Over half a century after the decolonisation movements of the 20th century, one set of western institutions continues to repress the spirit of freedom and equality within post-colonial societies. Whilst seemingly benign, western universities continue to poison the minds of thousands in post-colonial societies who believe that the sole gateway to an enlightened mind can be found in the halls of western universities. Before progressing, it must be made clear that universities in any country teaching the hard sciences are excluded from this criticism. Instead, the criticism lies at the feet of the so-called “humanities” – a morass of self-inflicted liberal brainwashing that bears no relationship to an actual understanding of the subjects purportedly being taught.
Western universities are in fact based on once proud theological institutions whose origins lie in an era of high church feudalism. Such a model is not only removed from the histories of Asian and African societies but it is also highly remote from the realities of modern democratic western nations that have long abandoned feudalism and are increasingly if not totally secular in terms of their social environment.
Even though the Christianity has been largely expunged from once predominately Christian theological institutions, a new religion of liberal elitism continues to be preached and proselytised with the same vigour of a Medieval inquisitor.
Perhaps because liberalism is now being taught as a religion in the same way in which Christian theology was once taught, the university graduate of today is filled with the same dogma that might have once served priests well but which today is a supreme detriment bordering on psychological retardation when it it serves to indoctrinate aspiring politicians, policy commentators or worse yet, journalists.
Politics is nothing if not problem solving and problem solving skills are learned in the actual sciences rather than in the humanities. As such, if aspiring Asian and African rulers, businessmen, journalists and social commentators decided to attain a university degree (in any country) in mathematics, it could very likely serve them well in the vocations they seek to enter. The same is true of computer programming, physics, chemical engineering and medicine. Maths do not lie but liberal dogmatists do little else other than lie.
It is true that a bad education can be easily overcome by real life experience which is and has always been the finest teacher of all. The trouble is that the attitudes which individuals from developing countries exhibit when exiting western universities represent not that of pragmatic patriots but that of arrogant colonisers. Thus, the humanities departments colonise the minds of gullible Asian and African elites and later these same elites to the use these psychological weapons to hold back the progress of their countrymen who haven’t had the same experience of liberal indoctrination that they had.
For those who understand that western universities once prepared missionaries to accompany the militant conquerors of foreign lands, it will be that much more obvious to realise that today’s western universities are doing something eerily similar by conquering the minds of aspiring post-colonial rulers.
There is a further and deeply important factor in this entire poisonous pattern. Because those in post-colonial societies/developing nations who receive an education at western universities often do so because they foolishly believe that it is preparing them for a career as a political leader or policy marker, they inflict on their fellow countrymen a superiority complex in the same way that in ancient times, common tribesmen would worship a holyman even if such holymen were nothing but cunning frauds.
The very idea that someone ought to be treated as a superior being within society by virtue of the fact that he or she received a piece of paper from a western university is not only insulting to even the vaguest notions of democracy, social equality, economic opportunity and free speech, but it is downright absurd to think that those offering nothing but unreconstructed liberalism are somehow in a position to solve the practical problems within developing and post-colonial nations.
It is all too unfortunate that many ordinary decent people in Asia and Africa do not realise that westerners with university degrees in the “humanities” are often ignored, ridiculed or mocked in their own societies. In the United States in particular, the tradition of free speech granted by the 1st amendment to the constitution has led to a growth of a culture that has never been very interested in the proclamations coming from individuals housed in universities modelled on a style of European feudalism that the United States was formed to explicitly reject.
In Europe too, whilst some people still have romanticised conceptions of places like Oxford and Cambridge, when it comes to politics, more and more people throughout Europe are rejecting the “wisdom” of university types and are turning towards more pragmatic and more democratic leaders who understand that life for ordinary decent working people is very different from that of the overly educated elites.
Therefore, few people in western countries and hardly any normal people in America care about what happens in universities. Moreover, the more that university types take liberalism to new extremes, the more such people are openly mocked by democratically minded populations.
