Unseen Enemy: Cryptocratic Forces, Conspiracy, & the Role of Hollywood in the Dissolution of Yugoslavia

Many people—including ones who comment at this website—have difficulty believing that we have been manipulated for centuries, and that both society and ourselves are the end result of those manipulations. I have said that this resistance is itself the result of those manipulations and, in a complementary fashion, of a privileged and sheltered life in which we never had to see, or be on the receiving end of, the raw power of these forces when they assume a less soft form of totalitarian control.

I think we are largely clueless how absurdly easy to manipulate we are. And while I can agree that “conspiratainment” is part of the problem and not the solution, the evidence it incorporates into its controlled counter-narrative is nonetheless compelling and finally irrefutable (which is perhaps why it mostly gets refuted with vague blanket statements, spiritual platitudes, or Marxist arguments about systemic problems).

I recently watched a Mexican TV show called An Unknown Enemy that shows how the CIA and the DFS (Mexican secret police) brought about a coup that was partially dependent on coopting the student protests and the international Olympics to oust one president and get their own man in place. It’s very well-done and seems historically responsible (I haven’t read up on it). Bear in mind that this was forty years ago, in an under-developed country, and yet the level of malevolence combined with ruthless efficiency—and success—is chilling.

What occurred to me while watching it was that most “privileged” folk look at these dark slices of history and they think they are evidence of how undemocratic certain countries are, or were, how brutal and unjust the government systems, and how much better our own are. My own perspective is that this is only because our own societies have been so effectively managed, shaped, and controlled that these coarser methods are no longer required. We have the luxury of believing we are free, which is akin to the comfortable stupor of livestock ignorant that they are raised in an abattoir.

It is possible that, since I was raised to be an abattoir manager, I was never deceived.

There is another end of the social scale on which a person is less likely to believe in the benevolence of our “democratic” societies, and knows all too well how subject to manipulation we are. Someone who grew up in Serbia, for example, after generations of being on the blunt end of that instrument, has less difficulty with the idea that the empire has terraformed the landscape of the human organism, both inner and outer, since time began. They don’t need “conspiratainment” to make them paranoid-aware; they have first-hand encounter with the forces that shape history.

With this in mind I asked Cedomir to share some of his experiences. (In bold below and throughout the remainder of this piece.)

Croatian Illyrian Movement Most important actors

Socialist Federative Republic of Yugoslavia (SFRY) & Hollywood

To give a satisfactory explanation of the dissolution of Yugoslavia and Hollywood’s role in it requires an understanding of its creation. To do that, I’ll have to oversimplify.

Yugoslavia was created after the Treaty of Versailles in 1918. Its creation had some support from the local population, including bizarre bedfellows such as the Serbian Masonic Lodge and the Yugoslav Communist Party. The support was mainly to be found among the intelligentsia (groomed by the Illyrian movement) and some patriots who recognized that a unitary state of kindred peoples was preferable to small nation-states which had little to no chance of actual independence. Of the Great Powers, France and the US were principal supporters in the establishment of Yugoslavia. Great Britain, as always, wanted to ensure a balance of power, which is to say that no one got too big for their boots. The US even sent two battleships to Rijeka (in modern-day Croatia) to dissuade the Italian army from trying to claim the northern Adriatic. France’s “support” was so significant that the Nazis considered Yugoslavia to be a French satellite state.

The above is just the tip of the surface of the water settling over an iceberg.

There’s no racial hatred in the Balkans, we’re all the same race. The language spoken is categorized by linguists as “polycentric.” The fact is that the languages spoken in Italy or Germany have greater diversity than seven separate Balkan countries, but they’ve resolved it by creating unitary states at the right historical moment and imposing a “common language.” We’re essentially one people divided by religious identity and dialects masquerading as separate languages. SFR Yugoslavia was a centralized one-party state. Officially atheist and materialist, it didn’t suppress religious feelings but it did treat believers as backwards and retrograde. If one wasn’t a member of the League of Yugoslav Socialists, the ladder one could climb was relatively short. When the war kicked off and blood was spilt, people (as people do) converged instinctively behind their local (religious) banners looking for safety. It proved to be a disaster for many as it was “their own” who betrayed them.

I was born in the Socialist Federative Republic of Yugoslavia, lived in London for 20 years between the age of and 11 and 31 and then moved to rump Serbia eleven years ago (The Autonomous Province of Kosovo is, according to the UN Security Council Resolution 1244, under transitional UN administration (UNMIK) and a NATO-led peacekeeping force). While growing up in the UK, I used to go home regularly throughout the war years. Because of the events in Yugoslavia, it became clear to me that the real story is very different than the news reports. I’d watch BBC and Channel 4 one day and then watch RTS (Serbian PBS) a day later. Brainwashing and mind programming, overt and covert.

 

Malevolent Design

While (as my readers and listeners ought to know by now), I fully allow that the conspiring of human elites is a symptom of something much deeper, I also inquire into whether that deeper something might also be by design. We know about intelligent design, because the evidence of it is everywhere. What about malevolent design? Are intelligence and malevolence mutually exclusive—or is there a form in intelligence that in its very nature is anti-natural?

Part of my strategy with 16 Maps of Hell and previous books is to surround the reader’s attention and create a sustained exposure to unpalatable evidence of how we have been unfavorably shaped by malevolent design. My hope is that the evidence will neutralize a continuous internal broadcast (a propagandized and traumatized nervous system) designed to maintain the crucial fiction that “this couldn’t possibly be happening, not here, now, not to me and my loved ones!”

Of course, this approach is limited and can backfire. Can one fight fire with fire? Can one use words to dissolve the spell that words have cast over our consciousness? Information is always finite, and when it’s especially unappealing it will be met with counter-narratives that reframe the evidence in a way that is less conclusive or disturbing, and easier to dismiss and forget. I suspect university training has a lot to do with it; less well-educated people, or self-educated ones, tend to be more open to my work.

But there’s also a lack of critical discernment (as compared to an over-developed intellect) that is just as crippling—witness David Icke and Alex Jones, hardly anyone’s idea of a nuanced or complex reading of social reality.

Meanwhile, those who don’t learn from history, become the unwitting instruments of it—either its agents or its sacrifices, or both.

 

Sending Bosnia Back to the Bronze Age

Southeast Europe (the Balkans is a bit loaded and of dubious origin) has been a battleground since the Bronze Age. It’s an interesting case study for world events.

