Apostle Obama. (23)

The Moon Goddess.

© Eso A. B., 2012

The separation of religion from secular and state power in Western societies can be traced to secular atrocities against religion, which—to this writer’s mind—had its beginning with the incineration of St. Basil on the Hippodrome in Constantinople-Istanbul.


According to Russian historian and mathematician Anatoly Fomenko, severe critic of the Scaligerian chronology promoted by the Catholic Church, the auto-da-fe (act of faith) of Basil-Christ occured in the 12^th century. The last openly Christian human sacrifice occurred in 1802 in Spain.


Closer to our time and, therefore, more familiar is the separation of religion from secular politics in America, stipulated by the 1^st Amendment of the Constitution (1787).
As part of a continuing attempt to turn “secularism” into a “religion”, the separation continues to be maintained by the  U.S. Supreme Court, which maintains an “absolute” separation between its “law-making” and those opposed to secular absolutism.
In short, while the courts assert that “religion” today is “free”, the body of separated “religion” itself is kept in a kind of zip-bag the police carry around for dead. The phrase “separation of church and state”, goes back to a letter of Thomas Jefferson, in which he uses the phrase: "wall of separation between church and state".
Given that over two hundred years have passed since church and state
 have been more or less separated, it is clear by now (to those interested in such matters) that the wonder of the secular state (democracy) is none other than a “lawful” secular dictatorship.


Alas, the “new” religion is every bit as gruesome as rolling enemy corpses down the steps of the Aztec Templo Mayor. Of course, in our day the “act” of sacrifice lacks the presence of a priest offering the victim to kiss a crucifix. The death of the sacrifice usually occurs at some distance from the executioner—perhaps a hundred yards from him—by bullet. Sometimes, a pro forma religious ritual may take place afterward in places where “religion” retains its charismatic hold on the common people and they retain a subjectivity individuated by their religion and poverty., when compared to the subjectivity of, say, a “modern artist” who has surrendered his-her subjectivity to the state”, aka a museum. No doubt, there are occasions, when an artist is naïve of the political process by which his and her subjectivity is conjoined to and becomes identical with that of the state, which on a superficial level, they may indeed reject. The tool of this take-over of the subjectivity of the artist and his audience is (did you forget?) money and the status it buys for itself  as a God not yet put in doubt.


The discovery that artistic integrity and subjectivity may be compromised has caused (2012) money and those who have it, to take on projects, which aim to change the “old” subjectivity of humankind utterly. Of course, those who do so have no way of telling what the ultimate consequences will be. The project is provocatively cynical, because it is determined entirely by the interests of money and those behind it.


However, the project is not so well hidden as its perpetrators presume, if only because money is a virus that infects every human brain, even one that that has no idea of the difference between an individual’s subjectivity and the state’s alleged objectivity. The first crack in what the moneyed wish to keep hid, appeared when an establishmentarian news agency, CNN, and its reporter Lou Dobbs, a career journalist, who dared to bring up some of the plans of “The Money Establishment” (ThME, aka banks) during prime time news. The report concerns NAFTA or the North American Free Trade Agreement, an agreement that would link Canada, America, and Mexico into one governmental entity known as North American Union.


Apparently the subjective mind of the majority of Americans is not as receptive to the idea (no doubt, many psychologists and polls helped analyze the nature of America’s subjectivity). Therefore, the individuals who constituted the subjective mind of ThME, said by some to be TheBilderbergGroup, which membership consists of some of the more wealthy and powerful individuals of our time in the Western World, pulled a “white rabbit” out of the hat: Barak Obama, a U.S. senator from the state of Illinois.
At the time, there were many speculations, why it was Obama over Hillary Clinton, the latter a sure shoe in—it it came to Hillary actually running for the U.S. Presidency and people voting, because apparently her subjective orientation was close to that of a majority of Americans.


Instead of Hillary, America was offered a candidate with roots that reached more into the subjectivity of America’s black population, one who was ambitious for himself without commitments to anything that could not be covered by the fogs of advertisement, with a subjectivity cynical in the extreme (as sentimental democrats found out soon after the election was over), and backed by wealthy  Saudi Arabians
While the outward appearance of presidential candidates may be considered froth of cynical politics, a more profound subversion by the ThME forces surfaces in the plot sd told by a Russian television story, which is certainly worth paying attention to.
Most everyone knows that the Money Virus is not new, but has been shaping the World Order in a very direct manner (i.e., with the direct aid of violence) for over two hundred years, at least from early 18^th century on. The age of Enlightenment began from about 1700 on and does not yet presume itself to have come to an end—even if its end is envisaged by groups such as the Bilderbergs.


What stands in the way of TheME (The Money Enterprise) are the subjectivities of “old” religions, 1) that of the Israelis; 2) that of the Christians, and 3) last, but not least, that of the Muslims.


I The Israeli nation, under the control of  Zionist politicians, with a strong Zionist led lobby (AIPAC) effecting the interests of American oligarchs, does not serve ThME’s interests in the North American Nation.


II The Christians, under the control of U.S. Fundamentalists, though in fact helpful to the cause of ThME, is, nevertheless, a long-term obstacle, because it hides (now in the deepest part of its closet) the notion (of Jesus Basil) that human kind is essentially an egalitarian entity and, therefore, Christianity will never be sufficiently cynical to suit TheME rule on planet Easrth over the long term.


III The Muslim oligarchs, with their control of Oil Money, have as great an interest in securing for the Muslim world a secure a place on our planet as the Chinese, Russians, and Americans appear to have.


