bombing of a tower block in Russia, blamedon
Chechen extremists, which justified Putin's military engagement in the
Caucasus in 1999; the kidnapping of two Israelis to lend legitimacy to
the last war in the Lebanon. Each one of these incidents was a
chess-move instigated by intelligenceservices. Secret services and
their machinations have to be considered if one is to understand the
central core of histor
ical dynamics.
MM: In a publication of 2003 you accuse military genetic research of
bearing some responsibility for the outbreak of epidemics such as AIDS.
What would be the motivation for such a thing, when everyone in the
world suffers from these epidemics?
W.E.: Records that remained classified for decades show that, on 9th
June 1969, Dr. McArthur, acting head of the research department of the
US Ministry of Defense, requested an endowment of $10 million. He said
that with this money a new kind of virus was to be developed, which
destroys the immune system of the infected organism and does not react
to preventive therapy. The funds were granted and the research work was
taken up in utmost secrecy in high-security laboratories. The most
capable scientists at that time, among them the later "discoverer" of
the aids virus Robert Gallo, contributed to the project, which was
planned to reach its conclusion within 10 years. It was after the lapse
of precisely this length of time that the first HIV cases appeared in
the USA.
The chain of evidence seems in many respects to be beyond
question, including the aspect of recombination of the virus. The
outcome was the first genetic weapon in human history; though it was as
yet unfinished because, unlike its present-day successors, it cannot
kill selectively according to region or race and spreads
indiscriminately. For this reason I would not hold any US Government
department responsible for the release of the virus, not even the
secret service-military complex. The groups involved are more likely to
operate above or beside the state, and pursue in part Malthusian, in
part religious aims. Jewish and Christian Messianists akin to Shoko
Asahara, who released poison gas in the Japanese underground railways,
because he hoped in this way to bring closer the prophesied end of the
world. There is just one difference: Asahara was a largely isolated
sectarian guru. In contrast to this, like-minded people who share his
Biblicalconvictions stand on the threshold of power in America,
England, Israel.
MM: One month before the 11thSeptember 2001 you published a book with
the title "In the Name of God Israel's Secret Vatican as the
Fulfiller of Biblical Prophecy". Was your book already 'outdated' one
month after publication?
W.E.: No. Of course, I had no foreknowledge of the 11thSeptember. In
the book I am discussing the character of groups that stand above the
state, and their influence on history in general. ...Beginning with the
French Revolution and continuing to the end of Clinton's term of
office. "Israel's Secret Vatican" is more an outline of basic
principles. What I did foresee was that the Apocalyptic groups in the
religions were working via their political networks at preparations for
the 3rd World War. And as is the case in every war, a concrete
triggering event was needed,20and that was the 11thSeptember 2001.
Actually, 9/11 fits quite naturally into the list of the campaigns I
have already mentioned, whose purpose is to ignite a war. It is not
surprising, therefore, that in the preparatory period leading up to
this terrorist coup we find the tracesof secret service activity.
MM: A year later, your book "Attack of the Hawks" came out. Why, in
your opinion, does German policy today stand so strongly on the side of
the hawks?
W.E.: I first asked myself this question when the pro-Government US
news channel Fox News announced on the 12thSeptember 2007 that the
Germans were supporting Washington's plans for a war on Iran. The
subject of the broadcast was a Security Council meeting in Berlin set
up specifically for discussion of the Iran question. The Federal
Government was reported to have said that for national economic reasons
it was withdrawing from the joint anti-Iranian sanctions campaign,
while at same time it was encouraging America to bomb Iran's nuclear
installations. Fox had been told this by diplomats from various
countries. Assuming this is not a deliberate falsehood put out by the
Murdoch company, but a leak based on the truth, we see here in its most
blatant form the swing in our still social-democratic as it has
always been foreign policy. I can only explain this behaviour as the
result of US pressure to accept Germany as a permanent member of the
0AWorld Security Council only on condition that it supports current US
policy
MM: Your latest book "First Manhattan, then Berlin" claims that there
is a risk of a successful terrorist attack in Germany.What is your
evidence for this?