During the war in Bosnia, from 1992 to 1995, Serbs were presented in the Western media as medieval central Asian marauders from illustrated history books. While the rape of civilian women did occur, and the perpetrators can be found on all three warring sides, the stories took on fantastic dimensions. The Serb army in Bosnia, made up of locals, was made to seem like barbarians storming the gates of western civilization. The accusations of rape became so ridiculous that one could reasonably assume that they had no military strategy or goal in sight other than to rape Bosnian Muslim women. The figures were exaggerated so as to present the Serbs as alien and menacing, if not pure evil.

Joe Biden made some memorable anti-Serb remarks, my favorite being that “Serbs were genetically predisposed to genocide.” Flash-forward four years when the most powerful military alliance in history (NATO) bombed Serbia against international law. This time, Serb soldiers were raping countless Kosovo Albanian women. Again, the numbers were ridiculous, and the implication was that the desire for rape was the primary drive of the Serb army. What made this particular piece of propaganda especially disgusting was that the NATO air force was dropping depleted uranium on the population it claimed to be saving. More bombs were dropped on Kosovo per square kilometer than on any other part of Serbia, and the last remnant of a system striving to be self-sufficient was destroyed.

Fast forward again, this time to 2011 and Libya: the media claimed that Gadhafi’s army was raping women in rebel areas from its very first reports. No superficial bullshit introduction to the conflict. It was immediate. However, this time the journalists came up with an even more bizarre story: Gadhafi’s army was using Viagra! For some reason, people think that wholesale rape of women is something that a retreating army, poorly equipped and fighting an immeasurably more powerful adversary, is especially interested in raping the women. The anchor just accepted that account as fact and moved on to further vilify Muammar.

The narrative against the Serbs was spun over a full decade. The stage was set. We were guinea pigs for subsequent military interventions across the world. He’s a Hitler (Saddam, Milošević, Gadhafi, take a pick) turned into defaming entire populations and peoples. If it weren’t for the Yugoslav wars, western propagandists would have had to make more of an effort before the invasions that came later. It’s important to note that the psyop by the media was directed at western audiences, not the target populations.

 

The Beginning of Wisdom

I can’t pretend not to see what I see or try and un-know what I know. People can call it dogmatism if they want; but from my end of the telescope, I am working with facts, not theories. It’s true that others look at the same facts and come up with a different interpretation. I think this shows that intellectual cognition is limited to how much we are connected to our bodily sense of reality, which is itself dependent on recognizing (sensing) and releasing trauma.

The question then is, is a non-paranoid perspective really post-paranoia, or merely uninformed and lacking the subtleness of thought to allow for the awareness needed to incorporate the horrible truth?

Besides Dave Oshana, I have yet to meet anyone who was able to grok the reality of our predicament to the extent I can, without getting bent out of shape by it. In other words, I don’t buy it when anyone else tells me they have moved beyond this “reductionist” paranoid worldview. From where I am swimming, they have dipped their toes in and found the water too cold, then rationalized that staying in the boat is as good a way to know the depths as diving.

My last five books present the evidence for something that, with hindsight, I have known since I first arrived on this mudball and that I never quite managed to fully forget. But as recent exchanges at the site show, they aren’t especially effective in persuading anyone who isn’t ready to dive in, that diving in is the only way to get to the bottom.

By dive in, I don’t mean into my books, necessarily—or even into conspiracy research, which obviously is not for everyone—but into the trauma that blocks our awareness from seeing reality. This is not just the darker aspects (if it was we might as well stay blind), but it is primarily the darker aspects, because those are the aspects that fear of seeing keeps us from looking past, into the deeper dimensions of our being.

For some, reading my books has allowed a fog to lift from the eyes and a deepening awareness to happen, of the world and of their bodies and the traumas trapped inside. There has been some degree of liberation and release. For the rest, my books may just be mind candy and it would be better they never read them. Those who came to me via channels of conspiratainment and have only an intellectual grasp of these realities, may use them to fortify their worldview of a malevolent design without ever twigging that the devil they have to deal with is inside them, not outside.

Those who do grok the books, and have an experience of visceral horror and corresponding cathartic release, or at least of Aha!, have either already moved past the question of hidden elite control of society or can now do so. That was really just the first step, but a necessary one—before awareness, paranoia. Fear of the devil is the beginning of wisdom.

I would guess that what makes the difference, once again, is that, like Cedomir, they know what I am talking about from having been on the receiving end of it. When you have a personal direct experience of being traumatized, exploited, abused, colonized, fragmented and controlled, you instinctively know that societies and groups can also be managed this way. At a deep level, we all have had this experience, that’s very much the point. But it depends on the extent of the trauma and of our ability or willingness to retain or regain awareness of it. Without this awareness, it’s all just more “history,” words on top of words.

It’s sobering to realize that people can read my books and still not get over this first hurdle: that we have been colonized for time immemorial, that society is what it is by design—a farm, a matrix—and that this is just the nature of the world, and perhaps always has been.

 

First Hand Fall-Out

British army in Bosnia

When it comes to the actual war, the trenches, I have no first-hand experience, thankfully. I barely saved my sanity being on the sidelines observing the horrors. However, I regularly spent extended periods of time (months at a time) in Yugoslavia during the 1990s. During the sanctions of 1992-1995, I used to fly to Hungary or Romania and take a van across the border to Belgrade. I witnessed the immediate effects of the war first-hand.

The economic implosion followed by the economic depression, people losing their savings. Foreign currency exchange became dodgy men standing on street corners in loud-colored shell suits whispering “devize, devize” (foreign currency). The inflation rate was 23,000% per year during the sanctions, and family members were suddenly earning 3 Deutsche Marks (£1 at the time) a month, and were happy to have a job at all.

Many factories and companies shut down; prices increased twice daily in ‘92-’93. Long queues were ready to boil over into fights over oil, flour, salt, sugar and coffee (sometimes no one knew what was on the truck). There was rapid growth of the black market, a rise in drug abuse (specifically heroin) and alcoholism, and resulting overdoses and deaths. Guns and munitions could be bought on the green markets if you knew the right person (many brought them back from the army, and everyone knew someone).

There was a rise in crime and murder (one of my school mates murdered a mate from his tutor group on a basketball court where we grew up playing). Young men carried guns openly and threateningly. Moral values became inverted, respect and kindness became weaknesses and any means necessary was glorified. There were regular power outages. Garbage collection was irregular for months at a time and people resorted to burning rubbish in the middle of the city. Central heating became irregular and inadequate during the winter. My paternal grandfather died from a blood clot after he hit his head in the bath when the power went out and there was no electricity to power the scanner. There was severely limited access to medicine unless someone brought it from abroad. The list is not exhaustive, but you get the picture.

