Eva's blog

I have a theory all the meaningful events of the western world can be drawn back to The Sahara and Arabian deserts turning from grassland to arid desert. The adaptation of Homo sapiens brought about both Sumer and Egypt in and around 3 serarate river valley's at the end of the long slow drying process. 

It is also worth noting that  until about 8000 BCE you still had ice taking away much of the living space.  And while the reach of human population was global (and had been for thousands of years) it was so sparse there was no need for civilation, even confined around the equator or livable spaces. It was still all green.  

And that is it.  

6000 BCE the places people all live look like this. Easy to stay apart from one another in our Africa-centric origins. 

Sahara Desert: 

The Arabian Pennisula had even more water in a massive criss-crossed river system. 

There was plenty to keep the human population sparsely populated. 

Then the earth titled and the season changed, and you get the rest from there. 

They (inhabitants within the drying up area) would have followed the green until they reached rivers or oceans. That is exactly what is appears happened.  

From there you can follow archeological evidence (mainly tools and trinkets) around the entire region as civilizations rise and fall. Get subjugated and freed. Write one text, then another to supersede it. 

You can follow the conquering civizations and their monuments of achievement or texts of conquest and still retract all civilation back to the first ones starting 5500 years ago with the onset of the copper age. Of course brought to you buy necessary cooperation. 

At this point one may bring up Chinese civilation, which arose in the middle of the bronze age 2200 BCE.  

The reason is still environmental. Albeit more localized. It is my stolen argument the Xia Dynasty's start in the Yellow River had more to do with protecting farmland from flooding.  This actually centers around Yu the Great who is fabelled to have organized flood mitigation and subsequently pushed into a leadership role as the environmental crises destroyed their food supply. They essentially rallied around central figures to save the farms in and along The Yellow River.  Go from there. Gunpowder and all.

The points being civilation took adversity beyond human doing to form. Whether it being too much water or not enough. 

And that's the complete history or the World according to me. 

Nobody is fucking special and everyone is  working together not to die in the grand scheme of things. It is also beco.ing clear all advancement is in resposnse to indifferent adversity, usually environmental or sociopolitical. 

 This took longer than I thought it would. 

There will be empires you never knew existed.

Here is a comprehensive list of ownership of lands between The Sinai Peninsula towards Egypt and The Tigres and Euphrates River Vallies over towards the Persian Gulf in the east with the desert in between. This makes Poland's history of occupation look like nothing.  And I even missed a few.  Very in depth considering how small of a geographical area it truly is.  For reference about the size of Texas, Oklahoma, Arkansas, and Louisiana. 

And begin in BCE. (25 years +/-)

Mesopotamia/River Valleys (East):

2900 - 2500 - Sumer
2500 - 2400 - Lagash
2400 - 2330 - Uma
2330 - 2150 - Akkad
2150 - 2000 - Ur (Sumer) 
2000 - 1890 - Old Assyria/Neo Sumer (split North/South)
1890 - 1780 - Small states/Babylon 
1780 - 1470 - Old Assyria/Babylonia
1470 - 1350 - Babylonia 
1350 - 1285 - Middle Assyria/Babylonia
1285 - 1205 - Middle Assyria 
1205 - 1190 - Babylonia
1190 - 1143 - Neo Assyria/ Elam
1143 - 1021 - Babylonia
1021 - 846 - Neo Assyria/ Babylonia 
846 - 819 - Neo Assyria 
819 - 808 - Neo Assyria/Babylonia
808 - 724 - Neo Assyria 
724 - 720 - Neo Assyria/Babylonia 
720 - 624 - Neo Assyria 
624 - 611 - Neo Assyria /Neo Babylonian  
611 - 539 - Neo Babylonian Empire
539 - 483 - Achaemenid Empire (Ancient Persia)
483 - Mesopotamian Revolt 
483 - 331 - Achaemenid Empire (Ancient Persia)
331 - 328 - Macedonia/Achaemenid Empire
328 - 324 - Macedonia
324 - 141 - Hellenistic Era (Ancient Greece) 
141 BCE  - 118 CE - Parthian 
118 - Rome 
118 - 225 - Parthian
225 - 634 - Sassanian Empire 
634 - 635 - Sassanian Empire/Rashidun Caliphate 
635 - 661 - Rashidun Caliphate 
661 - 748 - Umayyad Caliphate
748 - 1051 - Abbasid  Caliphate
1051 - 1118 - Seljuq Empire
1118 - 1261 - Abbasid  Caliphate
1261 - 1408 - Mongol Empire 
1405 - 1538 - Safavid Dynasty (Persia) 
1538 - 1621 - Ottoman Empire/Safavid Dynasty (Persia) (river valley split lenthwise)

