KATHAKSUNG! ok, but...

http://www.originaldissent.com/forums/showthread.php?t=23266

128. Location, time and motive (sniper case)

Muhammad lived in Washington State which is at west coast. The sniper shooting spree took place in Washington DC which is at east coast. If this is a case for blackmail, he could do it anywhere, or most conveniently, near where he lived. What made him took that trouble to cross the whole continent to east coast? Because the case targetted at law makers. They had to shoot at DC area so Congressmen could feel the threat. And the time went tally with the authorization of Iraq war power to President Bush.

Time table:
10/2/2002: House Speaker Dennis Hastert and Minority Leader Richard Gephardt introduced the bill (H. J. Res 114) to authorize the use of armed force against Iraq.

. . First 2 shooting: Same day in evening, sniper started his shooting spree. 1st shot was at a Craft-store window, broke the glass but hurt no one. It might be a declaration of the start of shooting by sniper. Then a man was killed in a grocery parking lot.

10/3: The bill went to the International Relations Committee for the beginning of debate.

. . Shooting 3-7: Five shooting took place the same day, all victims dead. Six deaths in less than 28 hours shocked the whole country, especially those lived in the area. Of course, including those politicians in Capital Hill.

10/4 (Friday) Debate on bill.

. . 8th shooting: A woman wounded in parking lot.

10/5-10/6 (week-ends) Politicians took a rest, sniper coincided by taking a rest too.

10/7 (Monday) Debate on bill resumed.

. . 9th shooting: Shooting resumed too. A boy wounded at school.

10/9 Debate on bill continued.

. . 10th shooting: Man killed in gas station.

10/10 House passed the bill.

10/11 Senate passed the bill.

. . 11th shooting: Man shot dead at gas station. It took place at 9:30 am, could be a last push on Senate.

10/14 12th shooting: FBI analyst was shot to death in Home Depot parking lot.

10/16 Bush signed the Bill.

10/19 13th shooting: Man killed outside a restaurant.

10/23 14th shooting: Bus driver killed in bus parking lot.

Can you find how the sniper shooting helped pushing through the Bill to authorize the power of Iraq war to President Bush?
*******



KATHAKSUNG! – OK.

…a little correction. “When the case was over and a scapegoat needed, they became a sacrifice.” Minor point: the dark Chevy was seen around town. even stopped! – so they were in the area all along.

And more, from the symbolic (psychological) angle.

There were two distinct phases in the DC sniper shootings
First: 10.2 – 10.4. 02 (WTF) 6 killed ;
Second: -- beginning Monday, 10.7 with the shooting of 13 year old Iran Brown, to 10.24 arrest of Muhammad and Malvo. 4 more killed, incl. FBI agent Linda Franklin on the Home Depot lot for which Malvo is later convicted.

During that week-end, between Friday and Monday, effective control of the hunt passed from DC Chief Moose to ATF, same folks as at Waco.

Moose’s white van lead had gone nowhere, the public was getting skittish as hell, and White House Press secretary Ari Fleisher’s words “for the price of a single bullet” from the previous Wednesday kept coming back. There were no leads and no control of the situation.

All that changed with the shooting of Iran Brown. The shooter breaks silence, leaves a shell casing on the Tarot Death card, marked “I AM GOD” – it was reported, apparently as an entrapment gimmick, because came our soon after that the printed message had been “CALL ME GOD”. And certain news agencies knowingly printed false information.

This gave focus to the Feeling of Evil.

Soon after, priests began getting bizarre phone calls, letters start turning up at the shooting scenes, a more bizarre monetary motive gets floated; contact with authorities has been established; no phantom Al Quida terrorist is out there; its some sort of serial killer crime spree and everything is under control. The two black men, Muhammad and Malvo,

The confluence of very powerful symbolic elements make the shooting of Iran Brown the turning point.
1. It seemed deliberately targeted, a school boy, with that name, whereas the other victims seemed random, not chosen for a particular reason. This one said “CHILD SACRIFICE”. That is the unconscious message, but virtually screamed as such from the news headlines. More broadly, it is the unconscious meaning of War, which the U.S. Congress is considering.
2. The Tarot card – the XIIIth, Death
3. The message “I AM/CALL ME GOD” (the kid seems to have garbled this link in calling the priest) is a “Reversal”: the god that sacrifices children would be evil. Thus, the notion of evil is introduced de facto into American consciousness right here, through this most perverse use of “God”.
What’s next? In his forthcoming State of the Union speech, President Bush startled the world by using the phrase “focus of evil”, referring to Iraq, Iran and North Korea.

4. The threat of nuclear weapons in the hands of Iran is being presently used to support war against it – war on terror, war on evil. “Brown” is the color of the skin of Arabs and Hispanics; one, the Emirates of Dubai, wants to get in our ports; the others, from Meheekow, are illegal aliens pouring across our borders like ants and termites.

Considering the fingerprints all over these things (hint: how did the phrase ‘focus of evil’ find its way into Bush’s SOTU speech? – sure stole the show), KATHAKSUNG’s remark that “Muhammad and Malvo were a support term of the intelligence (to watch out, or be “witness” if necessary)..” requires asking: “Whose ‘intelligence’?”

(Hint 2: the quickly made-for-TV movie was by a well-meaning Jewish woman, who wanted to show how Israelis understood what America went through, and vice verse. I lost her name and the ad, but it can be checked.)

Iraq and Gay Pride

Iraq and gay pride

Connecting the dots on Page Two.


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13048452/

Iraqi leader critical of U.S. military ‘mistakes’
Prime minister ‘worried about the increase’ of shootings like Haditha
*******
But at the same time, Marine Gen. Peter Pace said that if service members are responsible for an atrocity in Haditha, they “have not performed their duty the way that 99.9 percent of their fellow Marines have.”

Many Iraqis believe unjustified killings by U.S. troops are common, though few have been confirmed by investigations

*****

http://today.reuters.com/news/newsarticle.aspx?type=worldNews&storyid=2006-05-30T175830Z_01_L30284784_RTRUKOC_0_US-RUSSIA-GAYS.xml&src=rss&rpc=22

Moscow says banned gays because "cleaner" than West
Tue May 30, 2006 1:58 PM ET

MOSCOW (Reuters) - Moscow's influential mayor said on Tuesday the city banned gay activists from holding a parade because it is morally cleaner than the West, which is caught up in "mad licentiousness".

The gay activists tried to hold their protest against homophobia and discrimination at the weekend despite the ban, but were detained by police, abused by militant Christians and attacked by neo-fascists.

They had wanted to lay flowers at the grave of the unknown warrior, a monument to those who died defeating Nazi Germany, but police blocked their path.

Mayor Yuri Luzhkov said such an action would have been a desecration of the sacred monument, and rejected Western criticism of his ban as prejudiced and homophobic.

*******
Comment:

Call these “Page One sign-use events" (documents, media artefacts). They, along with other Drudge headlines and ‘stories’ reported on the newswire, Cable News networks, and print media, are the “dots” the reading public are required to connect in order to make sense out of what is going on so they can react and relate to their governmental processes on an informed, basis. How one connects the dots (I call them “Sign-uses”, abbrev. “S*”) composes the Big Picture a person gets from Page One. These, merging and conflicting, define the perspective individuals and groups share. No two are expected to be the same in all details, but rational discourse requires that contradictory accounts of the same facts cannot both be true, even if both occur on the same page and editorially predicated on as a compound subject.