Imagine a regular European city become a favela almost overnight with no recovery in sight. Everything I listed, I’ve experienced. The only difference between me and my family and friends was that I knew I could leave whenever I wanted, and I spent most of the year away. Since moving to Belgrade I’ve been quizzing people across former Yugoslavia about their personal experiences. I find their testimonies to be very informative and useful in filling in the blanks regarding my understanding of events.

I’m aware of the living conditions of many Americans from documentaries and articles. I’ve visited ghettos in Europe, South Africa, South and Southeast Asia. I’m not claiming that any of the Yugoslav cities had it worse, it’s just that the change happened so suddenly and it was so dramatic that it turned peoples’ lives upside down.

 

The Age of Latahs

When the plan is to indoctrinate people and turn them into latahs, they will then carry out your plan for you with no further planning needed. People always seem to extrapolate from this the narrative of an all-powerful elite controlling everything. I say they just haven’t dug deep enough into reality (their own felt sense) to understand what I am saying and so they latch on to pre-existing Ickian narratives out there and assume I said something I haven’t said.

The qualifier is not all the people can be made into latahs, or all the time. But it is enough for society to continue to “evolve” along the tracks laid down for it, with increasingly unwitting engineers carrying it on—in ever-growing numbers—to its designated end-point. Hence the cultural bondage spreads, like a wildfire, as the global village “lights up.”

If I thought there was a real danger people would misread my work as fuel for a persecute-the-elite-drive, I would be worried. It seems to me the opposite is the case, however, and that I haven’t stated it plainly enough. This allows fence-sitters to ignore the horrible truth about how we have been culturally possessed and becomes guards in our own prison, so they can keep sitting on the fence and waste time worrying about whether I am being politically sensitive, or responsible, or whether I am verging dangerously close to nihilism. The route to truth is through nihilism, not away from it or around it; awareness through paranoia, remember?

Since I am writing about sociocultural realities, it is natural to want to put what I am saying into a social context. Ditto when I write about political aspects of reality, people want to view my statements a political ones. But this is not the context and never has been, not even when I first put paranoid pen to paper. The context is “psycho-spiritual,” and somatic. It’s experiential more than theoretical. The problem with words is that they reduce everything to the theoretical level. So I am forever hoisted with my own petard. (Had to look up what that expression means, here.)

Hollywood Uproots

While Yugoslav state film production was big budget, that only applied to propaganda films glorifying the Yugoslav Communist Party (later League of Yugoslav Socialists). All other film production was script and character based, closer to theatre than big budget films. While attending prestigious drama schools was held in high regard and state TV channels played movies from film festivals, our staple was Hollywood. I grew up watching John Weissmuller and John Wayne, not famous actors from the Soviet era. Czechoslovak animation and Soviet masterpieces were available but we were inundated with Clint Eastwood, Frank Sinatra, and Marlon Brando. We played cowboys and Indians. Popular music was in step with the West. One Yugoslav band called Idoli even appeared on Top of the Pops. We were so steeped in Hollywood, that young men on all sides during the civil war dressed like Rambo, red headband, leather fingerless gloves and face paint (none of which are standard army issue).

Hollywood undoubtedly played a key role in ideological warfare and ultimately victory. I recall my parents and their friends looking down on the Communist block and being frustrated by not living the American Dream. Even though many, like my parents, were well travelled and had visited the US, they always ignored the obvious failures of US capitalism (black youth dancing around a stereo ignited passion for the new trend, but no one bothered visit a ghetto and consider the causes of their poverty). Instead they chose to look for faults in the Yugoslav system by comparing the worst with the absolute best US had to offer. Inane shit was regularly quoted, like the salaries US garbage men earned comparative to how much they earned in middle-class jobs, never once considering the living costs, free education, healthcare, job security, etc. that Yugoslavia offered.

I recall people unquestioningly discussing life in the US through the Hollywood filter. Hollywood’s reach is truly amazing. It colonized people’s minds, ambitions, and worldviews, on a different continent in a sociopolitical system which was very much at odds with the US. Hollywood for Yugoslavs was like a beautiful woman who you have to jump through flaming hoops for, just so she might, just might, on a good day, glance your way. Other than the economic pressure from the US via the International Monetary Fund and World Bank, and the Yugoslav state security apparatus selling out wholesale, it was the spell which Hollywood cast over the Yugoslavs which hastened our demise.

Hollywood specifically, not Cassavetes or independent films, promulgated the ideas of Western Capitalism and fantastic material wealth. The American Dream enticed the early immigrants, but it had a different role in the ideological warfare between Washington and Moscow. It served to promote a system which promised to award hard work with social status, freedom and unimaginable wealth. It was complimentary soft power to the US’s control of the IMF and World Bank, as well as direct meddling.

When Ronald Reagan assumed office, he pressured the US Senate to vote against an already agreed upon IMF loan to Yugoslavia which imposed serious financial pressure. Every subsequent loan (six in total during the 1980s, more than any other country in the world for the decade) included ever-finer small print which resulted in the privatization of state-owned industry and led to increased stratification and a growing income gap. Simultaneously, the Yugoslav State Security apparatus was compromised to the extent that the head of the Serbian (Yugoslavia was made up of six constituent republics) State Security was working for the CIA and head of the Croatian branch worked for the German BND. CIA and BND worked in concert. Even during Milošević’s reign, Jovica Stanišić as the acting head of the Serbian State Security was directly working for the CIA. These claims were proven in the Hague Tribunal and by their own admission in subsequent memoirs.

The Vatican has been an open enemy of the Serbs for centuries because they are Orthodox Christians. Given that it provided safe passage to Latin America for many leading local Fascists after 1945, and that it continued to operate in Yugoslavia during Communist rule, their role should not be underestimated. However, their outreach was limited to the faithful who were few in number. They played a pivotal part in igniting the war because they were the first to recognize Slovenia and Croatia as independent states.

Hollywood propaganda was not the primary cause of the country’s dissolution, but it was one of several complementary causal factors. Certainly I would say it was higher up on the list of influences than religious differences. (Bear in mind that most people had lost contact with their religious roots and customs.) It played a central role in dominating the narrative which supported secession because the seccationist movements promised the American dream of freedom, democracy, wealth and collective abundance only if the Socialist Federative Republic was broken down to its very foundations. That would not have been possible had the Hollywood dream factory not installed itself over decades as a filter through which Yugoslavs perceived social and political reality.

USA is a relatively recent political venture so a cohesive myth, or a series of myths, which would serve as a binding factor in developing a sense of common identity was needed. The colonization of the frontier had nothing to do with its’ portrayal on the silver screen as the “Wild West,” just as WWI & WWII as historical events bear no resemblance to their Hollywood interpretations. Initially, Hollywood represented the European colonists almost exclusively. These peoples were of disparate backgrounds, coming from regions whose histories potentially saw them as mortal enemies. This reality had to be adjusted to serve daily political needs. These people suddenly became neighbors and fellow Americans. While the initial impetus for Hollywood myth making seems obvious from a nation-building perspective (and far from exclusive to USA), its’ evolution to the current state is of an entirely different level of programming and intended for audiences worldwide, or everyone within Hollywood’s reach.

