The Ouroboros of anarchism

HOMO•HOMINI•LVPVS•EST

Thomas Hobbes

Who of us, within The People, don't know, or haven't even heard of, an anarhist -either self-called or media-created prophile-? And even further, who of us won't think of anarchy as a left-oriented ideology pulling and pushing against the Élite in search of an ultimate liberation of Mankind, no Law, no Government, Men capable of self-conducting soviety with harmony and empathy?

...Seems horrific when you oughta realize that Anarchyism and Neoliberal Capitalism are two entites reflected in a mirror?

Anarchy bases on the no opression entites, nule the orders whose functions are, or include, the opression towards liberty. Under such principle religion, government and even morals are mechanisms to contain freedom -I claim morals and religion to be different since saecular, and even atheist, morals tend to be sometimes apart from religious morals- therefore must be supressed.

The government through the law einforcement and the Armed Forces contain the human rights of The People making 'em obey unwritten rules and written laws in a sort of master-pawn relationship in which you, the individual, are forced into certain regime of behaviour. In order to live must earn a minimum wage, to earn it you must attend a work or, in other cases, became a bussiness man turning into part of the enslaving system. Must attend bachelors in order to gain a beuraucratic file certifying the value of the knowledge acquired. In college, high schools and elementaries must obey the rules imposed by force and cohertion subjucted to a system saying what is relevant and what it is not.

The government says which means are valid and which other aren't. Not fullfitting'em makes you an outsider, a law-breaker; therefore an individual to be restored, reformed and restructured via medical and healthcare institutions. Psychology and Psychiatrics work along with the Élite.

One can agree in such statements by accepting vicious men are in control of political and ethical institutions of the State. Our leaders are indeed incompetent to fullfit duties and agendas beneful to The People. Main phallacy relays on: people in charge are corrupt, opressive and vicious, the institutions are managed by those people, therefore the institutions must be dissolved and people will live freely in harmony. How come vicious people will live in peace without any law? In order to occur certain situations hafta be in time: aequality, virtue, respect, friendship/comradeship. Anarchists apeal to an alleged human nature of compassion and love, quasi romantic.

The human nature itself would sustsin civilization and agreements within disputing issues can be achieved with natural acknowledge of fairness and empathic minds. Being humanity and the world like the country, wolves (elitistic groups) are attached by certain strings (the Law) and barely eat 10 sheep (vulgar people); what if the strings dissappear? well, it would end up in sheep carnage and butchery. That's the goal which'd be obtained by anarchists if their agenda'd fullfit.

Is it different from libertarianism? No Government and let the People freely decide over themselves. Men by an innate principles would act towards the good of all since with doing good for itself, it will end up in good for all. Free enterprise will allw people to choose where and how to work. Without governments to tell what, when, where and how to produce, the wealth will spread troughall society. Anarchy? People by nature acting in and for the good of The People. Just another face of Libertarianism.

Syrian War

SI VIS PACEM PARA BELLVM

To divde and conquer, to repeat a lie 1000 times till it becomes a truth, to never believe anything until it's officially denied.

I.- The forsight at the USA

Shortly after 9/11 the retired general, former Commander in Chief of NATO during Yugoslav War of 1999, Wesley Clark advised of a Rumsfeld-Wolfowitz plan, which comes from someone or something very high above, to overthrow 7 muslim governments at the Middle East:

Afghanistan

Iraq

Sudan

Somalia
Lebanon

Libya

Syria

Iran

Since the War on Terror began by Pres. George W. Bush II the US Armed Forces have intervened in 5 of those countries, within 'em 4 allegedly hadn't a privatly owned by Rothschild zionists Central Banks (Afghanistan, Iraq, Sudan and Libya). In the end the Rumsfeld memo never achieved in the expected time of 5 years, but still standing and the current scenario shows it's more than alive, as Washington's real owners have taken former allies like Hussein who faught for the USA and the USSR against the Islamic Republic of Iran.

II.- Geopolitics game - China & Russia

The key strategic issue of China is her geopolitical possition in the globe as one of the largest economies but depends highly on oil from which China lacks. China's 2º oil provider is Iran in a fantastic deal of cheap oil which allows Chinese economy to grow with little costs for importing oil, in exchange Iran receives favourable votes at the UN Security Council and even veotes.

Syria's main ally is the hard-line islamic regime of Iran controlled by chii-Islam just as Syria under the Assad dinasty. China's concern on the Syrian War relays on a direct route from NATO to Chines borders, if Syria is taken and Iran after then it's invaded, then, on the long-term vision, China can be easly souroundeb by US-NATO.

On the map:

RED: China and Russian Federation
YELLOW: US arab puppets + Israel
ORANGE: Rumsfeld List's countries already occupied
BLUE: Syria and Iran (missing countries in the Rumsfelf List)
GREEN: NATO excluding US and Canada
PURPLE: Belarus, Russia's ally and quasi colony

By looking at the map the corridor leading to China by corssing the american bases at the Middle East is evident but has an obstacle: Iran which is extensive in surface and Iranian puppet, Bashar al-Assad, ruling Syria, the gates of the Mediterranean leading to China's most rebel province: Tibet.