How will these two S* - dots be connected?

For those whose sign-use processing comes only from Page One, they will be largely taken separately. The second item will be taken by many as saying “Even ex-Soviet Russia is more moral than America. Their leaders know how to nip liberal depravity in the bud. This is how nationalistic conservatism expresses itself, over there.”

Moscow police beating up gays: that is pitched to the mind set Karl Rove got GWB re-elected by stirring up. It cannot be dismissed out of hand that it has been set up for that very purpose.

For long-time radical deconstructionists, such as I, however, ALL contents of Page One are pre-text, used to misdirect attention from what, while at the same time inevitably alluding in one way or another to what is actually happening to accont for “tokens” – why such a scene, or dot, is occurring for all to deal with, at all. Using that rule, the connection immediately pops up. It is countdown time for Republicans to the ’06 elections, and the mind-set of neo-con Republicans that led to My Lai, Fallujah, Abu Ghraib and Haditha has rivers of blood-filled hate to displace onto liberals (Saddam Hussein, Muslim males) and take out on their asses. That is the Page Two connection, via unconscious group-fantasy process.

There is a Page Three, but it goes directly to metaphysics, Christology and the shooting of 14 year old Iran Brown by the D.C. snipers in ’02, whoever they were, Red Dot events contributing to the last Republican mid-term election campaign. But leave aside, for now.

There are no names of God

There are no names of God

(Never mind what google turns up)

“The Names of God” is a sign-use construction of a very clever, cunning, even malevolent sort, from a Christian point of view. What the Bible “God” stands for, as the single term translating the various Old Testament tokens (“Elohim”, “YHWH,” “YHWH El Elyon”) is reformulated after the New Testament to “God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Ghost”; one being, three persons. The alternate pre-Christian tokens are not different “Names of God”, as if the incarnation hadn’t transformed, by bringing together, the two major historical strands in the Pentateuch. These are 1. the Sumerian, Elohim tradition of Genesis 1, far older than the Hebrew Bible; and 2. the Semitic, YHWH tradition of Genesis 2. The unique designation “YHWH El Elyon” (“God Most High”) occurs at Genesis 14.18-20, and can be accepted by Christians as identical with (what) “God the Father” (communicates), since Hebrews 6.20f explicitly links the Melchizedek Priests of ancient (Jeru-) Salem, who accepted Abram/Abraham’s tithe (offering, sacrifice), with Jesus Christ’s Priesthood. Again, in John 8.58, Jesus asserts his identity with the “I AM” worshipped by Abraham’s descendants, the Jews. Whereupon they commenced stoning him.

One understands why. He was hijacking the spiritual side of their religion, leaving them only faithfulness to external observances, law and sacrifice, to perpetuate tribal origins.

In the New Testament, Jersus is quoted as repeatedly sets himself off, as relating to (what he called) “The Father”, from the god known only to descendants of Jacob (Israel) through Abraham.

Metaphysically Challenged: Christians

METAPHYSICALLY CHALLENGED: CHRISTIANS

Keyword “Jewish Sects” tapped into Yahoo! (May 25, 2006), brings up

1. Jesus the Jew !

Punched that up; got
http://www.sullivan-county.com/news/mine/jesus.htm

Jesus

As confidence in human reason and hope for happiness in this world waned in the last centuries of the Roman Empire, a new outlook began to take hold. Evident in philosophy and in the popularity of oriental religions, this viewpoint stressed escape from an oppressive world and communion with a higher reality. Like many so-called mystery religions Christianity evolved from this setting of declining classicism and heightening otherworldliness.
Christianity offered a spiritually disillusioned Greco-Roman world a reason for living—the hope of personal immortality. Christianity marked a break with classical antiquity and a new stage in the evolution of the West, for there was a fundamental difference between the Hellenic and the Christian concepts of God, the individual, and the purpose of life. Whatever freedom existed in the world would soon give way to darkness as the Apostle Paul and the church fathers hijacked Jesus and Judaism to pervert the simple rabbi into a new Roman god.
Origins of Christianity, Judaism in the First Century B.C.

MOVED TO CORRECT THIS. Once and for all.

Christianity went virtually overnight from local origins in the early Galilee/Jerico River – Dead sea region of the Middle East, centering on Jerusalem and the crucifixion events of the first century, to become the major transforming psychodynamic force in the history of Roman, Medieval, Enlightenment European, and modern civilization. The remnants of the little tribe with big ideas of their own importance to the world; who trace world history through Abraham, Moses, Solomon’s Temple, and the great diaspora; but whose ancestral ranks were confused and greatly enlarged by a mass conversion of Kazar semi-barbarian Caucasians (“13th Tribe”) in the 10th century b.c.; …the ancestors of those with web-sites capable of drawing #1 Yahoo rank to broadcast “Jesus was a Jew”, were very likely among those expelled by later nation minded European communities from the 16th century on. The religion of this region was Christian, in various version, some rough and crude compared with others. That gives cause to defend against “Christianity”; and what better way than dismiss it as the story of how Peter and Paul hijacked Jesus and Judaism to pervert the simple rabbi into a Roman God? Then in this past century the terrible events of Germany and WWII ensued, now recalled almost exclusively as the time of “the Holocaust.” That is to say, through Jewish eyes.

Seeing Jesus as a Jew goes with seeing WWII as the Jewish holocaust. They (Romish brutes) killed the simple rabbi back then; then, Teutonic-Norse Aryans, with Christian veneer, slaughtered six million. The point is, it is always the Jews who get killed. Jesus was a Jew. The holocaust sacrificed Jews. There you have it. Circle complete. Oh, man’s inhumanity to man….

Real Elders of Zion couldn’t top this. Not telling anyone what to think, or anything, but to have that up as #1 Yahoo! entry for “Jewish Sects” goes beyond metaphysical audacity to contempt, Christ-killing and spiritual reversal (hijacking Jesus).

It is metaphysically audacious to rule out Jesus’ repeated assertion that his “Father” was the hoary “I AM” (cf. John 8.58f), for which they resolved to kill him.
This is why it rings no bells for Christians to harangued with “Jesus was a Jew” over and over. After professing “only on his mother’s side”, a Christian has nothing left to say, except to insist that what they refer to not just a Jewish “simple rabbi”, and to reduce it to such understanding, except among each other behind closed doors, is a provocation. Don’t tread on the Trinity.

In order to make this correction, however, Christians owe it to themselves, each other, and the tradition, to spell out for Jews in terms they can understand what it is about Jesus as “the Christ” they don’t get. That is the metaphysical challenge.

Boy Named Sue

Boy Named Sue


The story is this

After having exposed the deficit in the collective mentality running the government during the Vietnam war

… then not confronting it as a totality, exposing wrong-thinking, lies, inside manipulaters, and imposing unequivocal punishments (“Watergate” doesn’t count)

…but, instead, splitting those who resisted “the System” for different reasons: war protest – in the name of America; economic protest – in the name of oppressed workers (“leftists”); black protests – in the name of civil rights; student, women, homosexual, drug legalization movements in the name of freedom, democracy and removal of The Dead Hands of the WWII fathers from the baby boomers’s throats…

…left the deformed Vietnam war mentality in control and stronger than before.