I have sincerely struggled to understand how any adult can be drawn to these films. The obsession with super-hero movies is especially interesting as, unlike traditional myths, they’re not grounded in or claiming to relate to some long forgotten historical time and event. Entirely fictional characters and universes are offered as a substitute to reality not as a filter through which to relate to the world, family, community, and one’s own ancestry, which is how myths almost exclusively functioned. This entire genre seems to center around the character’s foundation myth, which is almost always a traumatic event, and everything that is all too human is depicted as a weakness, to be shunned or be embarrassed of. The stories are so plastic, thin, superficial and lacking in substance that I struggle to comprehend what the deep rooted appeal is.

An uprooted fantasy with no intentions of it bearing any relationship to reality.

 

There Is a Plan

One thing I think we can all agree on is that it’s complicated.

If people like David Icke, it’s because he makes it simple. The irony is that Icke’s view of social reality is probably closer to being a true one than Noam Chomsky’s, even though Noam is smart and David is kind of stupid (which is why he has mass appeal). Icke’s dumbed down version makes it easy for average folk to get it, but it also makes it easy for people to dabble a while in paranoid awareness and then believe they have emerged from it by adapting more sophisticated viewpoints, whether spiritualized ones, philosophical ones, or sociopolitical ones. I still probably prefer Icke’s worldview, even if it’s sort of stupid, because I think it adheres more closely to the facts.

At the same time, I think Icke probably does more harm than Chomsky ever could, and certainly the dumbed-down version—that creates a release valve and an audience cult for the growing sense of suspicion and outrage among the latahs—might be more useful to the plans of the social engineers in furthering their schismogenetic agendas. On the other hand, if people come from Icke to me, I can probably set them on the straight and narrow more easily than someone who has studied Derrida (fugeddaboudit).

Fact: There exist long-term, transnational social engineering programs that can be traced back historically to specific groups and players (without being limited to them) at least as far back as Marx, Blavatsky, and the Fabian Society. (I lump these together because of the period, not to imply they were part of a single cabal or agenda, though there are surprising convergences.)

Fact: These historically traceable agendas conform, to a surprising degree, to the current configuration of society. There are many examples of this and my recent books are filled with them (if you wish to discuss these questions in any depth with me at this site, please do yourself the favor—and me the courtesy—of reading at least a couple of them). To give just one example (one I don’t cover in my books): how the promotion and distribution of illegal drugs has brought about the destruction of inner cities and the creation of ghetto areas. This is a complicated subject and there are many variables, nuances, and so forth. There’s also the more simple case of a plan being formulated, implemented, and carried through to an expected, predictable conclusion. Black people know about this. White people get called conspiracy theorists for talking about it.

This example is factual. I would add that similar cases can be presented in hundreds if not thousands of other areas of society and history.

TL;DR: There is a plan, it is old, and it is unfolding before our eyes (2020 vision, right?).

There are certainly questions (some raised at this site) that are more nuanced and perhaps more interesting than whodunit, how, and even why. But so long as these questions dodge the Fact of a Plan, as outlined above, I find them distracting, intentionally or otherwise. I say, first acknowledge the adversary and his influence—give the devil his due. Then we can talk about what constitutes his nature and how he can be seen to be natural, or systemic, or subtly provoking (stimulating) our growth and development, despite himself, secretly working for God, or whatever.

When I think of a controlling elite, I don’t think of the Clinton Foundation, Bilderberg, or the Rockefellers. I think of Bertrand Russell, Aldous Huxley, George Bernard Shaw, H.G. Wells, some of the “finest minds” of recent times. I don’t presume to imagine I am smarter or more far-seeing than these intellectual giants. I may be more ethical, more conscious, more responsible (I hope so); but I am certainly not more intellectually prodigious.

I recognize, therefore, that those who are in control of society’s development, to whatever degree, aren’t there merely by dint of ruthlessness, savagery and self-aggrandizement, but through a kind of cunning, ingenuity, commitment, and sheer brilliance that boggles the mind. To refer to such “elite” simply as power-mad sociopaths is ridiculous, and only underscores how thoroughly hoodwinked we have been (and/or hoodwinked ourselves).

I also allow that the end they are working towards might justify the means. How can I know, so why would I speculate? I stay focused on the means, on all the broken eggs. I don’t see the omelet, or even whether there ever will be one. That isn’t the exit I am seeking. Hell is a Chinese soul trap. We cannot outsmart or out-think our jailers.

We can only transmute suffering with the willingness and deepening capacity to love. Love exists and moves in the blood and in the body—the heart, and not the mind.

****

Postscript from Cedomir, in response to some probing from me:

Irrespective of my contribution, I would like to see your text posted. It has a certain quality of finality. I have an image of you putting a book down, one that you were writing or reading. Like it’s done and dusted, you’re finished with ‘it.’

If you decide to post the text, please add in the footnotes that I’m rather fond of Icke for all his faults. It was David who helped me embody my conspiracy theorist weltanschauung and stop apologizing in conversation for having a very different outlook on world affairs. Curiously, that never occurred to me before tonight. It nicely backs your point about him. I was quite into Chomsky as well, but this particular text isn’t about the folly of youth.

Chomsky was important in my late teens, early twenties, when I was looking for academic authority figures to expose the disturbing underbelly of official history and current affairs. Icke stepped in when I realized that a sinister force was directing events throughout human history but lacked a coherent picture which I desperately needed to formulate a sensible argument and worldview. That state of being was one of uncertainty grasping for conclusions. Hadn’t yet heard of the Liminal state. NB: A case for language: the term liminal led me to and helped me allow/exist in that state.

FYI It’s not Chomsky – Icke – Horsley/Oshana, any more than it is Strieber – de Ruiter – Dave for you. You just happen to mention the two of them and I wanted to be upfront.

Chomsky is compromised as an establishment academic would be. He’s a gatekeeper. The way he dismisses ‘conspiracy theories’ is not only telling but smells of intellectual dishonesty. One would assume he would only need to look, like the rest of us, to know that 9/11 wasn’t perpetrated by Osama’s super-Jihadists. Just an example that sprung to mind. His role as gatekeeper is matched by his haughtiness and righteousness. He reminds me of my history teacher who once told me that you can gauge the truth of any current affairs topic if you read all the broadsheets while I was trying to explain that the US air-force was employing local warring factions in Yugoslavia as foot soldiers to achieve their strategic aims. He brushed it off as unfounded. The information I was sharing was first and second hand witness accounts, but it wasn’t in the Guardian or Sunday Times. An establishment mind who wants to improve the system, as if the system was ever humane. 