W.E.: As I already mentioned, I view Messianic networks as one of the
driving forces of human history. Events occur, which are exclusively
the work of these radical sects, one such event being the assassination
of the Israeli head of State Rabin. It is possible for them to exert
the strongest influence, particularly on the explosive situation in the
Middle East, which they wish to escalate to the prophesied War of
Armageddon. One of the vehicles used is Israel, where leading
politicians like Benjamin Netanyahu, when they are facing far-reaching
decisions, seek the advice of occult rabbis. On the other hand, in
America, following in the wake of George W. Bush, fundamentalist
Christians have taken over the White House. Every week, Apocalyptic
Bible scholars are invited there and to the Pentagon, to hold bizarre
meetings in which Biblical guidance on their daily tasks is given to
politicians and military leaders. This dangerous vision of having been
chosen by God has been current for a considerably longer time in
influential circles of the British establishment. Many Masonic lodges,
which are known to exert a strong influence on public life in the
United Kingdom, are convinced that the=2
0mission of the Jews to lead the
world to its revealed end came to a conclusion with the crucifixion of
Jesus, and has passed on to the British.
MM: You often mention Christian and Jewish groups in one breath
?
W.E.: Common to both the Christian and the Jewish groups is the fact
that they appeal to the authority of the Bible, citing prophecies whose
content they espouse as a political task, or they uncover, by means of
decipherment codes, secret doublemeanings in the Holy Scriptures. In
both camps 9/11 is regarded as fulfilled prophecy, on the evidence of
passages from theBible. In both camps there are whisperings about the
coming of a parallel event, let us call it 11/9. A nuclear attack is
repeatedly mentioned
and Berlin. When my book came on the market in
November 2005, this horrific picture seemed to lie in the far distant
future. This has now changed; the warnings of neo-Conservative
politicians and State-supporting media are reaching us every week in
the German language. In style and content they are like the propaganda
in the USA: When the big bang comes so runs the 'briefing' for the
trusting man-in-the-street the culprits will be Muslims. It could be
so, in fact; but who in the terrorist background is pulling the strings
that keep everything in motion, of this for very good reasons we
hear precious little.
MM: You say, among other things, th
at the interests of extreme fanatics
who misuse Islam as a justification for their actions, coincide
surprisingly often with the interests of the hawks; How do you explain
this?
W.E.: You mean the symbiosis between radical Muslims and intelligence
agents? Let us take the best-known example: Osama bin Laden and al
Qaida. Both of them are creations of American geopolitics. When the
White House decided, during the Presidency of Ronald Reagan, to win the
Cold War, a central pillar of this undertaking was the plan to prepare
a new Vietnam for the Russians in Afghanistan. To achieve this end, the
Pentagon poured billions into the mobilizing of an Islamist army whose
task was to wage a civil war and make life uncomfortable for the
pro-Moscow government in Kabul. They succeeded in this, and when the
Russians came in "to help", they had fallen into the trap. The war in
Afghanistan with its heavylosses was a thick nail in the coffin of the
Soviet Union. And the grave-diggers there, were the mujaheddin. The
collecting and transit post for the Muslim fighters in Afghanistan was
called al Qaida. Its organizer was Osama bin Laden, who stood on the
payroll of the CIA under the name Tim Osman.
He and his people were trained, paid and armed in America. After the
collapse of the Soviet Union, this collaboration is said to have been
brought to an end by a series of attacks by alQaida on American
installations. This seems to me to be an alibi set up to disguise the
fact that the collaboration continued. The fact is, that Washington
overcame the vast Communist empire, not in order to liberate the people
there, but to open upits markets and resources. And the chief resource
targeted was the oil that is extracted in the southern
semi-autonomousrepublics of the former USSR. The attempt was now made,
by means of putsches, civil wars and rebellion procured withmoney, to
remove these Muslim regions from the Russian sphere of influence. And
who appears again as a main asset inthese battles which, almost without
exception, were serving the geopolitical interests of the Pentagon?
Yes, quite correct: bin Laden's bearded warriors of God. They would
soon be running riot in the Balkans, too, when the USA was pursuing its
geostrategic interests there in the mid-1990's. In this connection as
has been confirmed by investigative reports of US Congress
White
House was working as close ally of al Qaida; hand in hand with them.
