A ghost among us

Have you ever experienced a “Duh!” Moment where you slap your forehead upon seeing something painfully obvious? I had such a moment last evening.

Go back to the year 2000, and the presidential election. Normally, the parties just take turns. The person holding the office is a ribbon cutter, not much more. Some, like Clinton and Obama, are very good at it, having good memories and stage presence being very good at making speeches. They seem presidential, and that is the only real job requirement.

Those two were groomed for the office. The fact that each changed their names at a young age is a hint that they were being prepared for big things ahead. (Oddly, Gerald Ford changed his name at a young age too.) They were on the calendar, so to speak, scheduled to burst on the scene, as if spontaneous.

George Herbert Walker Bush is a powerful man, and apparently a talented man as well. He must be a very efficient administrator, a “gets the job done” kind of guy. He served as president unofficially for eight years, and officially for four. He was then moved aside by Ross Perot to make way for Clinton. But he never lost touch, never really left the realm of power, or so it appears.

His son, George W. Bush was a clown, a man who lacked gravitas, abhorred study and had to be puffed up by PR staff to be electable. In a real world if these men, the candidates, were more than images in a TV screen, he could not have been elected constable of Podunk county. But he was chosen, and more than chosen, was forced on us. When it became apparent that Al Gore was going to win in 2000, the Supreme Court stepped in and just outright handed the office to Bush. It mattered a whole lot to some very powerful people that Bush, and not Gore, hold that fake office.

Why? Here is my “duh!” moment. It was not about electing W, but rather returning HW to power. 9/11 was on the calendar, and they wanted a man with a proven track record to manage the Oval Office end of it. The government was only a small part of the events of that day, but it required someone with brains and administrative skill to make sure that end of the operation held together. No screw ups!

George Herbert Walker Bush may be one if the most important men ever to crawl about in the alleys of power in this country. He was there for the Bay of Pigs, for JFK’s departure, for Watergate, Iran Contra,  Reagan’s departure, the Afghanistan War, the Iraq attacks. He ran the CIA while Ford was president. He was de facto president from ’80 to 88, and then for real for four years after that. And now I realize that he was there for 9/11 too.

He’s an old man now, soon to depart, and I won’t shed a tear. But I am in awe of his accomplishments. He’s been like a ghostly presence in all of the important [public] events in this country for the last fifty years or more.

About Mark Tokarski

Just a man who likes to read, argue, and occasionally be surprised.
This entry was posted in American wilderness. Bookmark the permalink.

20 Responses to A ghost among us

  1. steve kelly says:

    Prescott was no slouch either. Without W. A. Harriman clout, it never could have happened.

    Like

  2. you really should investigate the occult.

    Like

    • I do not know where to start. I have read what Mathis has to say about it, that throughout history it has been a hiding place for intelligence – have we covered this ground before? Intelligence did not believe in it at all, but used it as cover as it would frighten regular people away, allowing them freedom to operate. Aleister Crowley was, according to Mathis, British intelligence. In the same manner they use numerology – the numbers 8, 33, 46, 47 and 94 having significance. It is nothing but a way of signalling to one another … “Hey – we are here.” (Sharon Tate’s supposed Social Security number, for instance, was 452-74-4733.)

      But like I say, I don’t know where to begin. It’s another rabbit hole?

      Like

      • I think in order to take the occult seriously, which I do, you have to be open to the possibility that forces beyond what our 5 senses can perceive actually exist. even if you don’t necessarily believe that to be a possibility, those in power may truly believe in those forces and may do things that appear illogical.

        Like

  3. Rob Kailey says:

    Actually, Mark, science has explained all the work of Nikola Tesla. We, as a species, have simply failed to put much of it to good use. The ‘free energy weapon’ you theorize committed 9/11 wouldn’t be possible without Tesla. Nor would your microwave. And I remain horribly amused by your fear of a word that accurately and succinctly describes your view of power, just because it’s ‘icky’ and might drive people away. The word “Illuminati” simply describes what you posit can’t be seen, and in fact has never been seen, a unified order of controlling power. Those who claim to have seen it participate in the worst form of rational discordance, religion. What you claim is truth, I see as mythology, and have no fear of applying an apt name to it. Most people don’t, and if that drives them away why should you be concerned? That is, if you’ve really found truth …

    Lizard, Mark would find little use in a study of the occult. Whether one follows the ritual paths of Catholic religion, Masonic order, Kabbalistic efforts like The Order of the Golden Dawn, Satanism, Scientology, Crowley’s Sex magicks, or even any of the new Wiccan efforts, one always finds the very discordance that stands against Mark’s ultimate thesis. Power must have an ultimate order. No, it really doesn’t and never has. What all those things have in common are entropy and complexity. The amount of energy put into keeping a system at ordered state must increase as the complexity increases, but all systems will reach a singularity where the order overlay, often only imagined, breaks down.