Icke has blind spots that he prefers not to notice. He reminds me of a failed artist who ‘made it’ late in his career/life and is convinced that he’s faultless, that he’s earlier failures were an injustice, and now can’t put a foot wrong. He’s flawed, not as a current affairs analyst, not as a man fighting the good fight, and not as a brave man, but as a truth seeker. Absence of subtlety and nuance, not the reptilians, are his Achilles’ and make him ultimately unreliable. 

Since my mid to late twenties my goal was to become independent, beyond cause and effect. So I was never in danger of being anyone’s advocate or apologetic.

59 thoughts on “Unseen Enemy: Cryptocratic Forces, Conspiracy, & the Role of Hollywood in the Dissolution of Yugoslavia”

  1. Very enlightening. I feel this has really added something to my evolving engagement with your work and understanding ‘where you’re coming from’. I think questions about the “plan” and what a “designated end-point” might be are very much where my mind is at right now. I’ve been thinking about the role of ‘evil’ in current events. Our culture pretty much pooh-poohs the concept of evil, although deep down we know it when we see it.

    I’ve started reading Judith Von Halle’s ‘The Coronavirus Pandemic – Anthroposophical Perspectives’. I heard about it after the breadcrumb trail led me to this article and the one below it: https://anthropopper.com/2020/11/14/coronavirus-and-the-indwelling-divinity-within-each-human-being/?fbclid=IwAR30bOFs2cr64RRAJn9T1hPNCdjFzdUZwE7t6uy6-pwDS_igNtFiFNIRTK0

    https://anthropopper.com/2016/09/11/how-should-we-deal-with-evil/

    Reply
  2. >Very enlightening.

    thanks Greg; if you have attained enlightenment since reading this, I will have to think about putting my prices up 😉

    Reply
  3. “But also, not so many millennia ago we were brutal primates, merrily acting out predator-prey fantasies left, right and centre without a care in the world.”

    So we’re told…….

    Reply
    • > “But also, not so many millennia ago we were brutal primates, merrily acting out
      > predator-prey fantasies left, right and centre without a care in the world.”

      > So we’re told…….

      You don’t agree with the Theory of Evolution?

      Reply
      • Theory of evolution doesn’t stipulate brutality, it just includes it as one of many traits and behaviours, including caring for the weak. There’s no reason to presume that humans were any more brutal than any other species. As far as we can tell, primitive societies capacity and propensity for violence pales in comparison to institutionalised systems of organisation, that is civilisation. Even to this day we need prodigious propaganda efforts to mobilise people to fight en masse. It’s not instinct.

        Reply
        • > Theory of evolution doesn’t stipulate brutality, it just includes it as one of many traits and behaviours, including caring for the weak. There’s no reason to presume that humans were any more brutal than any other species. As far as we can tell, primitive societies capacity and propensity for violence pales in comparison to institutionalised systems of organisation, that is civilisation. Even to this day we need prodigious propaganda efforts to mobilise people to fight en masse. It’s not instinct.

          Our mind, and the tech that it has created, can nowadays be leveraged to create good or evil on a far greater scale than our forebears had the possibility to do, yes. But the root is still genetic.

          Dominance hierarchies exist in animals. Torture exists in animals.

          Reply
        • > Our mind, and the tech that it has created, can nowadays be leveraged to create good or evil on a far greater scale than our > forebears had the possibility to do, yes. But the root is still genetic.

          > Dominance hierarchies exist in animals. Torture exists in animals.

          An apex predator in the animal kingdom, even in a really bad or desperate state, cannot wipe out an entire species. A human apex predator, armed with modern asymmetrically-powerful tech, can do just that every hour.

          Reply
  4. For me it would be better if you came up with a notion of where this so called plan is meant to be heading. David Icke does at least offer that.

    “I have an image of you putting a book down, one that you were writing or reading. Like it’s done and dusted, you’re finished with ‘it.’” Cedomir, 2020

    “not to be dismissive but a researcher has only so many hours in a day; those who dont get it, get left behind.” Jasun, 2020

    Reply
  5. Since you recently explicitly invited comments, and while I haven’t read a couple of your books yet (I plan to do so when they arrive in January), I will dare to comment ahead of time. I (think I) get the gist of what you are driving at, and am at least sufficiently intrigued to have bought those couple of books. What I don’t get is this: Sure, generally speaking sheeple are happy to be led to the slaughter by Bertrand Russell et al, the more unwittingly the better. What then is the point of telling them what they, generally speaking, do not want to hear?

    I am puzzled, I think, by your insistence that what you have to say is of relevance to more than the relatively few who are genuinely interested in or grok it. You appear to be invested in waking up the happily asleep. Why would you want to be “effective in persuading anyone who isn’t ready to dive in, that diving in is the only way to get to the bottom”? The way I see it, I only want to be kicking in open doors.

    Reply
    • hi Ben

      why would you need to kick in a door that’s open?

      Your comment assumes I have a target audience, an existing set audience, and a specific, general intent for these imaginary audiences. I pretty much address individuals or, when writing a book, I work to bring coherence to my own life, inner and outer, then share my findings. The current blogpost is a hybrid in that it was compiled of comments from this site, hence originally addressing specific individuals’ comment, but now turned into a summation of my position for clarification and a “closing of the book,” as Ced says. This is combined with Ced’s personal observations, as an example of someone with direct first-hand awareness of what I am writing about, and of the utility of mapping our parapolitical underbelly as a means to become more whole, sane, and autonomous in our own lives.

      I am not writing to awaken the “sheeple,” true enough, However,anyone who fits that description isn’t likely to end up here and is even less likely to stay long if they do.

      Reply
      • The process you describe makes sense and sounds comparable to my own, though I do not write books. Doors open to varying degrees and I refer to those which are open somewhat, perhaps just a tiny gap. As for those which are wide open, I agree that it is a waste of energy and of little benefit to anyone, to try to kick them in.

        Reply
  6. Cedomir: Thank you for this. I have a Serbian brother-in-law, and this gives me greater perspective on his experience. I think the two of you may be of similar minds.
    Jasun: Very direct without being simplistic. A clear expression of liminality. The whole piece read like listening to a song.

    Reply
    • Send my regards to your brother in law 🙂

      Please bear in mind that what I wrote is only a superficial skimming of Yugoslav history, it doesn’t do the topic any justice whatsoever, it just happened to coincide with Jasun’s recent blog post.

