Charles J. Ingerson


When one needs a win of any kind – when one wants to attack the strongest – when one needs to develop an opening – strike the weakest link. Over the years history has developed a plan for this attack. In some places it’s been the family, in others what others know little about, in many it’s been the school system by teaching the youth ‘untruth’ or only ‘truth’ as they want taught. In the plethora of examples in history we find the ‘bully’, the ‘criminal’, the ‘terrorist’, the ‘conqueror’s’ and the ‘extremists’ always following a similar pattern – attack the ‘weakling’ or the ‘weakest’ point.

The most recent example of this is Spain – attacking ‘commuters’ on a train. In NYC and Washington DC they attacked ‘sitting’ targets of ‘civilians’ at work. The difference here is the attack was on a moving target only. Both MO’s were in the use of the ‘transportation systems’. They attacked people who were unarmed and unable to protect them selves in anyway.

In Russia organized gangs of youth attacked and caused havoc unchecked and sponsored by the state – then did Stalin call in the military to restore order after the goals of destruction were accomplished the ‘terror’ of the innocent citizens who needed to be brought into line with the Communist’s way of thinking. Even here the deception goes beyond mere actions but in the ‘words’ used to describe this great plan. Communism has never been the goal or thinking of the dictators, leaders, founders of those movements that claim this title. Dominion by a few over the many is the only goal of those nations claiming to be ‘Communist’. Yet the use of the word makes the goal so more ultraistic in the text books and in the white towers of education. Actually the US, Canada and GB are closer to the ‘intents’ of Communism than any of the Totalitarian Dictatorships of the last 100 years. The Social Welfare, Taxes, School Systems and loosely interpreted ‘Rights’ by the court systems whole attempt is to make everyone equal and to share the fruits of the labor of all (regardless of how few they might really be now or in the future). China has done the same with its cultural revolutions. Cuba, Zimbabwe, Liberia, Sudan, North Korea, the Middle East, etc. have all done similar ‘blood lettings’ to rid themselves of those who oppose or create any opposition. One would suspect South Africa might be next.

It’s the denial of freedoms which attack the weakest first – till in the end freedoms are denied to all except those in ‘absolute power’. The denial is based on the implementation of ‘fear’ or the ‘threat of fear’. People are made to lose their voice. They become unable to talk about beliefs, right or wrong, deity, constructive criticism, or in the end anything which the leaders would be prone to call ‘murmuring’. When the voice of the people becomes quiet and the rhetoric of the extremist becomes the mainstream language (such as in parts of the Middle East and on Colleges/University’s or in the Media/Press) then the weakest have been effectively attacked. Common sense is lost and we’ve gone full circle to give back the hard won ‘rights’ and ‘freedoms’ which allow people to ‘worship’ and be ‘individuals/family’s’ and last of all ‘strong’.

Spain was an excellent target to attack for all of these reasons and including ‘emotion’. When one has no way to defend them selves, they have to surrender. France and Germany have already done so (even if they don’t know it) as have many of the EU Nations. Striking them would only be as a punishment or reminder and not a lesson. In any one election the change would be immediate and non-reversible with the current population ratios found in the EU. The vanquished has already returned and has only been taught to seek revenge and not to build.

Lastly, isn’t it interesting when the WTC was attacked with the Pentagon – we recalled the capture of the Spanish Fleet by the Dutch in the 1630’s. It took 30 years for the Spanish power to be completely lost but the end was already decided. This time in about 31 months it’s happened again. Whether it was necessary to blow up the trains a couple of days prior to the elections or not the result is the same. Somewhere I remember seeing a poster, “Make Love, not War” and thinking, “Yup! Agree but tell it to the enemy not us – we fight because they want to take away our rights to love our families and friends. To secure the freedoms that others may be allowed the choice of love and the blessings attended to this choice.” However, I learned the definition of ‘love’ they were using had nothing to do with ‘family/friends’ but with ‘lust’ and ‘abuse’. Full circle seems to define what we’re seeing today; nothing new, just a different stage and actors – with the same script.