    Since, Mark, you will likely ponce in with your usual insult and foolishness, I have read Regardie’s “Order of the Golden Dawn” cover to cover. I have read Barrett’s “The Magus”, cover to cover. From Crowley, I have read “Magick in Theory and Practice”, “The Book of Thoth”, “The Book of Law”, “The Book of Lies” and “Magick”. I’ve read the Bible many times, and the Master Mason’s handbook. I have read “The Satanic Bible”, Modern Satanism” and “The Devil and Philosophy” by LeVay. I’ve even read “Dianetics” and “The Book of Mormon”. (Most of those books are still in my paired down library, though not Dianetics. That sucked.) I’ve been a student of physics since junior high, and still studying to this day studying lectures from Hawking and DeGrasse Tyson. Thanks to my wife who purchases such things for me. So, if you want to think yourself superior because I’ve tortured myself in my life, feel free. If you want to claim I don’t know anything about the Occult, you might want to think again there, Pup.

    Like

    • It is “pared” down.

      Like

    • That was snippy, I know. That’s a common mistake people make, along with “baited” instead of “bated” breath. I’ll answer that comment tomorrow morning. Red flags pop up everywhere on first reading.

      Like

      • Rob Kailey says:

        Yes, it was snippy.
        http://boingboing.net/2012/12/13/literacy-privilege-or-why-gr.html

        Irregardless, Mark (deliberate), I am certain you will answer in the same manner you always do: You will claim lies and dysfunction from a commenter because their comment doesn’t suit your mythos. We’ve all seen that dozens of times, as it suits your ridiculous idea that ‘blogging is combat’, stupid on its face. To you, anything that disagrees is a “red flag”.

        Here’s another notion you might want to deal with in your oh so anticipated response: The Truthers, people you claim are just establishment misdirection, made the connection between GHW Bush and 9/11 about 14 years ago. What took you so long, smart guy? Are you just going to argue that when they brought it up it was elegant cover, but your revelation is somehow significant? I wait with baited breath.

        Like

      • My question was “why is he doing this, giving me a laundry list of books he has read, tossing his wife in as accomplice for good measure?” It’s validation, I suppose. So validate away. I don’t care. The purpose of reading, or one purpose anyway, is to gain insight, background, understanding of this incomprehensible world. So tell me, after that laundry list, what insight you’ve gained? I’ve read your writing on politics, and you don’t have any more than a rudimentary grasp of it. I’ve seen you bloviate on math and philosophy, demanding respect when you are obviously putting up a false front. So the laundry list is, as far as I can see, just another fake move.

        If you had not done the Monty stunt … We’d never be friends, but I would not have manhandled you as I have over the years. That was the coldest and most calculated thing I’ve ever seen, bar none. And just as it took me years to understand the HW connection, so too did it take me a few years to understand that. I am not the smartest person Around and can be fooled. So what?

        Regarding the occult, I have seen very little evidence of any of the other realm. I know Tesla’s work was confiscated at his death, so if you say science has grasped it all, it’s been done in secret, so you must be in on that. I’ve seen some evidence of human ability to communicate over distance without aid, and know we all possess, to varying degrees, the ability to read one another by visual and audial clues. I know we are programmable, can be mind controlled, continuing research probably the purpose of Gitmo. I have heard from my brother, a priest, tales of other-worldly interventions, ghosts and the like. He was highly skeptical, and yet was convinced he did not understand everything around us, that other realms came into play. My daughter had a ghostly experience that to this day troubles her.

        But I have not. So until I do, I am going to hold that whole world at bay. I saw, in my reading about Son of Sam, how people were manipuated into compromised positions by interacting with Satanic “worshipers,” I guess is the word. But I view that as our intelligence operatives working behind the scenes to create these nightmarish events, for sake of control of the public mind. In those days they did serial killers, these days it is mass shootings. But that is all understandable. It’s manipulation, not the “occult.” I am [not] going to spend time on it. Life is short.

