COB authors introduced this term for individuals, who reject their own declarations by reticences. It corresponds to the concept of “obsession” in Christian and Islam lexicon, and Bogomolov seems to develop this idea further in the article “Something stringer, than Gorky’s «Mother»”. He comments the reaction of Palestinian mothers on young Arabs suicide. I’d rather translate this paragraph wholly too.
Yes, Watson, please. All the more, that, as I remember, Galba told you something about Gorky’s novel “Mother”?
You’re right, Holmes, so:
“There, on the screen, not so young woman was dancing and singing with children. She might be their mother. When the subject about shakhids went on, one would remember her. The kamikazes among them were not so astonishing, as she was. Her son exploded himself voluntary, and took several lives with him. She regretted nothing. Everything was all right. We have the image of mother in our literature – Nilovna. She regretted nothing too. She blessed her only son for revolutionary, risky struggle for all humankind happiness. But it’s rather hard to imagine her brightening up, when she gets to know about Pavel’s death. Her gladness in this case…
Palestinian mother brightened up, rejoiced and said that felt happy. Happy bride. Neighbours congratulated them both, rejoiced together with them over their great good luck in this life. It is something irrational, from our point of view. It wouldn’t be correct to call it inhumaneness. May be, above-humaneness? Or super-humaneness?”
Yes, Watson, that’s the “resemblance”. We felt. Bogomolov (significant surname as such) seems to unit fascism and Trotskyism of “super humans” involuntary by this question. To tell nothing about that he has solved the rebus of the first picture in the “Historical Picnic”.
Speaking this, Holmes unfolded the first “picnic” and pointed to the branch “Nilovna” and “Zeus on the armoured car”.
It seems to be Watson, that terrorists-kamikazes of Arabian origin– Trotskyites in Islam, were indicated in matrix-scenario of the “Historical Picnic” as early as 1991. Yes, Galba may be quoted here: “what they were fought for has been their undoing”. And at the same time I’m absolutely sure, that neither author of the article, nor editorial staff, nor “overt” Trotskyite Galba knew anything about “picnics”, though almost entire paper “Izvestiya” of September, 22 was devoted to this Russian rebus, and Galba told you everything about each of three “picnics”.
Wait, Watson, – Watson interrupted his friend’s reasoning, – I think there is a connection with the backside of the “Historical Picnic”.
What do you mean, Watson?
Do you remember about six films, applied to the first “picnic”? Here, – I pointed to the left column of the twelfth page, – there is a heading “The Outrage of Naked Gods” in the department of “Tele-cinema on the week-end”, and after it – a list of six films: “The Envy of Gods”, “Naked Maja”, “The Drops of Rain on Burning Rocks”, “Escape from New York”, “Traffic” and “The Outrage”, with short annotation to each. Should I translate?
No, Watson, you shouldn’t. Everything is clear enough. I was thinking it over for long, why first and second “picnics” have the application with films, and the third doesn’t. It appeared, but only after completing the matrix-scenario. The fellows were late … they lost their “prediction” qualification, the ability to predict on the base of foresight, didn’t they? Essentially, this film-list indicates the algorithm of the “Post Historical Picnic”, but … but only after the matrix has turned towards its masters – biblical znakharstvo. So, that’s why “The Envy of Gods” – biblical quacks are polytheists and idolaters by their essence, they pretend to enter the huge throng of Olympic gods. That’s why Eros, ancient Greek god of love, is on the “top” of the third “picnic”. But in fact, money is their “god”, and the “god” of biblical civilization created by them. And that’s why there stood a statue of a “calf”, huge and shining, like made of pure gold, as I know, between two twin-buildings of WTC. It hardly has been burnt down and turned into dust as the result of explosions and fires, the most probable thing, that it has been covered with debris or, perhaps, crushed. “Naked Maja” is associated with “Aphrodite Beautifully-rumped”; I don’t feel like commenting “The drops of rain…” for that is all they can oppose to new conception with epic Russian name of “Dead water”; the whole world was watching “Escape from New York” on the September 11 and “Traffic” is a peculiar symbol of Western civilization, securing its stability of crowd-“elitism” and leading to its “Outrage” i.e. to death.
And still, Holmes, how do you think, is Bin Ladin involved in destroying the twin-towers on September 11 or not?
You see, Watson, he is, but not more than Gorbachev was involved in destroying USSR. May be. It can be said, that his real fault is even less, than Gorbachev’s. But in Bin Ladin’s case, as well as in Gorbachev’s, very powerful forces stand behind their backs. Choosing the candidature for the image of enemy, these forces assess his ambitiousness. Bin Ladin appeared the most suitable for this role, in spite of all his billions, and thanks to his ambitiousness and demonic type of psychical structure. Gorbachev answers to the accusation of destroying USSR, which still sound directed against him: “How could I be so courageous to start reformations… I might have been sitting in the General Secretary’s chair still”[124]. That means the following: “Such were the objective circumstances, and Soviet Union was doomed to inevitable split by all its totalitarian past, which Gorbachev was struggling against allegedly”.
But he could have been called really courageous, if he wouldn’t have betrayed the multi-national people of USSR, even having seen the half of his head laying on the table in front of one of presidium members; he could have been called courageous, if he wouldn’t have succumbed to destroying aggregor-matrix algorithms, destroying USSR in accordance with USA NSC-20/1 Directive of August 18, 1948, but if he would have found and realized some constructive alternative.
It could have saved USA from September 11 terrorist acts: Afghanistan became the main base of vakhabits and refuge of terrorists and drug-dealers in the last ten years of 20th century only as a sequence of Gorbachev’s betraying of USSR and pro-Soviet regime of Nagibula.
In the case of Soviet Union the role of enemy was given to GKChP with trembling hands. But you must remember, Watson what Galba told you about agitation point and advertising campaign: if one agitation point of socialism is destroyed, than one agitation point of capitalism should be destroyed too, if they have decided that “we’ll our, new world will construct”. But stereotype is impossible in the deed of destroying the “agitation points” of old world, which let keep world in balance by balancing between them, because in opposite case even the crowd, thoughtlessly watching pictures on their screen, would understand everything. For destroying the agitation point of capitalism the other method is needed and nothing dealt with associative links with ancient Greek mythology, because biblical znakharstvo understood, that the trick of global circus Shapiro – “such were the objective circumstances” – wouldn’t go this time. But they needed the “friend” of White House. Watson, you know that big family of Ladins was the “friend” of White House, and the circus trick – is Osama Bin Ladin himself as “prodigal son”[125] of rich family – belongs to the sphere of mythology too. And here we encounter with Rembrandt and his striking piece “Returning of Prodigal Son” once more. Besides what count read on the villa “Askania-Nova” from the paper “Chas Pick” №151 of October, 14, 1997 in this connection, a very strange phrase I’ve found in this newspaper, which lead my reasoning to such conclusions.