John Kaminski <skylax@comcast.net>





Levels of the game



Date :

Sun, 30 Nov 2003 16:21:03 -0500







Levels of the game

The deeper you go, the darker it gets



By John Kaminski

skylax@comcast.net



Did you know there's a war game played by Air Force types that posits a

situation where the United States in the year 2017 conducts a preemptive

first strike on China by using a next-generation space shuttle, which

swoops down and annihilates strategic targets before booking back up to

the Space Station? This is followed by the total destruction of China by

a spaced-based laser, which the Pentagon humorously calls the Death

Star.

I learned of this gut-wrenching scenario by watching a video titled

"Arsenal of Hypocrisy," a frightening array of future probabilities

compiled by Gainesville, Florida filmmaker Randy Atkins

(http://www.cfvs.com) detailing a shocking portrait of America's

militarization of space. This film features the commentary of anti-nuke

legend Bruce Gagnon, social critic Noam Chomsky, and former astronaut

Edgar Mitchell, as well as former president Dwight Eisenhower, and

provides such a chilling view of the future that it simply blew all the

current news right out of my brain as my jaw dropped open and stayed

that way for a few hours.

I mean, what's the point of speculating about what really happened

on 9/11 or the sinister butchery of innocents in Iraq when a plan for

total domination of the earth through calculated American violence is

already in place and inexorably evolving toward its ugly conclusion?

The game is over. Nobody can oppose this war machine. It doesn't

matter if we find out that no planes were actually used in the 9/11

deception, that it was all holograms and film. What court, what cop, is

going to act on our discovery? They're all bought and paid for. And so

are the "peace-loving" Democrats who are now clamoring to bestow their

own version of American totalitarianism on the people of the world.

"Whoever controls space will win all the wars on the earth," says

Gagnon in the film. "There is no challenger on this earth able to stand

against us.

Gagnon, coordinator of the Global Network Against Nuclear Power and

Weapons in Space and organizer of many demonstrations at the Kennedy

Space Center, goes on: "We have 7500 nuclear missiles, China has 20. We

are going to manage China."

He explains that the deployment of U.S. forces in Central Asia are

principally about encircling China, including "deploying theater missile

defense systems off the coast of China."

He concludes: "They don't want the American people to understand the

depth of the plans for moving the arms race into the heavens ... we

shouldn't have any illusions anymore about our country ... our democracy

is under the control of corporations."

At least watching the film took my mind off the depressing load of

e-mails I face every day. These e-mails are certainly just as

enlightening as Atkins' film, and one from my pal Hazel the other day

got me thinking that even the brightest among the people I have come to

know and respect on the Internet are still pretty much in the dark as to

what is really going on.

The story, now widely circulated

(http://www.rense.com/general45/wh.htm), involved a fellow named Michael

Meiring, who happened to blow his legs off last year while constructing

a bomb in the Philippines. The theory is that Meiring, operating under

the cover of being a "treasure hunter" (a common CIA occupation), was

instantly whisked out the country by American agents to presumably a

secure and secret location.

Hazel reported he was "a CIA operative and had spent 10 years on

assignment associating with Islamic groups, Abu Sayef, MNLF, Moro

Islamic Liberation Front, and other Philippine based Islamic groups,

supplying them with US counterfeit notes (courtesy of US intelligence)

and bomb making materials so that they may create terrorist mayhem

within the Philippines, giving the US a pretext to move in and "help,"

just like in Indonesia — just like nearly everywhere else these

Mafia-like thugs can plant their terror and, "protection" racket."

The story set off alarm bells with me. I have long insisted that

al-Qaeda is nothing more than a CIA/Mossad strategem, useful in creating

havoc when the U.S. military wants to respond to a threat. Got a place

you want to invade? Have al-Qaeda blow something up, and we'll respond.

It's a policy very much on the order of the Israeli formula, which

creates terror to respond to whenever it wants to instill its repression

of those whose land it wants to steal.

So now that everytime I hear about al-Qaeda doing some dastardly

deed, I simply assume it is U.S.-Israeli operatives committing some

"false-flag" operation in order to achieve some other, devilish purpose,

just as we saw in Istanbul, Turkey the other day.

I wrote about this earlier

(http://www.worldnewsstand.net/03/John_Kaminski/25.htm) in a piece

called "The perfect enemy" which was widely circulated. The point being,

an enemy under your complete control which you can deploy at your own

whim is the perfect vehicle to keep the war machine making money, and

Meiring is one of the best examples of that formula.

The so-called Muslim insurgency in the Philippines (and in a gaggle

of other countries) is nothing more than a false-flag operation provoked

by the CIA/Mossad construction named al-Qaeda in order to provide a

justification for further military action and expenditures on armaments,

not to mention that new cash cow, rebuilding countries the U.S. has

destroyed, using American corporations with close ties to the Bush

Administration. That's really the growth industry you should be

investing in, if you're a murderous pig with absolutely no conscience

about who you kill and what you destroy.

Istanbul was the most recent example of one of these false flag

operations, as was Riyadh in Saudi Arabia, and, a little while back, the

explosion in Bali, meant to exascerbate tensions and repression against

Muslims in Indonesia.

Of course the granddaddy of all these provocations was 9/11, where

the money men blasted the most famous American corporate landmark, made

billions on savvy stock transactions and insurance claims, and created

for themselves the perfect pretext to spread their population-reducing

and profit-producing mayhem all around the globe, not to mention put all

the American people in prison by means of Patriot Act and other

repressive legislation.

And speaking of 9/11, I have been involved in the most fascinating

round-robin conversation among absolutely the best, most conscientious

researchers in the world. I would like to share some of this debate (but

not all) with you, to maybe get your opinions on an apparent schism

among the group, and also alert you to some very portentous

developments.