It came back in the 80’s with Ronald Reagan, when Hollywood began putting on The America Show. Then again now, after the Clinton years, with a vengeance.

This broad story can be told through the psychodynamics of Father-Son relations. The male side of the process is where the deficit occurred, and is systemically neglected.
The dark Father had knowingly intruded into the son’s domain; challenged, but not excised.

***

The following is only a vignette, but serves as an illustration. A New York Times article “In Israel, New Reflections on Holocaust,” (A8, 5.23.’06) begns: “TEL AVIV – Shir Senora, 16, returned from a class trip to former concentration camps in Poland, haunted by images of fellow Jews herded into gas chambers. “They showed us where the gas was piped in and you realize that you yourself are in a gas chamber and your breath just stops,” he said. “We are taught about it, but being there it brings it all together in one place.”” This is the son, going back to the place of his father’s death.

That is what has happened in America

“What doesn’t kill me makes me stronger,” the saying went; but few considered it applicable to the killers themselves, vs. the protesters.

The on-going cultural, social, political, religious psycho-historical processes resumed, with swerves, swept along toward the computer age, the revolution in communication, MTV and videogames. The next generation of youth had more to rebel against, and over, -- drugs, sex, rock ‘n roll, at ever younger ages -- but “the System”, previously regarded as dark, evil, in the shape of a Pentagon, was now the enabler of these essential youth commodities -- themselves becoming ever more deformed, bizarre, puerile, icky, bloody, violent – it could not be regarded as more evil than they. However much Judas Priest music glamorizes the nullity of the situation. (“Angel of Retribution” – for the “oppressed”? – c’mon –beautiful, haunting songs.)

The psychohistorical template called for the group mentality to absorb the Dark Father’s abuse. The rising up of that old child-sacrifice (=intent-to-kill) feeling on the part of WWII fathers, hearing the filicidal “Hell NO! We WON”T GO!” chants. Depraved, out-of-control brood suddenly rising up all around, scoring without heroism, surging ahead in “Me Now” enjoyment of life…would have had to make war, not love.

That is what was absorbed by the youth template, for the ever-maturing young males to deal with in the image of President. He was/is the one authorized to order them to stand in harm’s way, in the name of America. This authority was abused in Vietnam, particularly by Nixon. What was exposed at the Watergate show trial was the tip of the iceberg of what he and Henry Kissinger did in politically managing the Vietnam war. This is where the deep split occurred, well before Watergate. America was onto them. If Robert Kennedy hadn’t been killed, things would have blown apart sooner and better.

Adam 'n Eve - Metaphysics of spirit v instinct

Completion of the Upper Triad under Sign-use

Adam and Eve
and The Metaphysics of Spirit over Instinct

The term “upper triad” in this psychosemiotic system refers to the 7-6-5 token-levels of sign-use in the Universal TokenSpace matrix*. It’s three key token-types (God, S*, I) can be imagined linked by imaginary lines, as a triangle. This step in active imagination, assumed taken, abstracts the three levels from any variable content, giving the representation of a self-contained functional unit of conscious experience, the arena of mental work using signs, with self-awareness, addressing Totality.

These mark the theological, philosophical and existential levels of discourse, ‘I’ using S* (thought) for (the) All = completed intellectual work bringing whatever is experienced under predicates for items wholly contained in the present conscious moment (e.g., “ideas”, strictly speaking).

Some (“believers”, those who accept the metaphysics of a given tradition) might (do, in fact) claim to ‘encounter’ an Objective Thou, a sense of presence, or spirit, which IS a manifestation of the completion, or “God”, of the universe in their experience. To these, objectivity obliges one to say: “However fervently this is maintained, it is still individual personal content. Certainly, special individuals experience things others don’t, but that whatever that is is still a subjective experience of that person. Without further evidence for claims based on it, others are not obliged to accept such claims; nor should they be expected to. Consciousness trumps thought. What some say they "encounter" as an Objective Thou in individual experience, as a real experience, can be explained as a flashback of the phantom placenta from the fetal origins of experience. L. deMause has shown the placenta to be the First Object relating in a "mysterious" way to the tiny but growing awareness, integrating its reactions, finally battled against at the end to achieve freedom and birth.



It is essential to consider these inter-related strata as a functional unit separate from content of conscious containing components that are not wholly contained in the present conscious moment, such as the perception of a physical environment in which one many move bodily about. The lower triad of token levels 3-2-1 passes from content of gestalt awareness of body in motion in physical space (3), trough the qualitaty/intensive awareness (2), to dreams (1).

It is functionally crucial for the upper triad to be completed, in a separate ‘story’ of consciousness through thought “under God,” in order to prevent consciousness from finding its completion in the body – e.g. (5) predicates spiritualizing (3) –events (procreative voluptuosities). The principle of the lower triad is pleasure; that of the upper triad, self-knowledge. Unless self-knowledge is distinguished from knowledge of the body, completion of life will be seen in the acme of pleasure, the orgastic sexual response, with involuntary rhythmic muscle contractions, releasing huge amounts of accumulated psychic and anatomical tension. The powerful effect of this experience spreads its influence over all levels and content in which the person is aware of themselves as individual living organisms, with potency (“will to be”). The range of feelings that go with it, deep, subtle, abiding, are the basis in self-awareness of what Freud called “libido”, as I understand it. Carl Jung spoke more generically of “psychic energy”, commonly manifesting as “interest”. This relieves metaphysics of reliance on biology for the ultimate dynamic driving the psychic system. .

This distinction between the two triads, and their respective completions in God, for the upper, sexual orgasm, for the lower, explains the theology of Genesis, which I had never understood, considered a kind of childhood tale, almost a farce, that the Creator of the Universe should be peeking about in the Garden, busting Adam and Eve for doing it, knowing full-well they would, or no generations would breed. It occurred to me in connection with many ancient things recorded in the Bible that profound meanings and deep truth could be buried in simple stories, but this one? -it seems almost obviously a charming child’s tale, whatever the historical facts may have been. It is the origin in human civilization of what Freud called “repression”, bringing the sexual life under punishment from the Almighty, addressed as Father. The beginning under Moses of a long struggle in men between spirit against instinct to achieve higher (sublimated) forms of expression.

The theological level of discourse posits one sign, “God”, in English, as the completion of all totalities, where a “totality” is the extension of a predicate, P (i.e., the set of individuals to which P applies, or of which “x is P” is true.). Thus, of “P” is the predicate of all predicates of actual sign-uses, “God (Px)” predicates all that exists (under sign-use) as “of God”, or “under God”. This follows the same logical pattern as saying that as Animal is predicated of all mammals, and Mammal of all humans, whatever is predicated of x (‘this man’ at random), qua human, is predicated under Animal, therefore attributes consistent with its species. This is how logical stratification works. What belongs to the higher level predicate is passed along and distributed to whatever comes under the lower.

What Would Judas Do? last show

TODAY’S TOPIC: WHAT WOULD JUDAS DO?