      Reply
  7. “By dive in, I don’t mean into my books, necessarily—or even into conspiracy research, which obviously is not for everyone—but into the trauma that blocks our awareness from seeing reality.”

    Jasun, plumbing the depths seems to have been your calling. Thankfully, so the rest of us don’t have to go as deep as you – we can just read your books instead, if interested…
    While you’ve been focusing a lot on the “plumbing” thing, others have been assessing the wiring, foundations, attic space, catering facilities, etc….
    conclusions are converging…
    Diving that deep could be enlightening as to how unsanitary the pipes are but be wary of “the bends” on ascent….

    Reply
    • there’s an assumption in the above and a flaw in the assumption; we all get to go exactly as deep as our unconscious is; and we all have our appointment with eternity therein. reading my books won’t provide anyone with anything but some orientation and emboldenment to make that trip themselves. or as aeolus once said, tickets to heaven are available, but only in hell. (oshana version 2.0: to lose hell you most loose hell)

      Reply
    • With Jasun on this one. Plumbing the depths is everyone’s calling. There is no way around it. Sooner or later, shit has to be faced and this is simply not possible to do in lieu.

      Reply
  8. Very interesting article, and some good background on Yugo that I’d missed when all that was going off. Kudos to Cedomir.

    Icke’s role in this charade is to blackwash the ‘truth movement’; yes, he rightfully nails a few of the more obvious truths, but then slips in some BS claims about the royals or the flat earth. So when you’re talking to some plank about the WTC for instance, he or she can counter you with “and I suppose you think the Queen’s a lizard, too?” Do not trust agents.

    Likewise Chomsky, who’s role now appears to be to keep leftists away from any truth. Nailed.

    Good stuff Jasun.

    Reply
  9. I believe I have a similar ‘resume’ as Ced, regarding the work / contributors that ultimately brought me to Auticulture, and to Jasun & his work. I too was red-pilled by the likes of Alex Jones and David Icke, a harsh and abrupt way to be woken up, but then again, it was in response to a brutal crime committed about 50 miles from my home (WTC 1, 2 & 7), so there was little time for gentle foreplay. Especially since my initial reaction, I’m embarrassed to say, was to join the call to ‘turn that place to glass’. (And I thought I was educated and sophisticated at the time!)

    No doubt that primitive tribal reaction was inculcated through the combined effects of my own personal life story traumas, Hollywood, public school indoctrination, and was reinforced through the confirmation bias / shared values of American middle-class rat racing.

    It must be said that both Jones and Icke each provided robust websites that aggregated a huge amount of material from various researchers that I may not have been exposed to otherwise, providing shortcuts, time efficiencies and opportunities that were rare in the early ‘00s.

    Significant personal trauma events, previously suppressed and slowly re-experienced, appear to catalyze those who wade in these waters. The opportunity presents to break out of one’s slumber and perhaps, if one is lucky, to use the experience of para-political conspiracy analysis as an adjunct to exploring those personal trauma events.

    After watching ‘Queens Gambit’ recently, I was reminded of my own clumsy attempts at becoming a competitive chess player in grade school. It was humbling and disappointing at the time to realize that there was a whole league of ‘smart’ that I would never attain. I came to understand there is a continuum of ‘smart’ in the world that extends in concentric circles to a rarified vanishing point, those able to see ‘moves’ well beyond the ability of most. The bell curve is a b**ch.

    The playbook used in Yugoslavia seems to have been dusted off, revised with a new edition that is customized for the US; the game was announced by various globalist authors long ago. An appreciation for past iterations may help one endure, at least in the short-term, as this unfolds. It seems that while we battle ‘powers and principalities’, and we must not forget that the really good chess players are usually hired to play ‘black’, due to a confluence of ignorance, vanity, bribery and when all else fails, control files. Trying to beat these forces at their own game seems to be a strategic error, while exploring the more infinite aspects within and without seems to offer us a fighting chance of success.

    Reply
    • > Significant personal trauma events,
      > previously suppressed and slowly re-
      > experienced, appear to catalyze those who > wade in these waters.

      Conspiracy theories mostly block healing from trauma in my experience.

      Whilst the mind can grip hard onto the theory, and seek to recruit others to it, we don’t have to accept and release all the feelings bound up in the psyche around compliance with authority.

      Reply
  10. Many people can substantiate their arguments and convincingly present their idea of where this is all heading. It doesn’t mean it is so, nor do I see the benefit of considering speculation as fact. What we see in the present and personally experience should suffice. If we add what we know from history we can easily conclude that centralisation of power is something to be avoided because where ever it takes us is unlikely to be humane.

    Reply
    • > If we add what we know from history we can easily conclude that centralisation of
      > power is something to be avoided because where ever it takes us is unlikely to be
      > humane.

      I agree. This is why I lost faith in the left. It all sounds great and noble and fair when it starts. But that level of power centralisation invariably attracts the biggest motherfucker around. You suddenly find all the idealistic revolutionaries have mysteriously died and now you’ve got Stalin.

      Reply
  11. The staggering amounts of money paid to celebrities and pro sports players, should be a major red flag. These people are rewarded by the system, because they play an important role in the distraction/propaganda machine. How many pro sports players behave as though they care about the poor? Yet they never denounce the astonishing amount of taxpayer dollars that have helped fund the construction of stadiums? Many times the stadiums are very near areas of abject poverty. How often do we hear Hollywood celebrities talk about social justice? Collectively they are worth billions of dollars. If they actually cared, the problems they complain about would cease to exist.

    Reply
    • I think of it as “bread and games”, both Hollywood and pro sports obviously falling into the second category. It is of interest to note that “games” originally referred to spectacles including gladiatorial fights and brutal executions by wild animals.

      Reply
  12. “I can’t pretend not to see what I see or try and un-know what I know. People can call it dogmatism if they want; but from my end of the telescope, I am working with facts, not theories. It’s true that others look at the same facts and come up with a different interpretation. I think this shows that intellectual cognition is limited to how much we are connected to our bodily sense of reality, which is itself dependent on recognizing (sensing) and releasing trauma.”

    To my mind, any one person’s perspective/perceptual bias illuminates certain aspects of reality and obscures others.

    You seem to be saying that your perspective has been shaped by the fact that you have been able to sense and release trauma and thereby have a bodily sense of reality? (or that the two things have complimented each other?) But I wonder what else is shaping your “perceptual bias”?

    I wouldn’t doubt that your perspective groks “the reality of our predicament” to a far greater extent than many other perspectives, and that others may benefit from inhabiting your perspective (I count myself in that). But it remains the case that your perspective obscures certain aspects of reality that other perspectives are able to illuminate.