As such, one of the few places where a degree from a western university matters is in developing and post-colonial societies where ordinary people have been browbeaten into silent submission by men and women with degrees which are more or less meaningless in the western countries in which they got the degrees in the first place.
With this in mind, the ordinary decent people of Asian and African societies ought to reject the liberal elitist and incredibly foreign dogmas delivered to them by arrogant recipients of university degrees form western countries. The next great step in the anti-colonial movement will be taken only after liberal academic colonialism is expunged from the nation-states of Asia and Africa.
As President Duterte said of the colonial mentality in politics:
”… I am a President of a sovereign state. And we have long ceased to be a colony of the United States. I do not have any master except the Filipino people. Nobody but nobody….. Son of a bitch…. I will swear at you.”
When people in countries like The Philippines begin to reject the elitism ensconced within minds colonised by foreign liberal universities, true freedom will be within reach.
US President Donald Trump’s special envoy for combating anti-Semitism has called for an armed presence at Jewish institutions across the US, insisting synagogues, schools and community centers beef up on security.
The appointee, Elan Carr, said American Jews face a “time of danger” and must take steps to protect themselves from attacks and persecution, according to the Jerusalem Post.
“Any synagogue, every JCC [Jewish community center], should have guards,” Carr told an interviewer on Wednesday at a conference in Israel. “God willing, may they never be needed, but they should be there.”
President Trump tapped Carr to be the State Department’s pointman on anti-Semitism issues in February, after complaints from Democrats and Jewish advocacy groups pressured him to fill the position, which sat vacant for the first two years of his term.
Carr also spoke at the conference of the president’s commitment to protecting Jewish minorities in the US and around the world.
“The rhetoric of the president couldn’t be clearer,” he said. “Every time the president speaks on this issue, he calls it [anti-Semitism] a vile poison that must be rooted out.”
Some Jews reject Carr’s description of the president, however, and argue his policies and rhetoric actually put Jewish communities in more danger. In a recent survey of 1,000 American Jewish voters, nearly 60 percent of respondents said Trump “bears at least some responsibility” for recent synagogue shootings in Pennsylvania and California. Seventy-three percent said they thought Jews were less safe in the US than they were two years ago.
In his proposal for armed guards at Jewish institutions, Carr may have taken pointers from German Chancellor Angela Merkel, who made a similar suggestion in May as one way to address rising anti-Semitism in Germany.
ZEMBLA investigates the collateral damage of the World Wildlife Fund’s (WWF) battle for nature conservation. ZEMBLA discovers that WWF promotes birth control programs that include contraception and even sterilization for men and women.
The fight against poachers is getting grimmer all the time. ZEMBLA travels to India, where local inhabitants are wrongly accused of poaching, are being tortured and sometimes even killed. On camera, guards from Kaziranga National Park state that they are allowed to shoot unwanted people.
All states in the US mandate vaccines for school children, effectively taking away the right to education for families refusing vaccination. Different states allow one to three exemptions from mandatory vaccination on philosophical, religious or medical grounds. In 2015 the California legislature passed a bill (SB277) removing the philosophical or personal belief exemption. The religious exemption had already been removed. This left only the medical exemption, which is difficult to obtain. because doctors fear losing their medical licenses if they grant the exemption. The Maine state legislature recently followed suit, removing all religious or philosophical vaccine exemptions. Mandatory vaccination depends on the assumption that all recommended vaccines are safe for all children. As state laws are going in the direction of more and more coercion, this is a good time to ask if that assumption is valid.
Dr. Plotkin
In October 2017 the divorced parents of a two year old child brought a case before the Circuit Court of Oakland County Michigan to settle a disagreement as to whether their daughter should have to be vaccinated. The mother was against; the father was for. Dr. Stanley Plotkin, an MD with experience in vaccine research going back to the ’60s, stepped forward as an expert in favor of vaccination. He was questioned by counsel representing the plaintiff (the child’s mother) in a deposition which ended up doing more harm than good not only to the father’s case but to the whole idea that ethics are of any real importance to researchers and industry promoting vaccines.
