II. “Behind the Mirrors” of the Year 2015

In its January 2015 issue the British magazine “The Economist” put on the title page a picture, a kind of collage, as a New Year’s greeting to its readers.

It seems to us that the picture is an allegorical prognosis of what the world is to expect in the current year. But we are not alone in this, because there are already articles in the Internet in which the authors try to decipher the allegory in terms of a political forecast. They say that the magazine has “behind the looking glass”[1], or behind the scenes, far-reaching connections with the occult-political world élite. This is not the first time it is playing with allegories. After all, it was in this magazine that the world map which we showed in the first Part of our study was published.

We will not repeat what in the allegory has already been deciphered – anyone can read it in the Internet. We will try to convey what in it, in our opinion, humanity is promised for this and perhaps future years.

The picture is a kind of vision of Alice, as she stands before the new “Wonderland” – this time a political one. Sitting in front of her on a branch is the famous Cheshire cat. Here, it is not grinning, it simply has a forbidding expression. The Presidents (not all of them) are smiling, though we all know the value of a diplomatic smile. But the Cheshire cat is – not a diplomat.

In the lower right-hand corner of the picture one can see in a luxurious frame a masterpiece (Belle Ferronierè) of the artist from the school of Leonardo da Vinci; it is lodged in a heap of sand, if not rubble. This obviously means that in the future the process of destruction, annihilation, the “flinging in the waste-paper basket” of the great cultural heritage of mankind is to continue.

Straight in front of Alice is the Prime minister of India. His posture expresses graphically the religiously-tinged political mood of the Orient, full of – in the view of the materialistic West – unfounded and illusory idealism. The East still looks to Brahman, who illumines the world with his rays. He is bringing the world a wonderful future. This is all that should concern the human being on earth. The fantastic aspect of this mood is underlined by the figure suspended in the air, drawn from the popular film production “Spiderman”. Meanwhile, on the ground the feet of the optimistic gentlemen are being run into by a small lorry at whose wheel is sitting, as one of the commentators remarked, someone who resembles the Queen of England.

At the left-hand border of the picture we see the figure of the rat- catcher, the character from the well-known story, the Pied Piper. Playing on his magic pipe, he will lead not only all the rats, but all the children, too, out of the town, never to be seen again. In our own time this is a world-wide ideologue who seduces, carries off, one generation after the other through the powerful means of pop, pseudo-culture. Generations, who are lost for the development of genuine culture, and without them – culture dies. The new Pied Piper lures children and young people with computer games, mobile phones, an entire virtual reality. This is the maya of the West, as contrasted with the maya of the East. The magazine wants to tell us that all this will continue. Because it is indeed an integral and even chief part of the globalization project.

In the background behind the figure of Putin, the figure of Napoleon Bonaparte is visible. Personalities of the oriental world are grouped around him. He brings to expression their Bonapartist mood – the intention to dominate the West.

Of immense interest is the figure from Chinese (Japanese) painting placed near the figure of Bonaparte. It is shown here as an archetype of Chinese (Japanese) man, and even of the spirit of the ancient Orient. He looks interestedly at an atomic bomb explosion rising directly above Cameron’s head. The spirit is probably thinking: If these people (the West) carry on like this, our victory over them will be assured. This strikes us as the most disturbing theme of the allegory. Let us try to explain why. This means we must recall a number of things from the recent past.

In May 2010 a joint report was published by the Rockefeller Foundation and the Global Business Network (GBN). It says in the preamble to the report that the Rockefeller Foundation and the GBN “have begun the process of developing future scenarios, with the aim of identifying the many driving forces that are able to influence technological and international development in the future”. In the report “the matrices of the four main scenarios of the future” are described. The first was given the name “Lock Step”. In this, the tightening of control and the strengthening of authoritarian leadership is anticipated. Especially interesting is the third scenario, called “Hack Attack”. In this scenario, the world will be subject to big, unexpected catastrophes similar to, say, the 11th September in New York. And there is talk in the report of “an explosion at the 2012 Olympic Games in London”! And a figure is even given for the expected number of victims: 13,000 people.