****** Introduction to last Talk America, May 12, 2006
WHRW fm Public Affairs radio talk show.


Following the theme “From the 60’s to the ‘06’s” throughout the spring semester at Harpur College, in Binghamton, New York, I have dubbed the “baby boomers” and their children “the Judas generation”. They have betrayed the True America represented by the anti-Vietnam war protestors, who did it for the right reasons. (not always clear then)

This, I am always proclaiming, was a bigger historical moment than they realized or realize. A flickering moment of Biblical, millennial, Zodiacal, evolutionary, cosmic focus, it unfolding in the “Woodstock nation” (much more extensive than the actual gathering).

Sudden massive, irreversable social, political and psychological changes were upon us all. Enormous inner turmoil fell on the experience of a generation of youth required to adapt to the cultural effects of unprecedented sexual awareness and openness. This accompanied disillusionment with WWII parental authoritarian ways and motives. Plus, innumerable psychedelic drugs ‘trips’ were taken during this era; altered states of consciousness extensively explored, and new ways of talking about self and others entered into group dynamics. Plus, the expanding computerized communication environment altered the very processes involved in using signs, what people do when they communicate.

Flash-backs of strands from this historical moment are now all-pervasive in the atmosphere of group TokenSpace.

This moment re-defined America not only internally, but in the national and international arenas as well. A student, Bill Glass, went from leader of campus protest ideology to spokesperson for students in Albany when Rockefeller was governor. The movement had a bold, daring, innovative, brilliant edge, a quality of instinctual libidinization, with new intensity of individual and group experience. It was an unprecedented efflourescence of human creativity that was unleashed on earth, as if a psychic strobe-light passed through space-time, burning neural imprints into future psycho-dynamic memory-traces of humankind.

All this got snuffed when Reagan rose.

Until….


*****/

WHAT WOULD JUDAS DO? …

To America : What Mearsheimer and Wald document the Israel Libby Lobby has done


Considering: 3 MOB RIOTS of huge psychohistorical consequence

1. The Crucifixion of Jesus: the mob that yelled “crucify him! crucify him!” at his trial for claiming to be King of the Jews; outside Jerusale,, 30+AD.

2. The lynching of Leo Frank: the mob that yelled “hang the Jew! – or we’ll hang you!” at his trial for the murder of Mary Phagan; outside Atlanta, Georgia, l912.

3. The Kristallnacht pogram: the Nazi and/or fake Nazi mobs manifested unprecedented barbarism, murdering, plundering, desecrating synagogues and persond on November 8/9, 1938. No trial accusing and condemning victims of any guilt preceded this outbreak, except that they were Jews in Germany at that time.

1. has come back by publication of the Gospel of Judas. It’s revelation has been hailed by writers on religion in the New York Times as bringing a kind of vindication of Iscariot (the name, taken from Greek, means ‘traitor’), therefore removing one thorn in the side of those who blame Judaicism in general for crucifying Christ.

This would be the face of the mob of Matthew 27. The last sight seen by the man on the Cross before declaring “It is finished”, and giving up the Ghost.
When Mel Gibson’s movie came out in ’04, and many Jews were heard protesting that it would arouse anti-semitism, many so-called “Christians” took the line that that mob represented humanity, even them, themselves. “We’re all sinners,” some said humbly. But, I submit – as I did so back then to Fox News commentator Cal Thomas – this attempts to have it both ways, on the cross or calling for it, thus denying the difference between the two points of view (looking down on the mob or looking up at the man). I argue that if you “believe in Christ”, whatever else that might mean, it must include the metaphysical difference – the eternal abyss -- of the grade of reality, and consciousness, on one side but not the other. That He is not just One of Them, who has wound up on the wrong side of Roman Law enforcement, with Judas’s help, thus earning him a place among the immortals by accepting the historical blame for betrayal.

Until now. Now, hearing his Gospel, credibility of him as a person and as a witness is restored. He was “doing what he had to do.” The present text survived in one of the Gnostic sects or “churches” that sprang up in Asia minor in the first two centuries around the crucified-God idea.

However, whatever the story behind its appearance now, what the text SAYS is astonishingly relevant. And hardly the benign denoument of the ancient antagonism it is declared to be.

Judas, in the text, is indeed “called to one side” during the week preceding Passover, though it is not clear what it was for, and many of the things next recorded have nothing to do with the betrayal evens until the last sentence, which looks tacked on. He is emphatically called the “13th”, excluded in numerical essence from the 12 (= number of completion) disciples bringing the Gospel of his resurrection (Acts 1). He has unlawfully gained access to holy precincts forbidden to mortals – “misled by his star”, Jesus puts it. It is recorded that “the disciples” have a vision of a great hall, with a great altar and 12 priests receiving sin sacrifices. In someone’s name. “What are they like?” – Jesus demands to know, asserting “It is in my name they are sacrificing.” The list of sacrificers is intriguing: “some men their wives, some their children, some men sleep with men, some are riotous in praise and blame, others commit many kinds of sins of property.” (from recall). This is a veritable three tree-ring record of development of male-ness toward spiritual maturity (individuation): Overcoming, in himself: -power of the woman; power of the child; power of other men; power of ‘street life’; the power of vice; power gained from satisfaction in wimping out; … in order to be what he is (so that the outcome unfolds the origin).

What is most intriguing about the list is its parallel with what was unleashed by the Vietnam war and “the 60’s”. These sins they were to suffer for were: feminism (witches); homosexuality; child-sacrifice (represented by the war itself; later, abortion); Abu Ghraib torture-sport (later coming),

What is important, I say, is Jesus’ seeing this in advance, prophesying it was THEY, the disciples (r descendants) who would receive sacrifices for these sins in his name; and renouncing it. I see that as the key message for these times. He does not go so far as to say, on my reading, that they were sinning BY sacrificing, but he was removing His name – token of his spiritual presence – from it entirely. In astrological/Zodiacal terms, it belonged to the preceding Age, which his sacrifice would replace. This is the strongest metaphysical condemnation that could be laid down without over-riding ‘freewill’, the freedom to grow from one’s own work. He saw the institution withering away, but also saw it being perpetuated on another level by “judas priests”, we called them.

**********/

Summary. What would (a) Judas do? --- betray (through intimacy with the light of spiritual goodness) and profit.

Jesus, not Judas, is the central figure of the Gospels, adulated by the brotherhood of 12 disciples, pure in motive, spirit, teaching, example. The mob (Jews, sinners, lost humans) will turn on him because what he is – The Son of Man -- condemns them: their collective way of being. By teaching and example he identifies this as sacrifice-based spirituality: a way of being that sheds blood for forgiveness of sin. It corrupts their maleness. Sacrificing wives and children; sleeping with men; taunting each other to violence; practicing wasteful and degrading indulgences, corrupting normal social affairs. He represented a higher spiritual plane. This difference is metaphysically irreconcilable. Therefore he was put to death by the people.