The Clinton government outwardly declared Osama bin Laden the "Most
wanted Terrorist" and offered astronomical sums forhis capture. The
reality behind all this hue and cry was experienced by a number of
Islamic states when they came forward with the information: The man you
are looking for is in our country. Do you want him dead or alive? In
each of these cases extradition was obstructed by the American
government. Sudan, which insisted most strongly on his extradition, was
taught a lesson in the form of an aerial bombardment. The reason given,
by way of provocation, was that Sudan was supporting terrorism.
Meanwhile, Osama alias Tim had, under the eyes of American and English
intelligence, official business and residential addresses in London. In
1996 he was a guest of the British overseas intelligence service MI6,
who employed the restless jack-of-all-trades as a subcontractor for an
assassination attempt on Muammar Gaddafi by the "Libyan Islamic
Fighting Group", a cell of al Qaida. For his part, the Libyan head of
state had just pledged a princely sum for the capture of bin Laden. I
could continue for a long time the story of the coalition between al
Qaida and the secret service-military complex in the West. It reaches
right down to the time of the 11thSeptember. The government-controlled
radio station in France "Radio France
International" and the daily
newspaper "Le Figaro" revealed that as late as July 2001 Osama bin
Laden was undergoing kidney treatment in the American hospital in Dubai
where he was visited at his sick-bed by the local CIA contact. Do you
feel like a 'second helping'? At the beginning of July 2002, after
the terrorist flights of New York and Washington, the American Time
magazine stated on the authority of high-ranking circles within
European intelligence, that Abu Qatada, the spiritual head of the al
Qaida network, lives with his wife and children in the North of
England. In a safe house made avail-able to him together with a
generous allowance by the British intelligence service. Bin Laden, al
Qaida, Mujaheddin are all children of the Pentagon.
The Taliban are a
direct consequence. And to the exact observer these groups have been
working, without exception, in the interest of the USA. They are still
doing so today, if we accept the Pentagon's word that bin Laden people
were behind the 11thSeptember. Why? Well, the neo-Conservative power
centre in Washington had the military campaigns against Afghanistan and
Iraq firmly on their agenda when Bush seized power. But they knew that
such an openly imperialistic venture could only be pushed through on an
international level if so the neo-Conservatives were saying in the
year 2000 a new Pearl Harbor were to take place. Do yo
u see? The
troops were all prepared, and 9/11 was the opener of the door to war.
Now Iran is on the agenda. The American secret service apparatus is
financially rich, but slow in movement and poor in mind and spirit
they are fond of repeating themselves. So the world can now prepare
itself for the next opener of the door.
MM: Why was there no terrorist provocation before the beginning of the
Iraq war?
W.E.: Because the engagement in Iraq could still be associated, on the
feeling level, with the 11thSeptember. The memoryof the violence of
9/11 was still very much alive. It had presented the White House with a
huge surplus of emotion, which Bush could continue to draw upon. Hence
the persuasive power of the horror-picture "the mass-murderer of
American civilians is lurking in fact or at least symbolically in the
vicinity of Baghdad". These were, incidentally, the words of American
former Senator Gary Hart who today, himself, warns of a terrorist
attack provoked, or even contrived, by the CIA. The second part of the
propaganda falsehood that led to war focussed on the weapons of
mass-destruction with which Saddam was allegedly threatening the
Western alliance and Israel. This is now repeating itself. The
campaign on the mass-destruction theme is already in full swing. Not,
however, the alQaida campaign, significantly enough. This would not be
easy. After Afghanistan and Iraq the wars of
conquest for the "cap-ture
of bin Laden" are starting to wear thin. Also, here in Germany, the
influence of the red-green Schroeder government's campaign against the
Iraq war, which raised doubts as to the genuineness of 9/11, continues
to be felt. Despite all the support we give, we are still looked upon
in the USA as unreliable allies. This is what causes me concern. A
series of attacks with dirty nuclear devices in America and Germany,
the sources of which could be traced back to Iran, would suit the hawks
in the White House admirably at the present time. In the first place,
German public opinion, the government and even the opposition would be
tied to US policy for the foreseeable future. And secondly, an attack
with ABC (atomic, biological or chemical) weapons would provide Cheney
& Co. with just the smoking guns they were searching for in vain in
Iraq; and in addition it would justify implementation of their
war-plans against Teheran. Thirdly, an act of this kind provides a
pretext for revoking the US Constitution whereby the
neo-Conservatives would avoid certain defeat in the 2008 elections.