    To my mind, the holding of different interpretations of the facts doesn’t necessarily imply that one is blocking going into their trauma – but no doubt that is sometimes the case as well… It might simply be that someone is looking at those facts from a different perspective and drawing different insights as a result…(who exactly is the unseen enemy?)

    On occasion it seems like you want a plumbers only club. That’s fair enough Jasun — a lingua franca can only incorporate so many differences. I’ll probably continue to hang around here a bit but prob best for both of us if I keep quiet on this issue from now on!

    Reply
    • We need electrical, carpentry, roofers, gardeners, it takes all kinds for a functioning community; but if the plumbing fails, everyone’s shit comes back up, not just the plumber’s.

      Reply
  13. Yes, and if the electricity fails, everyone is sitting in the dark; if the roofing fails, everyone is sitting in the rain; if the gardening fails, everyone goes hungry. Bonce makes a fair point, it seems to me.

    Reply
    • And yet… the plumber is the one that comes face to face with the shit. His perspective is limited, as perspectives necessarily are; but its possibilities are endless in a way that those of other perspectives are not.

      Reply
  14. There is just so much here. I’ve read all of the comments as well. I don’t want to miss out on the gems, the fruit, a chance to sample every flavor of perspective.
    Three or more years ago I ambled into a thrift store which had recently opened up in my home town. I slid past the door and came across a tall, slender man who was perched on a stool behind the counter. He was wearing what I would refer to as a Panama hat though I could be mistaken. I smiled as I moved deeper into the heart of the shop. He glanced at me. I felt his eyes I think. I left a moment or two later without stumbling, saying “thanks” as I pushed toward the door determined to visit the shop again.

    And I have, often, and I have three of Jasun’s books, two I have read, or rather digested. And Maps is luxurious.
    See ya Jasun. I will.

    Reply
  15. Jasun,

    Cedomir is attempting to gloss over the rape and genocide that occurred in Bosnia. I have personally known and listened to the first-person accounts of the survivors of those atrocities.
    Srebrinica and the rape camps happened. Divorce the facts from the narrative of political opportunists. It was real. It happened. The survivors are still alive. They are telling the truth.

    Reply
    • I don’t think Ced is saying there weren’t rapes or mass killings, just that there was distortion, exaggeration, even fabrication, of facts around this, for the purposes of propaganda

      Reply
      • I’m disappointed at the lack of caution In giving a platform to a narrative that denies that genocide occurred in Bosnia.

        This man, who admits he was not in the country while the execution phase of the genocide was being carried out, makes a baseless claim that it didn’t happen, or “It wasn’t that bad.” Compared to what? He offers no evidence. Not even statements as to the degree of exaggeration. In fact, his vagueness has the effect of making someone ignorant of the details of the historical events wonder whether anything happened at all.

        Jasun, I respect your work. At least take the minimum required time to look into the details of this story before sharing something so one-sided.

        Lars

        Reply
        • Ced is a known and trusted associate; you on the other hand have just shown up here hurling accusations; the burden of proof, introductions, and credentials, is on you.

          Reply
          • I’m sorry that I haven’t introduced myself.

            My name is Lars. I am originally from Des Moines, Iowa. Roughly ten thousand refugees of the Bosnian genocide came to Iowa in the 90s.

            I’ve gotten to know many people who lived through the genocide, whose family members were killed or harmed by it. It takes a long time for some of the details to even come out. The shame and pain are too intense. Some details, I’m sure, will never come out. They will be buried with the survivors.

            Their lives have never been the same. It still effects them today, that trauma.

            One of my close associates had a book published detailing the personal experiences of a survivor of Srebrenica.
            Read “Life Against Death: Srebrencia” by Kadir Habibović

            https://beharpublishing.com/

          • Jasun,
            With all due respect, the issue is not one of credentials though, is it? It doesn’t seem that way to me. It doesn’t matter who someone is, or how well I know them. It matters whether or not what they are saying is true. And there are objective ways to ascertain as much.

            There are objective verifiable facts surrounding the ethnic cleansing and genocide perpetrated in Bosnia by the Serbian forces.

            If you have studied the 10 Stage of Genocide, (https://www.genocidewatch.com/tenstages), you know that the final stage is “denial”.

            The Bosniak Muslims recall their experience as one of betrayal by UN “peacekeeping” forces. Later it came out that they claimed they were coerced to stand by and do nothing. Bosnian Muslims had acted in defense of their lives and liberty, responding to a civil war of aggression carried out by the Serbs. They state that they made the mistake of putting down their arms and trusting the international peacekeeping forces. And the Dutch stood by and allowed the massacre of non-combatants – many old men and young boys – and the rape of women to occur. Many of the contested points may never be clarified, having been lost in the fog of war and after the passage of time. Still, there are many facts that can be grasped and used to inform your opinion.

            The Congressional Record in the US states some of the facts of the case quite well. See “https://genocideinbosnia.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/resolution-passed-us-congress-recognizes-bosnian-genocide-1992-95/”

            Regards,

            Lars

          • there may be objective verifiable facts but in the end we can only be sure about our direct experience; when it comes to second or third hand information, then absolutely, the credentials of the one supplying it, and above all how well we know them, is essential. The medium is more important than the message. I didn’t mean I know and trust Ced as a person (tho that too) but as a historical researcher with not only a personal stake but direct experience in the area being discussed. So far, your criticisms have been vague and general and not around specific facts but the framing, which you appear to object to. Ironically, that is the same point Ced is making, that there was a specific “frame job” to the mainstream reporting. Are you disagreeing with that too?

            At this point, this is between you & Ced. I am allowing the space to be used for this, in the interests of fairness. Since I can’t comment on the specifics of this particular slice of history, I suggest you address Ced directly, and that you are precise & specific about which statements in his post you consider false or misrepresentative. He can then respond to those exact criticisms, if he chooses. Otherwise, I predict the discussion will go nowhere.

        • My mother is from Bosnia. I have family and friends in Bosnia. I visit Bosnia relatively regularly and have spoken to many people from all sides since 1995. Rape and torture of civilians occurred and the victims as well as the perpetrators can be found on all three sides. Approximately 100,000 are thought to have died in Bosnia and the dead reflect the demographic, Bosnian Muslims/Bosniak, Serbs and Croats. The slaughter of civilians in Srebrenica happened. I have a friend who’s mother still lives there and I had a Muslim colleague from Srebrenica who gave me some insight into the what occurred. What you have to understand, if you care to, is that Srebrenica was an enclave and centre of a massive Bosnian Muslim offensive against the local Serb population. It failed as a military venture but not before a bloodbath. The genocide you refer to was retribution. Srebrenica is not representative of the wider war.