1621 - 1639 - Safavid Dynasty (Persia)
1639 - 1721 - Ottoman Empire/Safavid Dynasty  (Persia)
1721 - 1749 - Ottoman Empire/Hotak Dynasty (Persia)
1749 - 1752 -  Ottoman Empire/Afsharid Dynasty (Persia)
1752 - 1785 -  Ottoman Empire/Afsharid Dynasty (Persia)/Kuwait
1785 - 1919 - Ottoman Empire/Qajar Dynasty (Persia)/Kuwait
1919 - 1926 -  Iraq (UK)/Qajar Dynasty (Persia) 

1926 - 1932 - Iraq (UK)/Iran (Formerly Persia)
1932 - 1941 - Iraq/Iran 
1941 - 1945 - Iraq (UK)/British Zone (UK) 
1945 - Present Iraq/Iran/Kuwait 

* Kuwait was a British protectorate during both world wars. 


The Holy Land (West): 

*The western portion can fit between San Antonio and Dallas, TX. 

1900 - 1470 - Canaan (nomadic former Akkadians) 
1470 - 1210 - New Kingdom (Egypt) 
1210 - 1021 - Phoenicia/12 Tribes (12 subdivided regions, their myth is the OG manifest destiny)
1021 - 796 - Phoenicia/Israel
796 - 783 - Neo Assyria
783 - 769 - Phoenicia/Israel
769 - 733 - Judah/Phoenicia/Israel
733 - 724 - Judah/Neo Assyria 
724 - 720 - Judah/Israel/ Neo Assyria  
720 - 699 - Judah/Neo Assyria 
699 - 624 - Neo Assyria 
624 - 611 - Judah/Neo Assyria 
611 - 608 - Judah/Israel/ Neo Babylonian Empire 
608 - 539 - Neo Babylonian Empire 
539 - 331 - Achaemenid Empire 
331 - 324 - Macedonia
324 - 137 - Hellenistic Era* (Ancient Greece) 
137 - 51 - Judea (Herodian Kingdom) 
51 BCE - 268 CE - Roman Empire
268 - 274 - Palmyrene Empire 
274 - 396 - Roman Empire 
396 - 489 - East Roman Empire 
489 - 616 - Byzantine Empire 
616 - 626 - Sassanian Empire 
626 - 635 - Byzantine Empire  
635 - 661 - Rashidun Caliphate 
661 - 748 - Umayyad Caliphate
748 - 970 - Abbasid  Caliphate
970 - 1076 - Fatimid Caliphate
1076 - 1099 - Seljuq Empire
1099 - 1174 - Jerusalem/Tripoli (France) 
1174 - 1188 - Jerusalem (France)/Ayyubid Sultanate 
1188 - 1191 - Ayyubid Sultanate 
1191 - 1251 - Jerusalem/Tripoli (France)/Ayyubid Sultanate 
1251 - 1291 - Jerusalem/Tripoli (France)/Mamluk Sultanate 
1291 - 1516 - Mamluk Sultanate 
1516 - 1919 - Ottoman Empire 
1919 - 1921- Egypt (UK)/Syria (France) 

1921 - 1945 - Egypt (UK)/Syria (France)/Trans-Jordan
1945 - 1949 - Egypt (UK)/Syria/Trans-Jordan/Lebanon
1949 - 1988 - Lebanon/Syria/Jordan/Israel
1988 - Present - Lebanon/Syria/Jordan/Israel/Palestine



Around 600 BCE you have Monotheism taking off.  The Achaemenid Empire (Ancient Persia) defeated the neo-Babylonian, and most of their narrative was influential in the western portion  of this region and underscored many ideas of Judaism via the ancient Persian Zoroastrianism. And everything influenced each-other in this confined region of the world. Amalgamation being the word. Save the Torah (oldest scrolls dated right around 1200 BCE), and most apocryphal, much of the OT text was written between 500-150 BCE. 

One of the oldest documented "hebrew" text is actually from the reign of King David. 10th century BCE and predates the Zoroastrianism idea. Showing that concepts in Judaism actually date back to at least the "Twelve tribes of Israel" (1210 BCE), which actually existed as a way to divide up territory gained back from Egypt after being subjects of The Pharoh. Initially serperate groups that later decided to call themselves "Hebrew" and unite as "Israel" around a mythical covenant with a monotheistic god and like narrative of Egypt oppression. They were Canaanites that were  made subjects to Egypt for long enough to almost forget. With some developing a new myth in the occupied interim. The origin of chosen therein. 