That he had used orphans to study an experimental vaccine.
That he had used mentally retarded children to study a rubella vaccine.
That he had written a letter to the editor of “Ethics On Human Experimentation” in which he says “the question is whether we are to have experiments performed on fully functioning adults and on children who are potentially contributors to society or to perform initial studies on children and adults who are human in form but not in social potential.”
That he had used babies of mothers in prison to study an experimental vaccine.
That he had used individuals under colonial rule in the Belgian Congo in an experiment involving almost a million people to study an experimental vaccine.
Elsewhere in the deposition, Plotkin said that he had helped create a vaccine advocacy group called Voices For Vaccines. He claimed the group was independent, but admitted on questioning that it was funded by the vaccine industry. Plotkin is a good example of a doctor so immersed in the prevailing dogma about vaccines that he can’t imagine other perspectives, or his own conflicts of interest. Not to mention the criminality of experimenting on people unable to assert their right to informed consent.
Paul Offit
Paul Offit
One of Dr. Plotkin’s students was Dr. Paul Offit, a tireless vaccine industry shill and developer of a rotavirus vaccine which made him a fortune. In October 2018 Robert Kennedy Jr. wrote a letter to Paul Offit to challenge the claim in Offit’s books that medical experts are the only authorities on vaccine safety. Kennedy writes:
“Your book title and press releases suggest that, in contrast to “celebrities, politicians and activists,” you consider yourself to be eminently qualified to furnish health information in a truthful and unbiased manner. I would like to take this opportunity to inquire as to whether your own substantial financial entanglements with the $52 billion vaccine industry—conflicts you deliberately conceal from your allies in the mainstream media—should disqualify you from representing yourself as a neutral and trustworthy voice in this contentious debate. You have accepted tens of millions of dollars from vaccine companies for your work as the primary spokesman for the industry. You occupy a chair at the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia endowed with a $1.5 million grant from Merck, and you were a co-developer, with Merck, of the RotaTeq rotavirus vaccine.
Indeed, your financial conflicts of interest with the vaccine industry since the early 2000s, during your tenure on a key Centers for Disease Control vaccine panel, were the subject of two federal investigations. While sitting on the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), you voted to add a rotavirus vaccine to the CDC childhood vaccine schedule. You neglected to recuse yourself despite the fact that you had your own rotavirus vaccine patent in development. Six years later, thanks to the inclusion of rotavirus on the CDC schedule, you and your business partners were able to sell your patent for $186 million. This self-dealing transaction in which you effectively “voted yourself rich” was condemned by a 2003 congressional investigation and a 2008 investigation by the HHS Inspector General. Congressman Dan Burton described the “paradox” of the CDC “routinely allow[ing] scientists with blatant conflicts of interest to serve on influential advisory committees that make recommendations on new vaccines, as well as policy matters,” even though “these same scientists have financial ties, academic affiliations, and other vested interests in the products and companies for which they are supposed to be providing unbiased oversight.” When ACIP added your vaccine (RotaTeq) to the childhood vaccine schedule in 2006, policy-makers of the time acknowledged that the vaccine was “one of the most expensive” and potentially lucrative ever added to the schedule. Critics of the decision wondered why we were mandating a ruinously expensive and shoddily tested vaccine for tens of millions of children to combat mild illness that accounts for only a few dozen deaths in the United States annually.
You routinely talk about RotaTeq’s achievements, but you have never publicly commented on the elevated rate of agonizingly painful and sometimes deadly intussusception observed in recipients of RotaTeq nor on the vaccine’s contamination with DNA fragments from two porcine circoviruses known to cause serious wasting disease in pigs. Scientists and public health experts suggest that your vaccine may be infecting millions of children each year with these viruses. Since the vaccine was never properly safety tested against inert placebos, we may never know the truth.”