In sum, a cynical individual, a weak Muslim, and an ungrounded American fits the current interests of ThME, the Money Virus, most,  because Obama’s ambition blinds him no less that the ambition of Oedipus once blinded him to the fact that (in the end) he is a patsy and scapegoat of his mother.


Though the interests and power of the moneyed and VIPs are not to be belittled, their goal of attaining for themselves a planet that is “globalized” under their aegis, is full of great risks, not least of which is Armageddon for humankind as a whole. In short, the demand of the Environbmentalists and Greens for an Earth that has no more than a billion or two people, may well be on the reverse side of the ThME coin.


We may speculate that the survivors of the catastrophe that is likely to follow on the heels of a failed WW3, will demand that any future government is led by a self-sacrificial leader, who through committing and conjoining life and service may gains for himself the subjective  authority that will  speak to and for all.

St. Peter The First PTSD Victim of State Terror (19)

The Saw-Cross Saws Upwards!

© Eso A. B., 2012

The morning after Basil’s (aka Christ’s) liquidation by Emperor, Alexius I, the sun rose over the Bosphorus the color of blood. It rose to just above the horizon, more wide on its sides than it was tall. Once the sun had reached the hill top (on the right hand side of the Bosphorus), it remained there and moved no further, though if one looked carefully,  it wobbled from side to side a little.


I am, of course, using the description of the sunrise that followed Nanautzins’s self-immolation as described in David Carrasco’s book, City of Sacrifice, p. 80ff,


Such Basil’s disciples as had dared to stay the night beside the fire pit and witness their master’s charred remains, they spake no words among themselves and acted as if struck dumb.


Years later, when the event came to be rewritten and fitted to the story of Jesus by the monks (likely in the service of the King of France), there rewrite left little of what had actually transpired at the pit of fire at the Hippodrome.  As we read the story, now in the “NewTestament”,  Mark 14:66-72, we discover that:

66 “And as Peter was beneath in the palace, there cometh one of the maids of the high priest: 67 And when she saw Peter warming himself, she looked upon him, and said, And thou also wast with Jesus of Nazareth (Nanauatzin?)

68 “But he [Peter] denied, saying, I know not, neither understand I what thou sayest. And he went out into the porch; and the cock crew. 69 And a maid saw him again, and began to say to them that stood by, This is one of them.

70 “And he [Peter] denied it again. And a little after, they that stood by said again to Peter, Surely thou art one of them: for thou art a Galilaean, and thy speech agreeth thereto. 71 But he began to curse and to swear, saying, I know not this man of whom ye speak.

72 “And the second time the cock crew. And Peter called to mind the word that Jesus said unto him, Before the cock crow twice, thou shalt deny me thrice. And when he thought thereon, he wept.”

While the cremation pit was apparently soon filled and reduced to (probably) a bonfire outside Pilate’s palace, the horror struck disciples acted precisely as petrified people do; as Lot’s wife did; as refugees from war zones in our own day do. Indeed, who is to define what is a “war zone” in our day? Is ‘a war zone’ not also a slum? Is it not where people pick through rubbish piles?
The commentator (–Austin Cline) to the above text explains:

“In order to emphasize the faithlessness of Peter, the nature of his three denials increases in intensity each time. First he gives a simple denial to a single maid who claims that he was “with” Jesus. Second he denies to the maid and a group of bystanders that he was “one of them.” Finally, he speaks with a vehement oath to a group of bystanders that he was NOT “one of them.”

This exegesis fits the pattern used by those whom the French kings [later also German kings and others (the last auto-da-fe occurred in 1802 in Spain)] employed to drive out arch-Christianity with a story version that better served the secularist ends of the oligarchs, princes, lords, firsts, barons, and wealthy merchants of the day. Today the story also serves bankers. On the whole, the exegesis stays on track–if it records (even as it does not explain) Peter’s “faithlessness” as a consequence of “mind paralysis”. It is interesting that Alexeus I and Herod, both, are kings/ leaders, who presume for themselves religious authority. This writer remains horror struck by the video clip of a U.S. helicopter crew machine-gunning a group of Iraqi men, including two men working for a news service. While the attackers are not to be equated with religion, their action is justified by the rules of war, i.e., the law of the U.S. government is on their side and their subjective feelings can be disregarded as far as the law is concerned. In other words, in this case the law is criminal.


Strange as it may seem to some readers, butting together a leap into a fire pit at Teotihuacan and pushing a man into a fire pit dug on the Hippodrome in Constantinople, it is not pareidolia beyond possibility.


The internet has done much to break the story patterns created by academics, whose versions of a story are constrained by their piers, whether the established story tells true or not. The internet user, however, has access to much of the same data that an academic has, but has none of the pier pressure to contend with when it comes to finding and telling a story constructed according to a new pattern. Of course, now that a new story of the death of Jesus Basil has been discovered, the scholars are free to do further research and begin an argument for or against or confirm yet another version of the tale I tell.


Are Basil, Christ, Nanauatzin, and Jesus perhaps one and the same person then? Probably not. Nevertheless, just as there is a relationship in the slaying of a sheep by nomads in the Lake Baikal region today and the sacrifice on top of Temple Mayor centuries ago, that is, that it takes five men to better butcher and/ or sacrifice, for all we know, five friendly warriors to one enemy warrior may have served as a rule of thumb to generals in pre-modern days in the Near East and Mesoamerica. Just as the sun did not rise into the skies immediately after the sacrifices at either geographic location, Jesus, taking an example from the Moon Goddess, did not immediately rise from his grave to heaven either.