All that Judas saw … and was willing to betray. It makes no difference if he was designated to do it; he could have refused. “The Son of man indeed goes as is written; but woe be unto that man by whom the Son of Man is betrayed: It would have been good for that man if he had not been born.” (Matt. 26.24). The inner form of his act – its ‘maxim, in Kant’s terminology; formula of its intention – is betrayal of stolen intimacy for profit (he could have turned down the 30 pieces of silver, and not betrayed with a kiss). Jesus allowed him access to the circle of 12, knowing him to be a “13th”” spirit, presumably in order to do this particular job, thus relieving him of the responsibility of requiring any true follower to do such an intrinsically abhorrent thing.

From an external objective perspective, the attempt to link Judas and Jesus as two sides of a grandly interpreted tale of God’s Plan of Salvation for humankind,
represents an attempt to predicate on metaphysical incompatibles – like classifying gravitational with hydro-electrical energy. The two logically incompatible sides are the two points of view of the Cross, where a categorical difference either is or is not perceived. To those to whom a categorical difference is perceived, to predicate on both sides -- refer to “the Crucifixion” --as if the difference perceived from the side one hanging on it and that of the mob below didn’t exist – is to allow that difference to be negated. In logical terms, to predicate on a subject term S* with intent to assert truth, versus falsehood, takes S* to refer to an existing thing. When it, as a sign-use, stands for a conjunction of incompatible opposites, e.g., “A and B”, when “B implies not-A”, yielding “A and not-A”, it (S*) becomes a way of importing self-contradictions into the universe of discourse. The extended formula for (the result of) taking “S* or not-S*” as alternatives, at higher predicate levels of sign use, is: A and (A and not-A). “The Judas principle” could then be defined as “the attempt to have the same term S* used in two way, one as presupposing existence, the other as conjoined with its negation.”

And this would define the “Judas Priest” syndrome, foreseen by Jesus in the new Gospel: those who continue receiving sacrifices in his name. Thus unctuously sacralizing the profane. Symbolically, this would be profiting off sacralized sex as spirituality. This is what the heavy metal group Judas Priest does, and very beautifully, too. Perhaps one of the only honest (“square” text x token) musical groups left, after Nirvana. It is the other, half-right and half-unconscious Christian judas priest groups who predicate America on what the Zionist-Israeli lobby has defined – linking America’s 50 states to a 51st state, without asking their permission – under the mutually adverse psychodynamics of “Judeo-Christian”. Once “Judeo” gets linked with “Christian”, “Israel” linked to “America” cannot be far behind. The article of Mearsheimer and Wald “The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy” details some of the outcome of the inner link. It is that which the Gospel of Judas addresses timelessly, but in these times.



2. Leo Frank and Jesus

“And the Dead Shall Rise”, 700+ page book by ( ) on Leo Frank, convicted murderer of Mary Phagan, focuses on the group of Georgia’s finest citizens who lynched “the Jew” in l913. The title invites comparison of this mob with the one calling for Jesus’ crucifixion long ago. The comparison depends on taking both as mob-mentality induced slaughter of innocents, sad examples of man’s inhumanity to man.

An event honoring the life of Leo Frank was held in 2004 at Cornell University, from which he graduated, class of ’06. A broadway musical in the 1980’s was based on Leo Frank’s career. A 1986 Supreme Court decision over-turned the Georgia Court’s conviction on technical grounds – Leo Frank was deprived of his right of appeal due to the lynching -- while not addressing the question of guilt itself. These are some of the indications of how interest in the case has revived. And retrospectively, in psychohistorical terms, it’s no wonder. Called “the crime of the century” at the time, the same constellation of group-fantasy elements of “the times” comes into dynamic play with powerful effect. This case has it all, folks, and if you are ultra-sensitive about religious, ethnic, or cultural identity being affronted by the way language was used then, and now, off-stage a bit, it would probably be best if this were skipped until later.

This constellation is not confined to this resurrection of Leo Frank, who “died for a crime he did not commit”, however. It is recurring at the original site, Marietta, Georgia, almost a century later, in a community spat between Rabbi Steven Lebow and Rev. Randy Mickle over use of the United Methodist mega-church for the hi-school baccalaureate. It seems that Rabbi Lebow has been invited privately by a graduate, Julia Levy, also a member of his congregation, to be the main speaker at the event the school traditionally held in Rev. Mickle’s church. This would have positioned the Rabbi behind the Rev’s pulpit, dedicated to the preaching of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Rev. Mickle said “No”, but said a floor-level podium could be used. The Rabbi demurred; was then disinvited. This was a widely watched latent sectarian conflict, pitting public school multiculturalism, sacralilized, against the defenders of a Christian doctrine. The achool event was eventually moved elsewhere.

The interesting hitch is that Lebow lives only two miles from where Franl was lynched, and has paid respects to his memory as having suffered a grievous miscarriage of justice.

A side-bar from Mickle’s side leads to his record of anti-gay rights activism. He has been a political opponent.

In another connected aside, Rabbi Eric Yoffie, president of the Union of Reformed Jews, was guest speaker at the recent commencement at Rev. Jerry Falwell’s Liberty University. In the address, he shocked the audience by calling for blessing of same-sex marriage. He and Falwell agree to disagree on that one – boos were heard from the audience, admonished with “I have never been booed in a synagogue”. But they agree to agree on Israel ueber alles in American foreign policy, again re-inforcing the link between Bush/Republican Christian Zionists and organized Judaism. Thing is, Joffie is one of the best ones. And he had chosen to go down for the gays.

This is the constellation of elements: Jews, Christians, homosexuals (symbols of deviant sexuality in general), and ‘racism’ (cf. the role of Jim Conley), going over to conflicts that bitterly and permanently divide people and ‘generations’ thereafter. Becomes their “history”. On analysis, these conflicts can be traced to irreconcilable psychological differences which have been framed in moral/religious drag, then marketed in public TokenSpace consciousness by signs used in communicating “issues”. Once killing gets involved, all bets are off.

At the core is the blood of an innocent victim. For Jesus (sans Judas) this is univocal: He is the victim. For the 1913 case of the little factory girl, the victim is ambivalent: Mary Phagan, certainly; Leo Frank, posthumously. The revival of interest in his case must be predicated on the assumption of his innocence. If he did it, he is the monster some web-sites depict him as (“drug addicted, bi-sexual sadistic torturer rapist killer”). There is a third possibility: the black man did it, victimizing both. But that is far fetch on its face and doesn’t fit the evidence. However, it can lead to the KKK organization, the second generation of which was begun at this time. Along with the Anti-defamation League of the B’nai B’rith (Frank had been president of its Atlanta chapter, where a sizeable Jewish community had come to exist by turn of century). This was to contain the “anti-semitism” likely to have erupted if the case got seared into public TokenSpace by Baptist preacher rhetoric. According to one account, this had helped inflame the mob to chant “Hang the Jew or We’ll hang you!” It was a time of rapid expansion of Jewish immigrants along the eastern seaboard. The prosecutor of the case, who went on to become Governor of Georgia, played the role of Bill the Butcher in The Gangs of New York, holding off the lower east side Irish Catholic immigrants before the War Between The States. Thus the question of who killed Mary Phagan, and the guilt or innocence of Leo Frank, becomes a metaphysical marker, a true “X” point in history.


3. Judas/Priests and Kristallnacht
Background: the book “the Pink Swastika” – the homosexual roots of Nazi Germany

A. Wotan enters Heydrich (Herschel Grynzspan was merely a (probably planted) pre-text, a propaganda excuse for unparalled barbarity in civilized Europe.

