Just a small Fiona Hill update

15. November 2023

Here is the gist of it, Fio­na Hill is still very much nume­ro­lo­gy obsessed.

So in the past 3 hours I tried to find out if what Fio­na Hill pre­sen­ted in a Broo­kings Insti­tu­ti­on talk, as the rea­so­ning for why “the Finns joi­ned NATO”, was a one off laps in arguing that reli­ed hea­vi­ly on an actu­al argu­ment popu­lar in fin­nish socie­ty, or if Fio­na Hill is inde­ed a fan of numerology.

Turns out Fio­na Hill, VERY MUCH a fan of numerology.

So here is the initi­al state­ment again, that was made by Fio­na Hill on the 16th of Sep­tem­ber 2023 in this Broo­kings insti­tu­ti­on video.

(See also: click)

[…] why the Finns joi­ned NATO, becau­se they’­re all in they know whe­re this is hea­ding 1989 for them, did seem like an aberra­ti­on and alt­hough the Finns were embra­cing the Euro­pean Uni­on and basing their embra­cing, their inde­pen­dence - they always had in the back of their minds that histo­ry would come back again - with ano­t­her nine [thats the num­ber 9] like 1939. So they were always rar­ing to go - so I think that we ought to our­sel­ves take a pau­se, you know, when we look through our own lens at 1989, and whe­re we’­ve been and you know how we feel about the war in Ukrai­ne, a lot of other coun­tries are all in, becau­se as uh Timo­thy said they have a dif­fe­rent year zero though they have a dif­fe­rent year nine - they think about a lot of the­se, uhm dates in dif­fe­rent his­to­ri­cal patterns[…]

Now in my mind the ques­ti­on still per­sis­ted, if she real­ly tal­ked about “how Finns think today”, or if she attri­bu­t­ed delu­sio­nal thin­king onto an ent­i­re natio­na­li­ty of peop­le here.

Well, what can I say.…

Not only the Finns are hea­vi­ly into nume­ro­lo­gy accord­ing to Fio­na Hill, the who­le of euro­pe is:

Refe­ren­cing this video deba­te from a Uni­ver­si­ty of Ida­ho Panel, uploa­ded on the 9th of Octo­ber 2023, at about 9 Minu­tes in:

[…] and Sena­tor Borah was of cour­se someo­ne who famous­ly wan­ted to end an out­law war um which was a very Noble ide­al and of cour­se this was after the the May­hem of World War I and he sad­ly you know um pas­sed away in 1940, alt­hough perhaps for­tu­n­a­te­ly -- becau­se he did­n’t live to see uh the United Sta­tes drag­ged into World War II um after the attack on uh Pearl Harbor.

But all of this repe­ti­ti­on of War, a 100 years cycle of wars in Euro­pe, is also col­li­ding with major uh Inter­na­tio­nal cri­ses uh cli­ma­te chan­ge and cli­ma­te dis­as­ters uh which are um cer­tain­ly nota­ble uh around around the world uh, very fast demo­gra­phic chan­ge uh I was tal­king to someo­ne ear­lier about thin­king who would have thought and perhaps who would have thought if you were sit­ting here 50 years ago as an under­gra­dua­te that the world would go from two bil­li­on peop­le to 8 bil­li­on, … […] also very fast rapid tech­no­lo­gi­cal chan­ge uh and all of the con­cerns - I was mee­ting with stu­dents ear­lier who were asking about you know whe­re are we hea­ded with AI you know for examp­le, I’m sure that’s ano­t­her of the the­mes that will spin them­sel­ves out over um in the Borah sym­po­sia in the future and it cer­tain­ly feels like with the tit­le that you’­ve picked, that we’­re in one of the­se apo­ca­lyp­ti­cal uh moments, but I would sug­gest as a his­to­ri­an we’­ve been the­re befo­re - many times - uh Sena­tor Borah’s who­le um expe­ri­ence as the per­son that this com­me­mo­ra­tes would have he would have felt the same for sure, uh back in the the 1920s when he was, you know, part of the Kel­logg Bri­and pact, try­ing to sta­bi­li­ze a world…


(at about 9 Minu­tes in.)

So here the ENTIRE thought pat­tern is again. But now its not the Finns, its “us euro­peans”. And its not Nato we are aiming for, but a “bet­ter, more sta­ble world, with less change”.

So here are the mar­kers of the men­tal image:

1. Pro­po­sed lack of struc­tu­ral safe­ty in the self per­cep­ti­on of ent­i­re coun­tries populations

2. 100 years cycle of war in Europe

3. And both cou­pled to desas­ter moti­ves (cli­ma­te chan­ge, demo­gra­phic chan­ge), then moved into ano­t­her desas­ter moti­ve, with over­po­pu­la­ti­on at the 8 bil­li­on peop­le mark occu­ri­ning at the same time.

And the way she got the­re was through an asso­cia­ti­on with nega­ti­ve emo­ti­ons, per­cei­ved his­to­ric cycles, and numbers.

Coin­ci­dence? I don’t think so.

Mea­ning its Fio­na Hill who­se got a litt­le Covid 19 iso­la­tio­ny, not so much.. like, you know… the rus­si­an guy…

So turns out the lady is cra­zy. At least in part. Lets say she has a spleen.

Well, very well then - and gre­at - becau­se Fio­na Hill was the one that inven­ted the “Putin thinks like a czar” nar­ra­ti­ve for the who­le of Europe.

Which in its ent­i­re­ty goes as fol­lows: “Putin thinks like a czar becau­se of his­to­ri­cal pat­terns he fol­lows, in the stone sta­tu­es Fio­na saw in his office after diner years ago - and not only one but like five sta­tu­es, whe­re the one named Vla­di­mir, which is the only one in front of the Krem­lin and not his office, which she also noti­ced becau­se he was named Vla­di­mir, is dou­bly important, becau­se its Vla­di­mir Putin, and Vla­di­mir the czar, so “Dou­ble Vla­di­mir” (thats a quo­te), and dou­ble Vla­di­mir, is very important - for why Putin inva­ded Ukraine”.

Not joking, see Fio­na Hills arguing here:

Oh, the four stone sta­tu­es theo­ry now got two types of Vla­di­mir on top

So apart from being the main pro­pa­gan­dist for euro­pes war nar­ra­ti­ve, what does the Lady do cur­r­ent­ly - you know job wise?

Fio­na Hill is a seni­or fel­low in the Cen­ter on the United Sta­tes and Euro­pe wit­hin the For­eign Poli­cy pro­gram at Broo­kings. She also holds the pres­ti­gious posi­ti­on of chan­cellor at Durham Uni­ver­si­ty in the United King­dom and was recent­ly elec­ted to the Har­vard Uni­ver­si­ty Board of Overseers.

src: click

Ah. Gre­at.

Die­se Gesell­schaft ist das abso­lut abar­tigst, ver­lo­genst und hin­ter­trie­benst Allerletzte.

Hinterlasse eine Antwort