        Like

        • personally I think demonic forces do exist and they can come through mediums. much of the occult literature has supposedly come through this way, including Blavatsky’s Secret Doctrine and Crowley’s Book of the Law. One of my favorite poets, William Butler Yeats, had a wife who helped him transcribe information from some other-worldly source. I also recently read an account from a priest who was close friends with Philip K. Dick. his son committed suicide and he communicated with what he thought was his son.

          Like

        • That’s very interesting, and I do not discount such things nor those who report having experiences. I am just outside the realm myself.

          My first venture into Theosophy last evening led me to the paper below, which is only a few pages about Blavatsky and William Olcott before he devotes the rest to the beat poets. Yeats features as one who was “ensnared” by Golden Dawn, to his everlasting shame. Not my words.

          http://mileswmathis.com/beat.pdf

          Like

  4. I see what you have read, now what do you believe, Rob?

    Like

    • Rob Kailey says:

      Because I am nothing like the caricature that Conspiro puts forth, what I “believe” is vastly more difficult to define than what I don’t. I have a general problem with the word itself because it is so often misapplied. I don’t “believe” in evolution. I know it as fact, as any reasonable person would. I don’t believe in mathematics or physics. I know them as verifiable and definable constants. I don’t believe in science. It’s a method of learning, not a religion.

      If there is something I do ‘believe’ in, it’s people, my species. We’re capable of the most profound magics usually without even knowing how or why we’ve accomplished things so impressive to others. I believe in mythologies, that we all have them and hold tightly to them. That’s what makes us people. I don’t believe in demonic forces; I believe in demonic people. I don’t believe in holy forces; I believe in holy people. I believe in experience. That’s how I knew that Mark would respond in precisely the manner I predicted. I shake his mythology, because of my core belief. I believe in chaos as the fundamental organizing principle of all that is. Entropy is a known, in which everything strives for it’s lowest state of energy output. To people, entropy is chaos, and to that degree demonic only because we have a will, a reason and an interest in prescribing order. We just rarely understand that order comes at a cost. The more complex the organism, the more complex the cost, the more energy that must be input to keep the order prescribed by mythology. That doesn’t work; it never has. Conspiro thinks that there is an order to power. I know that there is no order to it save that whomever is strong yearns for more, and will happily sacrifice any who get in their way. I don’t believe in an Illuminati, not because the word is icky, but because of experience. The powerful will eat their own at the first opportunity. It is chaos, at heart.

      I find the occult fun. There was a time in my life where I found it profound and ‘believed’ in magic. I still believe that magical ritual can teach us about ourselves and our roles as people. I have been reading Tarot for 30 years, and still do so at the request of friends. I still engage in the game enough to get rid of a deck I find spiritually difficult. I would happily read for you any time you’d like. But I don’t ‘believe in it’. I find it compelling, instructive, human. It helps build mythologies. It’s a people thing. That’s what I believe in.

      Like

      • That’s how I knew that Mark would respond in precisely the manner I predicted.

        You are such a liar! And a bad one to boot, as your lies so easily dissemble. You did not know anything. If you had you’d have out your cards on the table.

        I’ve met many people over these blogging years, and you are perhaps the weirdest, surely the meanest (though your brother is no peach). You are steeped in lies, fake fronts, illusary accomplishments (the best philosophy student ever to graduate MSU*). If you were engaged in propaganda, as Pogie is, it would make more sense, as the lies are meant to clutter the landscape and protect one set of jackasses from another. But your lies are about yourself. I long ago realized you were scheming and unintelligent. Then the question became why I became the object of your scheming. Because at the time of the Monty stunt, I hadn’t seen through you at all. I thought you were a genuine person.

        I don’t say this often, as this thing called “mental illness” is such a farce. It’s a dragnet term used to justify intervention and drugging of people. But you are some kind of specimen, a liar all the way down to the core, surely without genuine emotion. It’s not illness, not curable. You appear to be simply a sociopath who is not very good at scheming, and so one who is mired in poverty and desperation. Too bad for you, book store boy.

        *This is an interesting aspect: you did indeed go on a long rant about your matriculation in philosophy at MSU, and you know it and I know it. Your only interest in denying it now is not to fool me, as you know that game ended, but to fool others. Fewer and fewer buy your bullshit, which is probably why you retreated into football.

