Monday, August 31, 2015

The Production of Evil


[Sometimes a peеk behind the Iron Curtain erected by western media can be most instructive. However, this can be rather difficult to do for those who can only read in English or other western European languages. And so, to show you what people are thinking out in the big world where most people live, here is a translation of an opinion piece that appeared recently in the Russian press. If any of this is a surprise to you, you need to do more research. Enjoy!]

The word “ISIS” was laid out in the same font as the word “Hollywood.”

ISIS fighters executed the director of the architectural complex at Palmira, The 82-year-old Khalid Al Asaad was beheaded, and his body was hung on an antique column in the main town square.

ISIS has created a name for itself not just because of their exceptional cruelty. Lots of people can be cruel. But usually countries, organizations and people hide their cruelty. They hide it even if they aren't ashamed of it, but ISIS is demonstratively cruel, for the sake of the show.

But even this isn't news. Lots of people kill other people, behead them, blow them up with bombs, or tear them apart with their bare hands. You can't surprise anybody with that. People hang each other on city squares, behead each other at gas stations, send each other to gas chambers and seat each other in electric chairs.

ISIS is different from all the other executioners in that it didn't just turn death and atrocity into a show, but in that it has then turned this show into art. ISIS is not ashamed of the fact that it is evil. It doesn't hide it. It tells of its evilness, of its hatred, of its inhumanity, even its anti-humanity—on a Hollywood scale and with Broadway pizzazz.

What ISIS does is not amateur evil, it is not evil for the sake of monetary gain, it is not evil for the sake of power. It is evil for the sake of demonstration. ISIS is a government of artists, of poets, movie directors and produces, of makeup artists of evil.

There is such a concept as a “creative handwriting.”

The word “ISIS” is inscribed in the same font as the word “Hollywood” on a hill in Southern California.

The orange robes, the convulsions of a man being burned alive, the blood which spurts at the camera, the assembly-line executions by firing squad—all of this is done with relish, from different angles, with good quality camerawork and post-production.

The screenplay, the production, the costumes, the camerawork—all of these are obviously those of professionals from western culture.

How should evil portray itself from the point of you of a western person? It has to fall from above and smash the symbol of western civilization, of its freedom and power. Evil must throw down a challenge.

Do you remember the terrible video clips of airliners flying into skyscrapers? Do you remember the silent screams of people running away from collapsing buildings? Do you remember how they were raining down? This was all filmed from a multitude of vantage points—slowly, methodically, majestically—the skyscrapers seemed to be submerging in the earth.

These two symbols of American greatness—the towers of the World Trade Center, the towers of money, of freedom, of power and potential, of national pride—were destroyed with an audience in mind—western audience—and had the same “creative handwriting” as the atrocities now being perpetuated by ISIS.

I don't suppose I'll surprise anyone at all, and won't say anything new, if I say that both Al Qaeda and ISIS are western creations. This is old news. I am just mentioning this as a reminder. And the “creative handwriting” of their latest deeds speaks to the fact that they also share the same goal. No, it's not the governments in Lebanon or Iraq or Afghanistan. Their goal is the west itself.

If you can't unite your subjects by serving their common interests, you can do it using a common enemy. And if this common enemy doesn't exist—no problem, you can create one with your own hands. You can give it the opportunity to grow up, give it weapons, grant it immunity and release it into the world.

The most important thing in such a creation is that it must be horrible. It must be self-evidently horrible. So horrible that everyone—even the idiots—could understand that this—this thing covered in blood, holding a torn-off human leg in its hand—is the only alternative to having the United States of America in complete control of everything. That burning people alive, mass executions, beheadings, sanctioned rapes—this is the only alternative to gay marriage, feminism, total surveillance of everyone and extraterritorial American “justice.”

The western establishment is nurturing ISIS like an attack dog, feeding it, training it to like human blood, in order to then release it and offer people the freedom of choice: you can die in its teeth, or you can hide behind a gate, the keys to which are in the hands of global capitalism. And they will charge you for the entry—but not in money. That is, not just in money. The payment they require is your freedom—your right to choose for yourself what is good and what is evil. Anyone who wants to enter has to relinquish this right, and give it to the owner. Because anyone who enters through the gate automatically acquires an owner.

The history of the 1930s is repeating itself, except that now those who want to reform the world order are not facing the countermodern phenomenon of Nazism, but the countermodern (or post-modern) phenomenon of radical Islam—of an archaic being with a torch, a knife and a videocamera. His role—to herd all of humanity into a single project, to rid the world of alternatives, by replacing with itself or by destroying everything that could possible offer the world alternative paths of development.

In this case, the means tell us everything there is to know about the goal.

The goal is power through any means—power to set entry fees for all those who want to be safe behind the locked gate. Needless to say, there will be no possibility of exit. It's not in the plans.

Roman Nosikov, lawyer, publicist, author of journal “Однако”.
August 28, 2015


beetleswamp said...

It's always amusing when people ask me to prove that the CIA created and funded ISIS. I'm starting to think they just want to punish me with extra work for telling them what they refuse to see, despite a well-documented and very public blood and money trail.

"Do another couple laps around the field and then we can return to arguing if the grass is green or not."

Notmy Realname said...

"No snowflake in an avalanche ever feels responsible."

Veronica said...

Well, well - thank you Roman, thank you Dmitry - a very crystallizing piece. I don't presume to agree or disagree - I don't know enough - but the depth of this perspective puts a lot of my un-thought-out observations into words. I am in your debt. Our western cultural mirrors need to be replaced with more windows like this.

NowhereMan said...

Brilliant! Try getting this sentiment out there in any of the so-called main stream "liberal" blogs!

Spleen said...

Right from the start, I definitely had the feeling that ISIS was a dupe-group. Everything about them seemed just a little too perfect: the digital media savvy, the fleet of matching white Toyota pick-ups, the cartoon violence, the proclamation of a new 'global caliphate', et al. The only question I had then--and still have now--is who's really behind them? The CIA? Turkey's MIT? Mossad? Saudi intelligence? Qatar? Some combination thereof?

NowhereMan said...

The only question I had then--and still have now--is who's really behind them? The CIA? Turkey's MIT? Mossad? Saudi intelligence? Qatar? Some combination thereof?

My guess is the latter, with the CIA, of course, probably stirring the drink as the key organizer. Only twenty years after the fact, the movie Wag the Dog looks less like a lighthearted imaginative political romp, and much more like an actual tutorial/predictor for how 21st century warfare would be conducted here in the west.

krautsky said...

You really have to ask? Even some of the liberal presse are aware of the background of ISIS:

and the alternates as well:

Helix said...

NowhereMan - I fail to see how this has anything to do with Liberal vs. Conservative American politics. Or doesn't that matter?

Larkin said...

The author of this stunning piece, Roman Nosikov mentions the graphic savvy in the use of the Hollywood sign font for ISIS.

Even before the speculation about ISIS being funded by the US for provoking or proxy purposes, I wondered at the use of the term "Islamic State" The only other political entity in West Asia to use it was the casual term "The Jewish State". State is a Western or European concept and the fact that only Israel officially or unofficially used it would be reason enough for ISIS not to use it.

It does reek of concoction.