There is a correlation between this scenario and an article published by a Moscow political scientist, who tells of a number symptomatic events which preceded those Olympic Games. Before the Games began, he wrote the following: “The 2012 Olympic Games were born under two banners: joy and sorrow. The fact that London was chosen to host the XXX. Summer Olympic Games was announced on the 6th July 2005 in Singapore at the meeting of the IOC. In several places people were celebrating in the streets of London on that day. But on the day following (7th July 2005) tragedy struck in London. Much blood was shed in three trains of the Underground railway and a red double-decker bus in Tavistock Square. Terrorist attacks were carried out. The author saw in this a “numerological” connection: “... it turned out that the red double-decker that exploded in Tavistock Square was driving along route nr. 30 through London, and it therefore looks as if the explosion was “welcoming” the new-born Olympic Games of 2012, the 30th in the entire Olympic sequence...” (And we would add that the Tavistock Institute, which shares its name with Tavistock Square, has a bad reputation for its development, on behalf of the military, of methods for the influencing of the human mind.) And then – a really extraordinary thing – “this nr. 30 double-decker appeared in facsimile, life-size, at the closing ceremony of the 2008 Olympic Games (Beijing) during the handover of the torch from Beijing to London. In addition, this replica (and symbols of the souls who had perished in it!) was raised to the centre of the ceremony, it was its focal, ritual object. Another “star” of the ritual was the shabby old guitarist Jimmy Page...”, an admirer of Alistair Crowley.

Of course, one can now make the overweight objection: That is all just empty conjecture! The Olympic Games in London went off very well! – Thank God!, we would add. But we know that there is a kind of rule according to which, if people start to speak openly and widely about what is being conspired against them, the plan is not carried out in its original form. So, may these conjectures have played a positive role all the same? And we would like to point out a number of remarkable accompaniments to these Olympic Games. First – unprecedented security measures. For the protection of the Olympic Games 50,000 policemen were on duty. As though someone wanted to avoid the reproach that not enough had been done to guarantee security.

And something else. Those who watched the opening ceremony of the Olympic Games may have been struck by the Queen’s inappropriate behaviour. She did her utmost to show that she was not interested in the Olympics, actually disliked them, and that she was there against her will. Interestingly enough, a humorous film was shown on television before the opening ceremony in which “Agent 007” (Craig) appears, to accompany the Queen to the Olympics.

Reluctantly (and even emphasizing this aversion), with obvious antipathy, the Queen read in a burocratic tone a few “official” words, brief words of welcome, from a piece of paper. The purpose of this was to offend the organizers of this great show. Then she sat down with a bored expression, without a glance at the arena, and twisting something between her fingers, she seemed to be looking at her fingernails. And this before – billions of viewers! It can be seen as a provocation. But of whom, and why? And she didn’t appear at all for the closing ceremony. This was an insult, pure and simple. But she didn’t care. They said she had “gone on holiday”! In her stead they sent Kate and Harry (who had to foot the bill for this later). In the closing address the Queen also had to be thanked. This was done, but three young people had to be addressed, who sat there with nonchalant expressions and were not really representatives of “power”.

We believe we have the right to ask: what is the meaning of these strange phenomena? And we dare to guess (without expecting agreement from anyone) that the Queen was demonstrating in this way her refusal to support intentions that had ripened somewhere in the depths “behind the looking-glass”, in some or other very hidden societies which, moreover, make no secret of their intentions. And that is also an important symptom.

The Queen could permit herself such conduct, because it is certain that in such Societies she has no lower degree than the 33. Formally speaking there is no power above her, she is the sovereign. And her husband is, without doubt, also some Very Grand Grand Master.

If our supposition is correct, then the Queen saved her Kingdom for a certain time, and with it – all of us. In this case: Long live the Queen! After all, if the explosion had happened, we would already be living today in a different world with significantly “tighter controls” and “strengthened authoritarian leadership” or simply in a dictatorship. In France the terrorist attack on the publishers of the “Charlie Hebdo” magazine was enough for the government to insist that official measures should be taken for the electronic surveillance of all citizens.

But then revenge was taken on the Queen and her entire family. The Press started to show Kate and William in a negative light, and to well and truly persecute them. During a holiday in France, Duchess Kate was photographed naked by means of a telephoto lens and the photo circulated in the papers. Harry was waylaid in Las Vegas and photographed in a drunken state together with a girl. After this, the royal family was obliged to take action, by way of showing that such offenses cannot go unpunished. (In all other cases the Press approves of such “mistakes”.) The Prince had to serve for a second time in Afghanistan. And if, during his first period of duty there, the place where he was stationed was kept secret for security reasons, this time it was known, and the Press began to “complain” that the Prince might be killed by the Taliban.