MM: You write not only about the present, but also the past, and you
claim that there were certain interests at work which to put it simply
kept Hitler alive. Is there in your opinion a thread of continuity
from those events on into our own time?
W.E.: There is, quite concretely, a thread20where the political destiny
of certain leaders is concerned. Let us take the example you have
suggested Hitler. In the 1920's the powers that would later be the
victors and, together with them, a large number of elite groups were
interested in the rise to power of someone who would carry out the
National-Socialist programme. Imagine to yourself what it was like at
that time: Lenin had risen to power in the Kremlin. For the capitalists
of this world his regime of state ownership represented the worst
imaginable scenario. Leading concerns such as the Shellpetroleum
company had invested vast sums in Russia, which were now suddenly lost.
Just like Ford, the king of the American motor industry, the head of
Shell also gave large sums to Hitler, in the hope that he would come to
power and defeat the Soviets in a war. The same policy was pursued by
influential sections of British Conservatism, which was deeply
disturbed by Lenin's anti-colonial campaign. India, Egypt, Ireland,
half the Empire was in turmoil because the Reds were using the
treasures of the Tsar to finance world revolution. And so, as I said,
Hitler also received support from the English. Finally, there was a
card in the game, that was going to "play a trump". This was the
unspoken 'common sense' understanding between Roosevelt and Stalin that
a war unleashed in the heart of Europe would ultimately benefit only
those powers with the biggest hinterland: America and Russia.
It was
clear that if they held together they would win a new world war and
greet one another with a handshake in the middle of an exhausted and
ruined Europe. This is exactly what happened. The support by means of
which Roosevelt kept alive the collapsing Soviet regime after 1941 was
breathtaking in its scope. But it bore interest, because the USA was
able to install its bases throughout the world and replace England as a
world power. This is the reason why Hitler was so fundamentally
important for this game. His programme of national self-sufficiency,
withits goal of taking over Soviet Ukraine, was a guarantee of war;
while the political physiognomy of National Socialism offered those
directing it behind the scenes a perfect target for antipathy, a
platform which continually built itself up in support of the argument
that war is "inevitable". And so long as Hitler was alive, the war
continued. After Pearl Harbor each new day ofHitler's rule brought the
Americans and Russians one kilometre closer to the heart of Europe.
MM:
and today?
W.E.: In its imperial strategy America is pursuing today the same
policy towards Iran as it did towards Germany in the past. How is the
White House to justify a war against a densely-populated state that is
inclined towards the West? It cannot be done, and that was the
situation in Germany in the 1920's, just as it applied to Iranian
de
velopment before the presidencyof Ahmadinejad. The US geopoliticians
were confident that his rise to power would give them what the rise of
Hitler haddelivered 'carriage paid': namely, a fully effective target
for Western hostility. Build-up of weapons
antisemitism
anti-modernism
military ambitions. True or not, the slogans sound
familiar. As do some of the aims: Shell financed the NSDAP because it
wanted, via Hitler, to get to the oil resources of Russia. And today?
According to the CIA's "World Factbook" Iranpossesses, with 133
gigabarrels, the second-largest reserves of conventional crude oil.
There are enough strategic papers of the neo-Conservatives showing that
these are the resources they wish to acquire.
