Americans Waking Up to Mortal Danger of China

At the close of 2007, after the Dec. 18 Republican presidential debate, some American voters have realized that the Bush administration, as well as all presidential candidates except Duncan Hunter, have been exposing the West to China’s “surprise attack,” either outwardly or by simply ignoring that the threat exists.

Left unchecked, this threat will establish the China dictators’ world domination.

Michael Skok writes in a Dec. 22 e-mail:

Dear Lev:

Is there some kind of censorship on candidates who are against Red China? I’m running as a lesser known Democrat candidate in New Hampshire. I am against Red China. I have a Web site, michaelskok.com but nobody writes to me. Please let me know what I can do to warn my fellow Americans of the China threat.

Sincerely yours,

Michael Skok

I explained the solution in my previous column (Jan. 4). Michael sees the present geostrategic situation probably no worse than I do. But U.S. presidents are elected not by individuals like him and me, but by a majority. Hence the need for a film depicting the world situation and its consequences, and motivating the voters to elect a president capable and willing to face the ghastly world predicament.

A day earlier, another Michael sent me a short straight-to-the-point e-mail:

Mr. Navrozov:

I very much enjoyed your eye-opening article “The China Threat Goes Unchecked”!

Keep up the good work sir. Duncan Hunter is exactly whom America needs as president in ’08!

Michael

Here is yet another Dec. 21 e-mail, signed by Daryl and responding to my column “The China Threat Goes Unheeded: The Prospect of a China-Dominated World Is Real.” His response is no less affirmative, even if more elaborate:

Dear Mr. Navrozov:

Thank you for writing on this topic. Not enough people do, unfortunately.

There is an adage from the Cold War: Russians play chess, Americans play poker.

Well, the Chinese play wen-chi, a game of deep strategy which makes chess like tic-tac-toe.

Daryl concludes that the dictatorship of China “will do whatever it takes . . . to bring the entire World to its knees before Beijing.”

In his e-mail on the same day Sherman Sable asks:

[W]hy does the United States continue to allow China to ruin our economy[?] Almost everything I buy has the tag “Made in China” on it, yet they are supplying weapons to the countries we are at war with that are used to kill and maim our military. How stupid are the people running our country! I would ban all trade with China in a heart beat, the heck with political correctness and all that other garbage. It is high time this country does the thing that is right for the people instead of the government cronies.

Some authors of e-mails agree that “China is a threat,” but stuck in their heads are splinters of what American professors of sinology and other “specialists” talking on the subject of China in the mass information media have been knocking into their heads for years. Here is an e-mail (Dec. 21) from Eric LaGrange of Orlando:

Lev, while I certainly [!] agree that China is a threat and shouldn’t be trusted by our government, I still believe that mutually assured destruction is a deterrent. Although they may, in fact, develop post nuclear weapons, the nuclear weapons on our subs in the Pacific are sufficient to destroy China without warning.

They can’t take those out without taking themselves out. Also, I wouldn’t assume that China could be developing any technology that we’re not developing ourselves. After all, they had to get technology from Clinton in order to build their own weapons just 10 years ago or so.

Eric

Orlando

Post-nuclear weapons (such as nanoweapons) do not assure the destruction of the attacker, because during his attack, his post-nuclear weapons find and destroy the attacked country’s weapons, whether in the Pacific or in Washington, D.C.

Eric does not “assume that China could be developing any technology that we are not developing ourselves.” In his e-mail, Daryl explains that the Chinese play wen-chi, a game of deep strategy that makes chess like tic-tac-toe. But chess is not a Western invention either. It came to the West only in the 14th century. Gunpowder and compass appeared in China before they did in Europe, while gas for warming and lighting had existed in China 2,000 years before it appeared in Europe.

Of course, not all e-mail authors are motivated by their intention to reveal the truth, which is so scarce, and thus to save the West. Eric Hands is writing in the first of the two paragraphs of his e-mail:

You might try reading Thomas Aquinas [that is, I never tried reading Aquinas, but I might try] and then completing some course and lab work in conceptual analysis and the testing of empirical hypotheses . . . [ellipsis belong to Eric Hands] as empiricism can be a definition of folly.

I “might try” reading Thomas Aquinas, a 13th-century Italian Catholic scholastic. He studied Aristotle, who had lived about 17 centuries earlier. But what has this to do with the Chinese annihilation of the West?

You see, Eric Hands read Aquinas, went through all the other “academic” exercises, and received the rank of a professor, with the corresponding salary, to teach students to read Aquinas; that is, to become omniscient supermen, rising mentally above all who have not read Aquinas.

Not a single word in his e-mail is related to the coming catastrophe. As Western humanity is being turned into fertilizer, he will advise to “try” to read Aquinas unless he becomes fertilizer ahead of any other Westerner.

In another Dec. 21 e-mail, Ray from Florence, Ala., is as scornful about non-academics as is Eric Hands. Yet at least he says: “But your concept about China is realistic . . .”

Gregory Sullivan’s Dec. 21 e-mail contains an important request:

Lev,

I try to read your weekly articles in Newsmax.com and most recently I read your article titled, “The China Threat Goes Unchecked: The Prospect of a China-Dominated World Is Real” dated Thursday, December 20, 2007. Great article, as they all are. I too understand the China threat (go Duncan Hunter for President! — I wish). What are these “post-nuclear super weapons” you continually mention in your articles? Could you describe them to me? Are they of the nano-assembler type, the Tesla Howitzer type (as mentioned on Lt. Col. Tom Bearden’s Web site) or these are several other types? I look forward to your answer.

Thanks,

Greg

I recommend Lt. Col. Tom Bearden’s study to all who ask me about post-nuclear super weapons.

Note the title of his book, “Oblivion: America at the Brink,” and its “Final Urgent Commentary.” “The Darkest Days in the history of our republic lie immediately ahead of us.”

This is written by a U.S. officer! The only shortcoming of his book, in my opinion, is that he ignores everything K. Eric Drexler has been writing from 1986 to 2008, and the words “nano” and “nanotechnology” do not even occur in his book.

Fortunately, Drexler’s 1986 book “Engines of Creation” (with the chapter “Engines of Destruction” devoted to molecular nano weapons) has been republished as an ebook, and I received it free of charge from WOWIO.com — right into my computer.

I advise Gregory Sullivan or whoever else is interested to read the chapter “Engines of Destruction,” or to try to receive this ebook in the same way I did by ordering it from WOWIO.com. Please use my name if necessary. My copy is preceded by the inscription: “WOWIO ® is proud to sponsor this ebook for Lev Navrozov.”

* * *

You can e-mail me at navlev@cloud9.net.