Now the royal family’s patience seemed to be exhausted, and they took steps to restrain the Press in some way. During an outing of the Queen to a sporting event her husband is sitting on the stand in a Scottish kilt, with his legs apart, and it turned out that he had nothing on underneath! The Press cried out, “Oh dear!”. Thus, the old aristocrat was showing them, in a coarse “medieval” way, naturally, what he thought of their behaviour, and that it is a dangerous thing to lead an English gentleman up a blind alley.[2] And the Press had been humbled. After all, this is the Grand Master, not Harry. The journalist body normally belongs to the mass in the lower degrees.

And a further small detail. The newspapers published another photo in which Prince Charles is almost splitting his sides with laughter, close to the limit of what good taste will allow. Probably his mother is amusing him with the story of his father’s intention. In any case, this thought is prompted by the publication of these two photos together.

But back to the cover picture of “The Economist”. In the upper left- hand corner we see a poster bearing the name “Singapore”, which leads one again to think of the meeting of the IOC. (True enough, officially – international rugby matches, world games; but that can have two meanings: the world of games, the game with the world. The globe is represented twice in the picture. The second time in the shape of a rugby ball – a somewhat brutal game.) The “Spirit of the Orient”, we repeat, stares at the explosion. The rocket which, so it appears, is taking off from Churchill’s head, could, as the beginning of the process, indicate the source of what is said in the report of the GBN. This process had its beginning in 1948 when Churchill delivered his speech in Fulton. This was when the Cold War started, and the construction of rockets with nuclear warheads. The Cold War ended with the concluding of the socialist experiment. We stand now at the beginning of revival of the Cold War and probably at the beginning of a new experiment. The at- tempt is being made to launch it with the help of the events in the Ukraine, but it looks as if this is not enough. The extra stimulus of a decided “hack attack” will be needed.

The allegory in the cover picture concludes with two arrows sticking in the ground at Alice’s feet. They bear the numbers 11.5 and 11.3. One arrow is in front of the other. If this is meant to indicate a sequence in time, we should not forget that in the U.S.A. the month is given before the day.

We would much prefer our conjectures to be unfounded, or for this to be no more than a blackmail attempt to force Britain to connect itself more quickly and more closely to America. Britain has been under such pressure for a long time. We can recall an occasion when Margaret Thatcher made a loud public demand of Reagan that he should stop supplying the IRA with weapons.

And in the end it will not harm anyone to decide to focus on the symptoms we mention, even if it turns out that our guesses were wrong. Let us think of the astronomers who sometimes draw from the tiniest nothing their reasons for the discovery of whole worlds, and even if it later turns out that they were mistaken their work is still considered entirely justified. In any case it would be naïve to say it is of no significance when a magazine that is the mouthpiece of influential occult power centres publishes a cover picture with a small mushroom cloud rising above the head of the British prime minister!

Attention still needs to be drawn to something in the foreground of the picture – a tortoise bathed in glorious radiance. One commentator has rightly guessed its meaning. The tortoise symbolizes the Fabian Society. What sort of Society is that? It is a time-consuming task to follow up all the lines of inquiry that can throw light on this question. The commentator mentioned above makes our task easier.

It is a powerful organization that aims to establish a world government with a Bolshevist tendency. In contrast to the Russian Bolsheviks, the Fabians strive for power slowly, with the gradual attrition of their opponents through the infiltration of their own people into their ranks. As if via an evolutionary process they wish to take humanity into their possession. The logo of “creeping Bolshevism” was once a wolf in sheep’s clothing. Then it was replaced with a tortoise.

The motto of the Fabian Society is “When I strike, I strike hard.” Thus, the tortoise has one foot raised. The Fabian Society also supports eugenicists, proponents of enforced sterilization. A small tortoise of this kind with a shining aura is put on its cover page by “The Economist”, who wishes to show in this way that the chief direction of further “progress” of human society is to be neo-Bolshevist. This means that the experience of Soviet Bolshevism, reviewed and rid of its “weaknesses”, is to be introduced on the scale of humanity as a whole. It is to be the Bolshevism of the Orwellian “Ingsoc”.

Older people who had lived for a long time in the Soviet Union and had the opportunity in the era of Perestroika to stay for a longer period in the West discovered to their amazement that here the well-known features of Soviet Bolshevism are appearing.[3] People who have grown up in the West and lack the Soviet experience, do not yet see this. And when they see it, it will probably be too late.