This debate was essentially triggered by the curious revelations of

Mike Ruppert, certainly the most well-known (and deservedly so) of those

proposing an alternative view of what happened on 9/11. I term the

revelations curious because what should have been page 1 news among the

9/11 research community was buried near the bottom of an otherwise

pedestrian column about old JFK news and the issue of when the world's

oil supplies will run out.

Ruppert admitted as a person that he believed the WTC towers were

not brought down by the jetliners that crashed into them, that he

believed the buildings were destroyed by demolition charges. He also

said he believed no airliner hit the Pentagon, and that something else

was responsible for the death and damage there.

This was a change in his basic policy of reporting, and the curious

part of it was that he published his admission so unobtrusively. The

admission, however, sent shockwaves through the 9/11 research community,

and opened up whole new areas for renewed debate.

Because ... if the so-called top 9/11 researcher anywhere had

revised his opinion, and now believed that the towers in New York were

NOT felled by airliners, and that the Pentagon was NOT really hit by an

airliner, it not only gives all those websites and researchers who have

been insisting these very things all along a lot more credibility in the

public eye, but it also astronomically increases the chances that the

general public will begin to believe that George W. Bush's official

version of what happened on 9/11 is an absolute lie, and that our

country and the world are in much bigger trouble than most people have

been willing to believe.

Ruppert's admission significantly increases the likelihood, in the

public mind, that 9/11 was an inside job, meant to create a police state

atmosphere within the United States, and also meant to create a pretext

for bombing any country Bush says is harboring the terrorists who did

9/11.

BUT ... if the Twin Towers were demolished, and the Pentagon was hit

by something other than a hijacked airliner ... well, you have to ask:

how could Arabs in a cave in Afghanistan have pulled that off? Hmm?

Wouldn't you agree?

And if Arabs in a cave in Afghanistan didn't do the dirty deed, who

did?

Of course, the shocking part of contemplating that question is that

it can't help but shatter the whole world view of whomever has the

courage to confront it. I mean, we're talking about the president of the

United States condoning the killing of American citizens, a lot of them,

right in the middle of America's biggest city.

It's not an easy assertion to consider, for any of us. Because it

means that everything this country has stood for, and been built upon,

has been a lie, or at least is now a lie. It means that our leaders were

willing to sacrifice thousands of its own citizens simply to facilitate

a more aggressive and lucrative geopolitical agenda.

It is perfectly understandable to all how the mind of a loyal

American would recoil at that idea, declare it preposterous, and consign

advocates of such a theory to the loony bin.

And yet one of the top researchers of 9/11 in the world, Mike

Ruppert, has admitted that he has been convinced of the truth that the

WTC towers were demolished, and that the Pentagon was not hit by an

airliner.

And now the choices are clear for every American. You can either

hide your head in the sand, and continue to believe that the government

of the good old USA would never do such a thing to its own people, or

you can confront the evidence. I think now the choice has come down to

confronting the evidence or not taking care of your own life.

Which leads me to the little matter of the schism among 9/11

researchers, precious few of whom (and those who do now fall under a

glaring spotlight of suspicion as to their motivations) believe that

jetliners felled the WTC towers or that a jetliner hit the Pentagon.

The schism is a matter of what constitutes political realism. Of

what is possible under the circumstances.

I have long advocated the immediate arrest, on the basis of probable

cause for obstruction of justice, of the president and all his staff and

Cabinet. I'd prefer this order extend to most members of Congress as

well. More detailed charges of conspiracy to commit mass murder, and

conspiracy to commit treason, could be developed after the suspects were

incarcerated and not able to do any more damage to innocent people all

over the world.

Among 9/11 researchers, I am not in the majority, clearly. Though

I'm not alone, either.

What is happening now is that several high-profile investigators

want to make a movie about 9/11 and the sham that the official

government probe has become. When this was announced, a number of us

worried that the film could become another layer of the coverup if the

right questions weren't asked.

We seem split into two camps: those who believe the crime must be

punished and the perpetrators — whomever they may be — arrested and

prosecuted, and those who believe (as Ruppert and others do) that the

American government must be maintained, that we must go through

channels, work within the system, and achieve the best results we can

given the political realities we confront.

So what's your call? Should we let the killers slide in the interest

of maintaining the decorous, storied infrastructure of the American

hierarchy, or should we really go after the real murderers of all those

innocent people with everything we have in our guts?

Next time you read anything about 9/11, or the Patriot Act, or the

exterminations now ongoing in Iraq, or government scientists developing

the famous 1918 strain of Spanish flu, or white-haired Americans being

clubbed by Miami police, try to keep this question in mind.

You do know, my friends, which side I'm on.



John Kaminski is the author of "America's Autopsy Report," a

collection of his Internet essays. See http://www.johnkaminski.com/

For more of his work, also see

http://www.rudemacedon.ca/kaminski/kam-index.html

What an interesting life you must have! You're like a superhero that has the ability to morph his reality into whatever bizarre form you see fit!

Ladies and gentlemen, witness the feats of John Kaminski, and hi superhuman alter ego Walter Mitty! Able to stretch the truth out so thin it turns to vapor! Able to miraculously transpose reality into a parellel 13th dimension! Look, look! It's a bird! No! No!!! It's a plane!!!

NO!!! It's the incredible Stretch Armstrong!!!!! (Batteries not included).

Hey, how many EV points does this one get guys? I'd like to nominate it for the Fabulous Article by a Reknown Transgendered (FART) AWARD!

And I thought this was going be just another typical indymedia article... little did I know ... at the sign post up ahead ... my next stop was to be...

The Kaminski Zone!

Please reply to this post, thanks.

by Max

Blip bloop blop blup bling blang bloong.