One must see a picture of the 41 dots spread across the map of 1938 Germany marking cities where the Kristallnacht mob riot occurred to appreciate its enormity.

The authors of “The Pink Swastika” cite the roots of this outbreak to the decadence of Weirman German society, specifically its homosexuality. They tracer the strain of pre-Christian old Norse “Wotan” worship; the “Hellenes Teutonic”, idolizing large, powerful Blond Nordic human body types; cultic sex-magik practices of the Golden Dawn-Thule society (Aleister Crowly); glorification of a breed of German uber-mench, beyond good and evil, whose superior genetic strain would lift that of bourgeois humanity. The Friecorps, Hitler Youth, SA and SS elites were of this mold and had little use for outdated bible-based moral scruples. It was undoubtedly a psychic turbulence, a ‘blow out’ as in the 60’s, for which many psychohistorians see the Great Depression of the 30’s, and WWII, as a self-punishing reactions. And it is undoubtedly “anti-Judeo-Christian”. However, it is only half-right, and misleading, to view the metaphysics of the pro-‘Butch’ vs. ‘Femme’ homosexual split as key to the psychodynamics of anti-semitism, as do the authors of “The Pink Swastika”.





B. The authors of “The Pink Swastika” get it half- wrong: Judeo-Christians NOT attacked by Nazi’s because their moral/spiritual superiority, made them enemies of Third Reich ideology. This is an American right-wing fundamentalist spin, used to justify Republican party “family values” politics. THE EFFECT IS TO EQUATE RESISTING THE HOMOSEXUAL AGENDA AND FIGHTING NAZIS.

The politics of this is straight Zionism.

1. After Israel became the Jew’s refuge from the holocaust, anti-Nazi became synonymous with pro-Israel. 2. The United States is anti-Nazi (it is premised), having defeated them in WWII with great loss of life. Therefore, 3. the United States is pro-Israel. Or so the reasoning goes. This thinking has dictated policy ever since Harry Truman signed the deal in 1948. It is the premise of Steven Speilberg’s enormously disseminated movies Schindler’s List and Saving Private Ryan. Of the last tape of Osama Bin Laden accusing America of waging a “Zionist war”. And of the Libby Lobby, equating U.S. and Israeli interests.

Two points count against the author’s interpretation of German anti-semitism.

First, Christianity per se was not attacked by the Hitler regime (as the author’s “Judeo-Christian hatred” thesis claims). Some segments of Roman Catholicism actively cooperated. In Croatia, scene of the most vile atrocities, nationalistic Church-killer priests carried out unspeakable barbarities. Showing it is not Jewishness alone that arouses such behavior.

Second, many Jews and Jewish groups, particularly Reformed Liberal, do not reject homosexuality as sinful, or think that Nazi homosexuality drove the genocide. Authority for the first claim is Rabbi Eric Yoffie’s defense of gay-rights at Liberty U.. For the second, I can only plead ignorance of it, if it is held. Although the book of Leviticus stares any and every reader of Moses’ Pentateuch in the face with the author’s proscription right there in chapter 18 verse 22, whoever it was, it is one of the Old Testament laws most widely ignored in the breech, as it were.

"War" talk

http://www.originaldissent.com/forums/showthread.php?p=151396#post151396

Originally Posted by Angeleyes
Otto:

War on Poverty.

War on Drugs.

War as a metaphor for struggle is overused to the point of nausea for those who "get" war. A football field is not a battlefield, it is a field of play. But you hear sportscasters, coaches, and athletes spill war type jargon into their comments all the time.

Not sure if Jews started it or not, but the misuse and substitution of "war" for "struggle" or "difficult task" is hardly new.

AE

I agree with the italicized bit 100%.

AE
***** Response

I have often applauded your perspecuity, AE, for instance the remark about Europe's anti-semitism laws. (roughly, "If the holocaust really happened as believed, why should it be necessasry to make its denial illegal?") ..

...but none more than this.

"War" is a metaphysical metaphor; its use shows the user to be framing reality to "do battle" in, indicating a certain mind-set, as you note.

The psychohistorian Lloyd deMause spoke at our campus in the late 90's (by my invitation), and held forth on just this topic. He had gleaned some 20 use of "war" from a few days of US newspapers -- on everything from fat, laziness, drugs, termites, to Serbs and bad manners ...

...and astounded all (maybe 75 in the audience) who hadn't followed his work with the theses ihat it stood for (re-)birth: the original Cosmic Battle (at the every end, against the Poisoned Placenta clinging, crushing, suffocating -- inprinted as The Monster template from then on). Those who "get" war, and want to "make it" on everything opposing them have regressed to the point of compulsion to act out (re-)birth -- turn the obstance into an enemy one is fighting to be free of in order to have Lebensraum, oxygen, sense of Ego -- this last, especially, if the obstacle/enemy has been heroically b defeated on the field of battle. (insert picture of war dance in the end zone, compleate with spiking the ball. A sport begun by Venus worshippers ringing the U.S. Gulf Coast, using pigs bladder filled with blood for a ball, with the winning team on the out-and-out slaugher field getting slaughtered themselves, as well.

AT THE IMPRINTED UNCONSCIOUS LEVEL, WAR IS ABOUT SACRIFICE. What "war" is made on is always a monster-enemy it is necessary to sacrifice young, pure, oxygenated red blood...

-- of children, because that is what those who feel unborn are trying to "save"/redeem, of themselves -- unhappy, often hellish childhoods at the hands of sadistic caretakers. It's a fact. "The history of childhood is a nightmare from which humanity is just beginning to awaken," deMause says, and documents.

This is the message I have been trying to get out in every post, going to the core of why we are fighting, as opposed to "what 'we' are fighting for". But without awareness of the media's glaring use of "war" as a spread-on token for everything, there are no ears to hear. Which, paranoid that I am, I credit to the successful work of The Lobby & Co. who have no compunction whatsoever against perpetuating the sacrifice mentality to profit from. "If that's what people want to do." It is these Judas Priests who gave liberalism a bad name (and it is the "it takes one to know one" Judas Priests (Reaganonic Sith) who outed them.)


That is what I see the Baby Bomber generation perpetually trying to do: get rid of, gain redempton for the sinfulness they have been made to feel by their preachers and politicians after Vietnam. And deserve to feel, we who protested it to the point of civil disobedience hold, to the extent they did not do all they could to oppose it. Those who freaked out on drigs, sex, and rock 'n roll in the 60's, bless 'em, were at least honest human souls one could understand, whatever their eternal destiny. But they have been scapegoated by the moralizing corporate spiritual entrepreneurs to cover their own betrayal of America's ideals all once shared. Making way for the likes of David Horowitz, Andrew Sullivan, and the Rove/Guckert/Shaivo politic of Tom Delay et al. If they claim salvation, it will have to come from the Gospel of Judas.
__________________

Judas = Neo-Con's Christ

JUDAS = NEO-CON’s Christ.

A Gospel of Judas?

-Or: Political Wiseacring at Christians’ expense, big time.