          I am Serb and have always been pro-Yugoslav, I still am. You don’t seem to know very much about our history if you think that Srebrenica and rape is all that we’re about. You’re parroting the very narrative which was used to alienate us and present us as the barbarians at the gate’s of civilisation.

          My contribution to the above text isn’t one sided as you claim but is superficial and inadequate as I’ve clearly stated several times. For the topic to be treated justly it would require many books. Please note, hundreds of books have been written. My text came about as an exchange with someone on another blog post and is about media misrepresentation.

          Can I just quickly remind you that US sanctions caused estimated 500,000 deaths in Iraq: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RM0uvgHKZe8. So, in light of US foreign policy throughout the world, we ended up having it easy.

          has been proven to be false and at its core straight forward propaganda. In addition, it’s a tiny fragment of what happened to us. I personally empathise with everyone who died in Yugoslavia, irrespective of national or religious identity

          What you clearly don’t know is the wider context

          Western powers caused the war.

          Reply
          • The US absolutely engaged in war for profit from the LBJ presidency right through until Trump started to pull the plug on it. In Vietnam they realised just how quickly you could transfer taxpayers $ into arms manufacturers pockets, with kickbacks all down the line, and that set the stage for Central Asia, Middle East and North Africa.

            I’m not sure if Yugoslavia fits in the same pattern though.

        • If you care at all what happened in Yugoslavia and Bosnia in particular, do us the common courtesy of reading up on our history and try to understand what happened from different perspectives, Great Power interests and foreign policy as well as local political leadership during the 1990s is not a bad place to start. Always keep the historical context in mind, the war didn’t happen in a vacuum just because you don’t know the background to these events. Kadir’s testimony is just one piece of information.

          Reply
  16. The idea idea were being manipulated is obviouse and in plain sight .
    Any time I turn on the TV media irrespective of what country there constantly reminding me where I’m at (how could I not know where I’m at?)
    ‘They’ continue with what I’m suppose to like , suppose to be like and so on. Repeating a endlessly. As far as I know repetition is a form of manipulation (and not to subtle).

    Dangerously close to nihilism?
    Paranoia, a path to truth?
    I’ll have to read to find out
    Which is a reasonable thing to ask.

    ‘Secretly working for god’
    Just to good to let go by without mention

    Reply
  17. Lars, I never once said that many Bosnian Muslims didn’t suffer a terrible fate during the 90s. All that I said was that the information presented in foreign media was manipulated to the point of absurdity with the express aim to get the Western public on board in the process of destroying a country, Yugoslavia. Serbs were signaled out for a variety of reasons, not least because they were the most populous, they were a constituent people in four of the six republics of the Federation and that the vast majority opposed the break up of SFRY. In short, they were an obstacle to the country’s dissolution. My point is, the media intentionally misrepresented what was happening for the purposes of propaganda and in order to justify Western involvement which required public support. That’s what the media do all the time, it’s their modus operandi. The fact that you fail to mention casualties of other ethnic/national/religious groups or foreign intelligence, military and financial involvement proves my point. Your perspective is one sided and officially sanctioned.

    For me, the Yugoslav Wars aren’t about the blame game, who’d done what according to the internationally (read Western) prescribed parameters of discussion and debate. It’s about what actually happened. What I found is that it’s a microcosm of what is and has been occurring world wide. This is a topic close to my heart and I’ve been studying it for nearly 30 years. You’ve taken a point from the my text out of context, imposed an entirely new meaning while ascribing it to me, then extrapolated something I have never claimed.

    If you want to continue this discussion, ask Jasun for my email address, the comments sections is not suitable for lengthy discussion, I couldn’t directly reply to your comment.

    Reply
    • .. What I’ve found is that it is a microcosm of what is and what has been occurring world wide….. for many years.
      What happened and the fallout needs to be remembered. I appreciate your perspective here. I’ve some knowledge of it through several documentaries and a face to face account of one Canadian chaplin who was sent to the front, had a heart attack”myocardial infarction” and was promptly flown home. What he recounted of those few days left him scarred for life.
      There is a documentary floating around about the issues many of the women faced in the aftermath including trauma, but with the focus on unwanted pregnancies, abortions, and orphanages. All of those poor souls who were left in these horrendous places were unloved, forgotten and subsequently damaged.
      Propaganda! Will the masses ever learn that the media is merely an implement of persuasion, and never one of unbiased truth. Ever.
      Thank you Cedomir

      Reply
  18. Some of your best writing, and accentuated and corroborated by Cedomir’s visceral, earnest and on-the-ground perspective. The two work brilliantly together to simultaneously weave and unravel narratives where control collapses and only surrender offers liberation.

    Reply
  19. From what I’ve heard shared, the testomonies of the horrors that the women went through were hellish if not Hell itself.

    What boggles the mind is that people can turn on each other in such psychopathic manner. It almost works in favour of the argument that humans are instinctively dangerous if provided the environment to express it. However, as time passes more stories of courage, self-sacrifice and empathy come out. People who risked their lives to save others. Just like the sadists could be found on all warring sides, so could people who stood up for morality against all odds. It’s a shame, and I’m sure not a coincidence, that these stories don’t receive publicity or attention.

    Reply
    • ….Likely because most people don’t want to know that they too could be reduced to such depravity. All that is needed is a lack of consequences. The heart of man is deceitful….

      During WW2 many of those with power eventually acted in ways that could be considered demonic I’ve watched countless b/w films/documentaries from a variety of countries about the Nazis. Hitler, the SS etc. and have listened to more than a few dozen testimonies recounting the atrocities these survivors witnessed and endured. Seventy-five years have passed and these survivors still do not know how people could stoop to performing such evil acts against humanity.
      The murder of innocent people have been going on since the beginning of time and will not end until time stops.
      A Nazi murdered my friend in 1967. We were not at war. He enjoyed it, getting away with murder. There was no consequence for him as he went to his grave never having to face a prosecution and conviction. I tried and failed. I could hate him but that would make me a little bit like him. I refuse.
      I’m looking at the war you have experienced now. Knowing what people can survive is valuable to me and enriches my experience. Keep well.

      Reply
  20. The Jungians would probably say that the unseen enemy could be viewed in the mirror, if one cared to look. The devil invites me to have a drink with him. “Just a little glass of wine, you’ve had a hard day, you deserve it”, says he. Who said that? Is it from me, to me? Or something else?

    Reply
      • I always meant to read that book. I guess I’ll have to find a copy! Lately I’ve been pointing out to the wino that really, my day was not that hard, he’s exaggerating, -seems to shut him up. My wine consumption has dropped greatly.

        Reply

Leave a Comment