        Like

        • Rob Kailey says:

          It’s always funny to me how much ‘you know and I know’ when you go to such great lengths to tell me how little I know and never offer a shred of evidence about ‘what I know’. I’ve posted my Diploma online, Conspiro, as well as my graduation credentials. That wasn’t ‘validation’, as you would have it. It was evidence, evidence you refuse to even acknowledge, about a monster in your particularly twisted mythology. It shut Norma up, but apparently you’re not as smart as she is. You tell me what I’ve read, what I’ve done and who I am. That’s a particular mental illness you might want to examine someday, but I know you won’t, just as I knew that your only response to me would be a sputtering and emotional verbal defecation about how horrid a person I am.

          Heres a thing or two that I’ve learned about you, Conspiro. You’ve never managed people before or were shockingly unsuccessful when you did. See, your mythology holds a striking degree of conventional wisdom to it, that the strong can lift the weak when the strong has motivation to succeed. Experience has taught me that when you pair the strong with the weak, whatever effort is assigned will fall to the lowest common denominator. A grouping of capable if not exceptional people will always out-perform a grouping of the incapable with the exceptional. Experience has taught me that, management and, yes, football. Your conspiracies always rely on the weakest link remaining strong, and it’s been mathematically and statistically proven that almost never happens. The more complex the gambit, the less likely that all parties will maintain the illusion. 9/11 wasn’t what you postulate. It may not be what the official story says, but it wasn’t the well planned and executed energy beam you fantasize about. Sandy Hook wasn’t faked; neither was Aurora, Colorado, or the Boston Marathon bombing. AIDS is not a myth, nor is Ebola.

          The dynamic between weak and strong is what has altered blogging in Montana. There was a community of bloggers, not the best but most certainly capable. We actually talked to each other, and agreed to find a particular commonality of intelligence and personhood. Then a toxic element was added. Yes, that would be you, Conspiro, the one who made all effort simply not worth doing. You were, and remain, the weakest link. Thanks to you, we have blogging by Norma, and Cowgirl. We have one of the few remaining intelligent blogs consistently attacking another, as if either efforts are served. “Blogging is combat”, your words, weak one. What do you really think blogging is? Are you as stupid as you have expressed? Most of us hold to the idea that blogging is to express our own ideas, our own mythologies. But not you, Conspiro. You think bloging is to serve you. You accuse me of sociopathy, and yet you only acknowledge that you alone can make writing a personal endeavor. Everyone else must write to your satisfaction. You are the weak link, Mark, and have already damaged the exercise for JC and Lizard. They may not see it, but I do. Your will, your belief that only you have a truth is toxic, stupid, and taints every site that still allows your presence. You are the weak paired with the strong and dragging it all down to your level.

          Heres what I know about you, Conspiro: you fantasize about power that somehow doesn’t affect you because you have changed in your life. You flood the band with your bombast about how you know everything that is and can be real to someone, anyone else. You are nothing more than a weak comic book villain. Here’s something I believe and has yet to be dis-proven, Conspiro. Change is inevitable, to struggle is an option. That doesn’t apply only to you, save in your shitty little mythos. Lizard is not the same as he was 10 years ago and not the same he will be in 10 more. I am not the same as I was when I started blogging 13 and 1/2 years ago. No one is the same as you envision them, because your vision is clouded by self-importance. You are the problem, Cupcake, not any solution. By all means, keep blogging. Your mythology is fun to read. Pretend all you want. But you are nothing other than an old white guy foisting his religion on others and thinking less of them when they laugh at your weakness. That’s what I know.

          Like

          • I have always noted about you that the more you write, the less intelligible you become. I did not question your diploma, don’t care about it, did not bring it up. I merely recited my very good memory that you bloviated on your excellence in philosophy, to a sickening degree. And here is what else was apparent: you didn’t cut it. You made no sense. It had to be bullshit, and this was a deep tell into your character. You were pretending.

            Your second paragraph is evidence of your inability to think well. It makes no fucking sense.

            Your third paragraph on blogging in Montana relies on your own excellence, and that of others, and sorta ignores the Monty stunt, which sullied the ball game and exposed you for what you are, a liar and coward. And if you guys were really interested in moving forward, rather than feeding each other’s narcissism, you’d welcome dissent. Instead, you hated it, hated anyone who saw through you. You were lightweights, though I admit I developed admiration for Budge.

            And your last paragraph … I am not the same as I was one year ago. You are the same as when I met you. You know nothing, expound on your own excellence, and creep me out. You’re a loser, and a liar to boot.

            Like

          • PS: For you to determine whether Sandy Hook, Boston, AIDS, all of that is real or fake requires that you 1) Crack a book, and 2) stop getting your opinions from authority figures. Good luck on both, as I don’t see you capable of either.

            Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s