Russia it's higly worried on NATO's expansion to the east and therefored conducted a war against Georgia on 2008 and has it's Fleet at Ukraine. Iran is key to Russia's national security since they share mutual borders by the Caspian Sea and with a Russian nemesis: Georgia. Iran also allows Russia to sustain a fierce control over eastern european economies and even over Germany who couldn't control Europe in case of a full close of energy supllies by Russia and Iran. Syria by itself holds the only Russian naval base abroad, from Syria the Russian troops have access to mediterranean Europe (Italy, Greece, Turkey, Cyprus and Spain) in case of a war against NATO, Russian ships can easly shoot and undermine NATO at the Mediterranean.

III.- Netanjahu's personal issues

Iran is considered by Zionism as the biggest threat to their outstanding possition, and even to their existence. In case of direct war against Iran, moreover a solitary attack, the Syrian ally of the persians means a direct attack from a neighbor during a large scale war against a powerful enemy capable of returning every jewish strike, to the conflict of being attacked by Syrian Armed Forces, zionists deal with and invasion of Hizbullah and Hamas in case of launching attacks on Iran.

Zionists need to get rid of Assad so a seconf front would never be opened in case of their desired war against Iran; jews have already launched rockets into Damascus and have faught with Syrian Armed Forces, as well as with 'rebels', at Golan. Russia and its naval base remains as an extreme obstacle since any mistake could lead 'em into war against Rusian Federation.

IV.- Global coflict?

Back to the previous map, the US coalition in case that the Syrian "limited" invation erupts into a world war scale are clear: NATO, Israel and arab puppets BUT Syria and Iran have 2 giants backing 'em: China, Russia and their allies which can be: Belarus, Vietnam, Myanmar and North Korea, maybe even the whole CIS.

Could it become a large scale? World War III?

The Egypt massacre

"Never believe anything until it's officialy denied"

Jhon Pilger

The Aegyptian issue, the series of events that've been unfolding since the so-called revolution of Tunisia on the twilight of 2010 clustered now on the People, puppet supporters of the Muslim Brotherhood, leaving a veil of mistery, on the why's rather than the who's since the reasons and plans behind are the key whilst the people are merely puppets.

I.- The ORDO BRITANORVM era and Socialist Aegypt

The Muslim Brotherhood has existed for long time in Egypt, since 1928, and pushed towards the Islamic theocracy via the Jihad. In spite of their vow to break apart from any kind of western influence, their support to the monarchy under the British conscription was fierce against any kind of nationalist movemnt with left-winged orientation.

After the nationalist triumph of Nasser the Muslim Brotherhood was outlawed by Nasser himself, always pressured and prosecuted, many were tortured and killed. The biggest change in the Egyptian status quo was the alliance with zionists and the recognition of Isreal as a legal state during Camp David.

II.- The fall of Mubarak

By the late 2010, and the first weeks of 2011, the disgrace towards the 3-decade regime of Hosni Mubarak was decided by the influence of islamists 'cause the core of the protests were encouraged by 'em, along with people who were sick and tired of the brutal repression of Mubarak and forevermore from the close ties with NATO and zionists. The Muslim Brotherhood was granted with the People's faith for a change and gave the majority of demonstrators at Cairo's and other major cities' streets against Mubarak and in a tragical irony, supported the military intervention with an ultimatum that forced the government to step down and leave the power on the Armed Forces' hands with a promise of free elections and a Constitution.

The elections of 2012 gave a striking majority to the Muslim Brotherhood who has a bad image on the West and within the zionist puppeteers of the Egyptian political superstructure since their ideology is tied to the radical chii Islam for whom State and Religion are unbreakable as a one and only entity, in a certain way a proxy to the Islamic Republic of Iran.

III.- Muslim Brotherhood ruling Cairo

Muhammad Mursi ruled with a programme of hard reforms and law modifications towards islamization of the whole Aegyptian status quo, the Coeptic Church was legally assaulted, islamic Sharia began with minor reforms to enforce it, a hard line of civilian reforms towards relinquish power out of the military elite in order to establish a civilian order under strong institutions of the islamic rule.

Zionists who most feared a second islamic State conspired against Mursi under the same scheme that overthrew Mubarak: to create multiple social uprisings against an islamic state proxy of Iran: the fear of hard-line and the anihilation of the few democratic liberties under theocracy, who most were frihghtened were copetic christians.

Via the injection of money destined to bribery of the military chiefs that stood up against an islamic rule with civilian and religious elite as the ruling classes, breaking apart the order that was established by Gamal Nasser was unforgiveable and the Armed Forcers took action, overthrew and impirssoned Muhammed Mursi. The militia summoned the most variety of people into the new government to assure the support: military, civilian, religious and internationa figures like El Baradei.

IV.- The Massacre

Shortly after the democratically elected government was outsted, the social muscle of the Muslim Brotherhood took the streets troughall Egypt, social support that zionists wanted to erradicate in the same way they do with palaestinians and lebanese, with direct military action against unarmed civilians.

By orders of Tel-Aviv the army opened fire at 6:00 AM local time of Cairo resulting in almost 700 killed and several hundreds wounded, a genocide, in words of the People.