G. W. Bush is in the oil
business, just as apart of his administration only entered politics via
oil lobby associations; they are all well able to judge the value of
theclaims that have, for years, been made with American flags. This is
the reason why the White House so dexterously supported the election of
Ahmadinejad to the presidency. In the weeks before this fateful
election the news was sent out that the Pentagon was flying American
fighter aircraft from Iraq and Afghanistan into Iranian airspace in
order to test the location of radar defence systems in the event of a
war. There can beno doubt that the wave of indignation in Iran
influenced the approaching election to the disadvantage of the
up-and-coming pro-Western reformers. Added to this is the fact that, in
a remarkable coalition extending from the White House to left-wing
circles in Europe, the Iranians were called upon overwhelmingly to
boycott the election. Many left-wing and liberal voters followed the
call. The traditionalists, on the other hand, had little reason to do
so. Hence the victory of the Right, which seems to me to have been the
purpose of the exercise. Is the Iranian head of State therefore an
agent of American imperialism? No, as little as Hitler was. But without
realizing it he is playing their game.
This could be truly fatal, if
seen from the perspective of "God is with us". While Hitler and his
en-tourage were largely free of religious sentiment, Ahmadinejad like
Olmert (now Livni) in Israel or Bush in the USA is the leader of a
nation that sees itself as an integral part of Divine providence. And
just as the Evangelicals in the American government are firmly
convinced of the Second Coming of Christ, and just as the Conservative
political establishment in Israel dreams of the coming of the Messiah,
so the Shiite Ayatollahs await the descent from Heaven of their own
Teacher, the Mahdi. The problem lies in the small print: The earthly
birth of each one of these saviour figures is proclaimed to take place
on a wave of blood. Only global destruction brings salvation. Only the
end heralds the beginning.
MM: What you say is not quite convincing, because according to that
logic Iran should withdraw from the nuclear non-proliferation treaty,
drive the Jews from their own land and do whatever else will bring
about an escalation of war.
W.E.: That Teheran is behaving more passively in comparison with
Washington, is beyond doubt. This does not contradict my assumption of
belief in the Mahdi, since it is widely understood among its adherents
that their Muslim traditions forbids warmongering. Nevertheless, his
coming is awaited and will be joyfully welcomed. On the level of
feeling, this leaves littleroom for an all-out attempt to forestall the
impending catastrophe that is associated with his Coming.
MM: Is it not possible that the USA like every great power in the
history of great powers has, in Iran, found for the first time an
opponent who, ideologically at least, cannot be so easily defeated? In
spite of the 'Bild-Zeitung' (biggest german daily) there is
considerable sympathy for Ahmadinejad even in Germany, though it may
only be admitted behind closed doors.
W.E.: Unfortunately, the decision will fall on the battlefields and
not, as in ancient India, at the gates of the universities. And so
America, if Armageddon cannot be prevented, will at some point suffer
defeat in a conflict with China. But here we are predicting the
unpredictable. Militarily, Iran by itself would not stand the faintest
chance against th
e USA. Maybe it would succeed in open battle, in
conflict man to man who knows? But the Pentagon has not engaged in
warfare of this kind for decades. And why should it? If need be, they
bomb the enemy from an unreachable altitude of 10 or 20 kilometres,
until the land down below has been reduced to a Dresden or a Hiroshima.
Then the brave "liberation troops" appear on the scene. Iran's only
chance would lie in an intervention of Russia. But even this
eventuality would not help to win the war, because a trial of strength
betweenWashington and Moscow would lead in the medium term to the Gog
versus Magog scenario of the Biblical Apocalypse. Culminating in a
global nuclear holocaust with no victor.
MM: And do you see no hope of a solution?
W.E.: One of the contradictions in our democracies is the fact that
here the media control the State (and thus the common-weal) and not
vice-versa. It is therefore possible for a single wealthy investor to
influence elections, guide decision-making, determine voting, bring
political careers to an end, while he himself does not even need to be
a citizen of this country. The neo-Conservative cabal in England,
America and Israel makes intensive use of this strategic advantage. The
Muslim world, parts of which are very prosperous, ought not, perhaps,
to hand it all over to their most radical opponents.
|
Translator's Note: The above article appeared on the follo
wing website: www.muslim-markt.de and was published in the Dec. 2007/Jan. 2008 issue
of Symptomatologische Illustrationen, Basel. The editor W. Lochmann
prefaced the article with the Rudolf Steinerquote and his own
introductory comment.
|
| startseite |
|
|
|