  The "Exodus" is likely (IMO) a colorful historical account of when both polytheistic Phoenicia and The "Twelve Tribes of Israel" gained autonomy from The New Kingdom of Egypt, which  for a few centuries extended north into the area where Israel exists today. At the time of "Moses", who is very likely a literary device of when negative sentiment against Egypt was HIGH.  There is truth to "Israelites" gaining fredom from Egypt. No walking the desert needed. Humorously around 1200 BCE historical accounts in Mesopotamia recorded a pandemic resembling influenza.  Desert locusts swarms were also recorded... All at the right time. Though, they may have just been beneficiary of Phonician conquest, as both civilizations came to be at the same time, and in the same dense region .  

What can you say, they wrote their history books different-y

Christianity and Islam:

Not much until 300 CE and Constantine. Then hundreds of years later after The Caliphate of Islam kicked Christians to the curb, Crusaders, mostly European, took back and lost the "Holy Land" (western portion) several times. 


I can't really understand why so many people follow him or regard his gibberish as holding anything of value. I can state the obvious or do heroin and channel my unconscious rambling in a ziggaraut as well.  Channel some anciety spirit and write a book on anti-gravity propulsion. Oh wait, wrong one.  That was the ancient aliens one.

Anyway I don't see the draw of his wife-beating faggot junkie ass.  He seems like the last person with a philosophy that can be used. 

So let's begin and go after "The Law".

First off, The Book of Law can go fuck itself and take it's pretension with it.

"Do what thou wilt" is fine. Could stop there, but this fluffy intrinsic twat has to go ruin it with some bullshit about love. What the fuck did that addled nymphomaniac faggot consider love anyway?

Was it love to beat his wife when he couldn't handle the burning hell of his mind, or was just strung out. May of well let the woman who repeatedly "gets hit with the basketball" write a book on trusting relationships.

So not really a figure worthy to speak there.

Plus, everything I have ever read on his relationships is some asshurt letter to his faggot boyfriend or him beating his various partners.

But what is "love under will", other than some BULLSHIT he added riding the white horse, and on a total dopey dopamine buzz.

Seriously? Possession. I think it's possession. I think it's control, or least something along those lines.  Perhaps security as a juxtaposition against the indifference and default hostility of the universe?

But my whole thing is why tie it to the rest of the will unless you FIRST disambiguate it as "love of self"? How does that last line tie to the first unless you want to cloud your practical with drifting pablum?

 Love of sex? Money? Hormones? There are much more animal reasons I thought he was all about that make this is as perplexing as him on his deathbed... allegedly.

MY reason for this is the circumstantial nature of the kind he meant.

Crowley was a fruitcake and his "love" was half "do what you want" and half be led by mystical bullshit.  Something broke along the way and he became a veiled born-again with his abyss and blah blah unification with godform blah blah. 

So let's get the full quote.

"Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law. Love is the law, love under will. There is no law beyond Do what thou wilt. Every man and every woman is a star."

This is a non quote.  Love is the law? THAT is god shit, strait up. Without disambiguation that is holy spirit Abstraction.  Something unnecessary added to an already salient quote. Is it my will or some fruity hormonal shit you gotta feels?

And how am I a star? I am stardust (made of) but I am not a necromancing numinous magi controlling the incompatible. Do I shine on too, Mr. Lennon? AND WHEN DO I GET SHOT? I could define/understand that.... unless I die. 

Still, I'm stuck at how doing what I want + the chemicals associated ties to this fruity bullshit.  How was a fruity little mystical think god twat ever considered a beast of anything?

But once more on love under will.

What the fuck is that? Getting what your dick or vag wants? I believe he was trying to say you should be "guided by love",  which leaves me thinking his entire philosophy was a justification to religiously fuck ALL THE TIME and do a shit ton of heroin. 

Unless he truly meant "essences of love", which once again leaves me to believe he didn't understand how the chemicals the brain releases relates to behaviors and desire. Or just wrote it for the sake of writing it. 

Which is also why he wrote like such a cryptic tool. Looking over many of MOST successful people in history I see their bios littered with merciless selfishishness and faux-philanthropic conscience leveraging.

So it's gotta be "love of self". If he had any insight, it is that.  Case and point: Jessie Helms. It also means Ayn Rand was better at his philosophy than he was.  And not NEARLY as pretentious.

Sorry, I just had a bad day and remembered I LOVE trashing fluffy intrinsic things other people get fuzzies from.. So in his spirit I was required to post it.

Certain features and pages can only be viewed by registered users.

Join Now

Spread the Word. Help Us Grow


Donate - PayPal

This site is largely funded by donations. You can show your support by donating. Thanks. Every dollar helps. You need not a PayPal to donate either just a debit or credit card.

Satanic International Network was created by Zach Black in 2009.