Blog 14 Midsummer New Year of Johns Eve 2012



A Sideways View of A Tree in Rebirth.



To continue to follow through with the news of the day (not necessarily to the day), here is a worth while read from Stratfor:

http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/spain-debt-and-sovereignty?utm_source=freelist-f&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=20120612&utm_term=gweekly&utm_content=readmore&elq=ae946eda948d4861abb0d1cc3fd9d18c

The article illustrates just how vulnerable in the Big Scheme of Things is Latvia, especially when it is governed by ‘know nothings’ and ‘no brainers’. If indeed “The European Union is built around Germany”, will Bruessels be anything but a German and EU capital, and may not Koenigsberg of Old Prussia fame become necessary to defend Latvia?

The author of the article, George Friedman, of Stratfor continues: “During the U.S. Civil War, the future of the Union was challenged by the secession of the South. The decisions were made on the battlefields where men were willing to die either for the Union or to break away from it. Who will die for the European Union? And what will hold it together when its decisions are unpopular? The concept of extended integration can work, but not without the passion that moves a Greek or a German to protect his and his country's interest. Without that, the glue that holds nations together is missing in the European Union.”

Latvia’s sovereignty is, everyone knows, hawked by the Latvian boyars (known today as oligarchs) for dollars or euros. The perpetrators are they, who have compromised themselves early enough in the “Game over Latvia” to sell it, yet even more disastrously for the Latvian Commons http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Commons to gradually liquidate it.

While there are few who agree with me today, I believe that the “Latvian Commons” has much to do with the Rus of St. Vladimir. It is in Latvia’s interest to belong to a Commonwealth that insures it sovereignty.

The Latvian synonym for ‘Commons’, incidentally, is “saime”, a word at the foundation of the seat of the alleged democratic government of Latvia, re Saeima. The Latvian ‘saime’ means a bond, a group, a household, a unit that lives much as a family does, but acts as an extended economic unit within which not all members are of the same nucleus, which consists of a ‘saimnieks’ and ‘saimniece’, close symbolic kin of Adam and Eve.

What does all that have to do with St. John or plain Johns?

We need to continue with our history lesson from Wikepedia a little longer:

“Immediately after the murder of Fyodor and Ioann, early medieval Rus saw persecutions against Christians, many of whom escaped or concealed their belief.
However, Prince Vladimir mused over the incident long after, and not least for political considerations. According to the early Slavic chronicle called Tale of Bygone Years, which describes life in Kyivan Rus' up to the year 1110, he sent his envoys throughout the civilized world to judge at first hand the major religions of the time—Islam, Roman Catholicism, Judaism, and Byzantine Orthodoxy. They were most impressed with their visit to Constantinople, saying, "We knew not whether we were in Heaven or on Earth… We only know that God dwells there among the people, and their service is fairer than the ceremonies of other nations."

And why should Tale of Bygone Years tell that the envoys sent by Tsar Vladimir should prefer Constantinople over all others? Was it that all Constantinoplians were drunkards (in days when vodka http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vodka had not likely to have been invented yet)? Or was it perhaps because the people of Rus, the allaged pa-jahns or po-ivans, felt greater religious affinity with Constantinople?

Alright, what affinity?

Re: The bonds of the Eurasian ‘saime’, which have been stolen and replaced by the state-dependent Christian ‘family’.

Can you prove such a thing?

The word ‘saime’ speaks for itself. It is known that before the enthroning of St. Vladimir over Kiev, Vladimir was a payan (the correct word for pagan), yet one who was familiar with Christianity and who, yet, sacrificed human beings not only after a victorious battle, but probably also before it—to insure that his soldiers knew among themselves a blood bond great enough to bring victory.

We can assume that in the Christianity practiced among the people from whose midst St. Vladimir himself came, human self-sacrifice was not an alien thing. We know that self-sacrifice among the Christians of the West is if not quite forbidden, closely tied to the word ‘suicide’, which was universally, recognized as a disgraceful act. In fact, suicide was condemned with a fatwa or social taboo that was as strong as the one  against incest.