A lengthy (but still too short) discussion of what’s up in the Spiritual Border War Zone



Now this generation has lived to see Judas Iscariot exonerated. Not such a metaphysical miscreant after all, the newly published text indicates. In fact, by accepting history’s condemnation for betraying Jesus, when he was only carrying out his pre-assigned role in the Gethsemane arrest, he may even be said to be morally equal or superior. That’s if you put Jesus on the same level as the disciples, like a brotherhood whose members had different roles to play in arranging the great salvation drama.

If, however, Jesus is put on a separate metaphysical plane, a distinct type of entity with status among a celestial hierarchy of surplanetary beings -- human flesh, but with a higher-grade of consciousness -- this attempt to rehabilitate Judas makes no sense. In the canonical Gospels he is the one who cunningly exploits his membership among the twelve apostles to hustle money from the Sanhedrin, then leads the Roman soldiers to Gethsemane to identify Jesus with a kiss. This depicts a form of humanity than which no lower or more despicable can be conceived. Andrew Cockburn, writing the liner notes for the National Geographic on-line site characterizes the archetypal feeling toward Judas. “He is the ultimate symbol of treachery. Stockyards call the goat that leads other animals to slaughter the Judas goat. In Germany, officials can forbid new parents from choosing the name Judas. Guides at the historical Coptic Hanging Church in Old Cairo point out one black column in the church’s while colonnades – Judas, of course.”

And now…? a document arrives with great fanfare announcing itself to be “The secret account of the revelation that Jesus spoke in conversation with Judas Iscariot,” dated from the third century, linked to an earlier reference by Iraneaus, authenticity of its lexographic bona fides vouched for by experts, threatening to put an end to this part of the old, old story of salvation. The story transmitted by through the 17 centuries by the faith of all who called themselves “Christian” is to be radically revised? ?! And in what way? – by elevating Judas to a rank equal to Christ’s, privy to information others are denied.

Having pondered over the document for several days, while not claiming to be to unify all its exuberant symbolic content in a single story, I can certify certain things stand out against the interpretation of him as Jesus’ closest ally. .

One is the unlawfulness of Judas’ access to “the great and holy generation” scene. What he witnessed was not for humans. “Judas, your star has led you astray,” he is told. “No person of mortal birth is worthy to enter the house you have seen, for that place is reserved for the holy.” Far from its being a blessing, as the commentators male out, this assignment of a star (mission) to Judas (interpreting “the star that leads the way is your star”), it is a curse; his cross. It nowhere denies that he hung himself, bursting open at the middle with intestines (Matthew 27.5; Acts 1.18) He is told “You will become the thirteenth, and you will be cursed by the other generations—and you will come to rule over them.” But this promised rule does not include happiness. It will not bring a “great day of light dawning for the generation,” Judas expects. “But when he said this, Jesus left him.” Instead: For to the human generations it has been said, “Look, God has received your sacrifice from the hands of a priest – that is, a minister of error. But it is the Lord, the Lord of the universe, who commands, “On the last day they will be put to shame.”” There is nothing in this that points to Judas being the “best” among the disciples. (“This is really exciting. This explains why Judas is singled out by Jesus as the best of the disciples. The others didn’t get it.” – pure fabrication.)

The fragment “but you will exceed all of them. For you will sacrifice the man that clothes me” is cited out of context by the National Geographic commentator to support the idea that he was “favored”. He helped the “mystic” devotee of Gnosticism escape the body. Actually, in context, which is broken, it appears to be part of the curse.
It follow a line apparently identifying the “them” he will “exceed” with “those who offer sacrifices to Saklas….everything that is evil”. The enormity of his treachery is what others cannot exceed. He is lower than those who sacrifice to false gods.

The New Testament repeatedly has Jesus condemning him. “And truly the Son of Man goes as it has been determined, but woe to that man by whom He is betrayed.” (Luke 22.22) And “The Son of Man indeed goes just as it is written of Him, but woe to that man by whom the Son of Man is betrayed! It would have been good for that man if he had not been born.” (Matthew 26.24, Mark 14.21). Finally, he says to Pilate: “You could have no power at all against me unless it had been given you from above. Therefore the one who delivered Me to you has the greater sin.” (John 19.11) Nothing in the text of the gospel of Judas to reverse this utter condemnation. If anything, it is taken further.

That follows from a second major these that stands out. A segment of “scene 2” titled “The Disciples See the Temple and Discuss it.”, reads, in part:

”They said “We have seen a great house with a large altar in it and twelve men—they are priests we would say—and a name, and a crowd of people waiting at that altar…until the priests receive their offering.”

This is very important because a. there is a smack of reality to the “great house with a large altar”, considering the monumental plain of Baalbek was nearby and could have been visited. And b., on a symbolic plane, if Jesus role is to end, by fulfilling, the teaching that sacrifice is required for salvation (“in all their deeds of deficiency, the sacrifices are brought to completion”), the priests should not be receiving sacrifices in his name. Yet, that is what they are doing, he declares, bringing shame: “Truly I say unto you, all the priests who stand before the altar invoke my name. Again I say unto you, my name has been written on this ( …) of the generations of the stars through the human generations. And they have planted trees without fruit, in my name, in shameful manner.” This prospect, that he is describing the work of the apostles is a thunderous critique by its Author. “Those you have seen receiving the offerings at the altar—that is who you are. That is the god you serve, and you are those twelve men you have seen.”
One commentator takes this strange reference to “your god”, as reflecting Cainite sect that regarded the Hebrew’s YHWH as an evil creator. Jesus is distancing himself from this, even laughing at them. He is condemning their continuation of the Jews sacrificers in his name. They mislead. “The cattle you have seen brought to sacrifice are the many people you lead astray,” This is as if spoken before his own death, which perhaps Judas does not yet anticipate, but it appears to also look down the line to those who will receive sacifices in his name – “shear his sheep,” in more colloquial terms—AFTER his own sacrificial death. Generations of the pious will remain loyal to him., he says, but “After (…), another man will stand there from the fornicators, and another will stand there from the slayers of children, and another from those who sleep with men, and those who abstain, and the rest of the people of pollution and lawlessness and error , and those who say “We are like angels’: they are the stars that bring everything to its conclusion.”

The upshot: “Jesus said to them, “Stop sacrificing…which you have over the altar, since they are over your stars and your angels and have already come to their conclusions there.”

If the term “revelation” has meaning, it apples here. This vignette show the existence side-by-side of the two fundamental and profoundly incompatible views of the meaning of ritual sacrifice for humanity: that of Jesus, whose act, according to the book of Hebrews, would end it.

“11. But Christ came as High Priest of the good things to come, and the greater and more perfect tabernacle not made with hands, that is, not of this creation.
12. Not with the blood of goats and calves, but with His own blood He entered the Most Holy Place once for all, having obtained eternal redemption.
13. For it the blood of bulls and boats and the ashes of a heifer, sprinkling the unclean, sanctifies for the purifying of the flesh,
14. how much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Sprit offered Himself without spot to God, cleanse your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?
15. And for this reason He is the Mediator of the new covenant, by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions under the first covenant, that those who are called may receive the promise of the internal inheritance…
…
24. For Christ has not entered into the holy places made with hands which are copies of the true, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us.
25. not that He should offer Himself often, as the high priest eners the Most Holy Place every year with blood of another—
26. He then would have had to suffer often since th foundation of the world; but now, once at the end of the ages, He has appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself.

….. (If following sacrifices according to the law, “having the shadow of the good things to come, not the very image of the things” 10.1) could cleanse of sin, …)

2. Would not they have ceased to be offered? For the worshippers, once purified, would have had no more consciousness of sins.
3. But in those sacririces there is a reminder of sins every year.”

This is the conclusive argument that what His life and death represent to followers of the new covenant is fundamentally and profoundly incompatible with the way of the ancient Jews. Therefore, when Jesus said “you are the twelve men” seen sacrificing in the great temple, an absolute metaphysical line is draw that will play out through the centuries.

POLITICAL IMPLICATIONS

Judas is the Neo-cons Jesus, their Messiah.

Just as the favorable way of spinning the real message of the Codex Tchacos is blatant attempt to reduce the sense of guilt for those identified by name, if not commitment, with “Jude”, “Judah,” “Judas,” “Judism”, “Jew”.

For it recurs in the relation between Israel and America. As Judas dealt behind the back of the others to hook up Jesus’ capture at Gethsemane, so The Neo-con Lobby” (see Mearsheimer and Wald) has dealt behind the bacls of public Americans, their would-be saviors, to hang them on the cross of Iraq. And it is the same Jews: the one’s who would perpetuate the way of sacrifice forever, side-by-side with the One(s) who would end it.

“Judas Rising.” This is the lead title of the band Judas Priest’s 2004 album “Angel of Retribution”. Its lyrics go: “The burden of sin Echoes the prophecy …Ascending from hell…Forever despising…Judas is Rising. Their faith is revealed, Deceivers are crying by Crucified steel Evangelising Judas is rising.”

Is that what Andrew Cockburn sees, writing the last line in his National Geographic article: “Judas, reborn, is about to face the world”? If so, let him see what comes next

From DEAL WITH THE DEVIL – what’s happening -- “Gotta deal with the devil ‘Cause you know that it’s real…Done a deal with the devil From a heart made of steel. Watched the movement grow, Into One voice, Took on all the World, It had no choice”

From REVOLUTION -- picking up the 60’s Beatles beat “If you think it’s over better think again .. If you think I’d back down or accept defeat, brace for aftershock ..Here comes the Revolution, time for retribution.

From DEMONIZER – Birth of his’their new spirit. “Born of the sun, crashed to earth, Tormented reviled Engorged Hate from Birth … The beast of a god, Regaled of his race, Prepared to Onslaught and Bare face to face…The scream of the demon, There’s evil about, They’ve come to possess us, Out Demon Out. Blade of the wheel Cuts to deep to the bone, It’s Gideon’s quest To take Satan’s throne. The critical mass and power that the weild Exterminate all when vermin rebel”

From ANGEL – redemption -- “Angel – put sad wings around me now, Protect me from the world of sin, So that we can rise again. …Oh Angel – We can find our way somehow, Escaping from the world we’re in, To a place where we began.”

From EULOGY - end of days -- “And so now it comes to pass, By the Eventide on Mass, See them Gather Yet alas, They remain still as stained glass.
For they know only too well That the story they will tell, Conjures Up an ageless spell Guarded by the Sentinel.
So it goes forevermore, Ever steady to the core That the Sign that they came for waves majestic from the floor.”

From LOCHNESS – emerging from the primal waters, the Uroboric Monster –
“Grey mist drifts upon the water, The mirrored surface moves, Awakened of this presence, Dispelling legend’s proof…This legend lives through centuries evoking histo4y’s memories prevailing in eternities on and an on:


Elaboration and Analysis


The official spin put on The Gospel of Judas as redemptive, I charge, is a displacement, in psychoanalytic terms, of the (conscious or) unconscious sense of guilt felt by Jews on account of Israel’s dealings with America, onto the archetypal New Testament drama. Judas gaining exoneration for betrayal, by learning of a secret deal allegedly made with Jesus behind the other disciple’s backs carried over, by the displacement, to exoneration of the neocon/Zionist Lobby for having manipulated the system here to bring war. The political motive for this spin on “the Gospel of Judas” is thus to prevent this unconscious, potentially devastating dream/fantasy content from becoming conscious.


The write-up by David Gibson in the New York Times virtually said as much. .
“(T)hose same experts believe that the current debates provoked by the Judas Gospel, whle not undoing a painful history, could help Christian-Jewish relations now and in the future. “Maybe if Judas can be ‘rehabilitated,’ then perhaps some of those old issues could be set aside,” said Marvin Meyer, a bible scholar at Chapman University.”” (April 9, 2006 sub-titled “Anti-Semitism’s Muse”) These represent the world-view that accepts this story as semi-factual, without revising certain accepted Christological ideas. But this is not tenable. The “old issues” Meyer would set aside are traceable to different answers given to the question of what “divinity” or “Christhood” attribute to the man Jesus in the confessional.

For instance, concerning the issue of sacrifice, the bone of contention between between early Christians and Jews, this document relates that in a vision the disciples see a great house with a great altar and 12 men, a priesthood of 12, receive sacrificies in his name. If the spirit which they earlier attributed by “You are the son of our god”, and if he is to be the sacrifice that completes the time of ritual sacrificing, itself, in the cosmological transition from the age of Aries to Pisces, then the act of continuing to receive sacrifices in his name demonstrates utter lack of connection to the inner meaning of his death, alongside an entrepreneurial willingness to use the picture of his grotesque suffering as a gig, if that is what people want to see.

Call this “The Judas Priest hustle”. It is a miracle that “their god”, as he says to them, should reveal it now, just when humanity most sorely needs some good news of salvation.

In form, it is a three-phase process: getting him crucified; encouraging other’s adulation of him as “God”, linked to their soul’s eternal salvation; followed up by receiving the sacrifices of those who believe. This is admittedly an interpretative application. In broad terms, the text reads to me as saying:

“Judas’s vision concerns the work the 12 Apostles will continue in Jesus’ name. He was numbered among them for a while, then replaced “in order that the twelve may come again to completion with their god.” The work of the 12 is completed in this generation, the Judas Generation, with the revelation of his “Gospel.” What began with his bringing to earth the result of defiling a holy place to gain knowledge forbidden to mortal persons has played out into the present as the other side of Christianity.”


The symbolic line is in the “J-“ word sign-uses: Judas, Judah, Judaism, Jewish, leading by application to the state of Israel. The article “The Israeli Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy” by Mearsheimer and Wald documents the objective ground for following these token associations. This article and the Gospel of Judas appared at roughly the same time, Easter season, in April ’06. The article argues, roughly, that far from Israel being strategic and moral asset to the United States, it is a liability. It threatens, more than it helps protect American interests. That would make the neocon WHIG’s (“White House Iraq Group” meeting in Dick Cheney’s chambers to plot out The Sacrifice) Judases, and brand this era, their legacy, the Judas Generation, even as prophesied in the Gospel.

The juxtaposition of the two views of sacrifice, begun at a “Y” point historically 2000 years ago, now existing side-by-side in TokenSpace of contemporary communication, raises this burning question to a metaphysical level: what does “Christ” stands for?