The Spanish Flu
In a November 2018 article, Kevin Barry, former federal attorney and president of First Freedoms, looks back at the beginning of the pharmaceutical industry in the early 20th century as it was getting its start under the auspices of the Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research in New York City. US soldiers about to be sent into World War I in Europe provided medical researchers an opportunity for experimentation (in this case on fully functioning adults).
Between 1918 – 19, Barry reports, more soldiers died of a mysterious disease called “the Spanish flu” than from bullets. The Spanish flu, he says, killed an estimated 50-100 million people worldwide. But it was neither Spanish, nor a flu. According to Barry, it appears to have originated at a military base in Fort Riley, Kansas in 1918 where doctors were experimenting with a Rockefeller Institute bacterial meningitis vaccine, using US soldiers. The soldiers who survived were deployed to Europe where they spread a deadly bacterial pneumonia among themselves while the Rockefeller Institute also sent the “vaccine” directly to several countries in Europe, in the end causing the death of millions of people
Gulf War Syndrome
In January1991 The Unites States attacked Iraq in what was called the Persian Gulf War.
An estimated 43,000 US veterans of the war came down with a variety of strange and illnesses attributable to mandatory experimental vaccines and drugs administered without informed consent.
Cornelius Rhoads
In November 1931 a Harvard trained MD named Cornelius Rhoads conducted a cancer experiment in Puerto Rico under the auspices of the Rockefeller Institute for Medical Investigations. Rhoads said in a letter:
“Porto Ricans are the dirtiest, laziest, most degenerate and thievish race of men ever to inhabit this sphere… They are even lower than the Italians. What the island needs is not public health work, but a tidal wave or something to totally exterminate the entire population… I have done my best to further the process of their extermination by killing off eight and transplanting cancer into several more. All physicians take delight in the abuse and torture of the unfortunate subjects.”
Rhoads should have been tried for murder, but instead found fame and fortune. He went on the establish biological warfare facilities for the US Army, made the cover of TIME magazine in 1949, and became the director of the famous Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center in New York.
Bill Gates
Art by David Dees
In 1999 Bill Gates launched The Global Alliance for Vaccination and Immunization. Dr. David Ayoub points out that The Global Alliance had membership and goals identical to those set out in US National Security Study Memorandum 200 presented to President Nixon by Rockefeller protegé Henry Kissinger in 1974. Memorandum 200 had an explicit goal of coercive population control in less developed countries.
In 2005 the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation funded tetanus vaccinations for distribution by UNICEF in Africa. The vaccines were administered only to young women of child-bearing age. In 2014, doctors and Catholic clergy in Kenya had the vaccine independently tested and found that the vaccine contained an antigen called “human gonadotropin” which renders women infertile.
Bill Gates appeared in a 2010 TED talk in which he said: “The world today has 6.8 billion people. That’s heading up to about nine billion. Now if we do a really great job on new vaccines, health care, reproductive health services, we could lower that by perhaps ten or fifteen percent.”
If vaccines and reproductive health services are meant to save lives, how would they be useful in reducing a population?
To all appearances, the Gates and Rockefeller foundations are working together to promote population control under the guise of vaccine philanthropy.
The Vioxx Scandal
Vioxx was not a vaccine but its marketing reveals a great deal about the ethics of Merck Pharmaceutical, a major player in the vaccine industry. Vioxx was the brand name for a popular painkiller introduced by Merck in 1999. The drug was taken off the market in 2004, more than four years after a clinical trial and plenty of evidence, known to Merck, showed that it caused serious cardiovascular problems. Merck’s response was to “discredit, neutralize, and destroy” doctors critical of Vioxx. One spokesman at the FDA, which was by no means innocent in this scandal, said that the drug had caused “more than 27,000 deaths and heart attacks.” Like other pharmaceutical corporations, Merck considered the payment of damages for these deaths to be the price of doing business.
SIV and SV40
Experimental live polio vaccines, including the Salk polio vaccine, contained a virus found in monkeys which, when given to humans, may have created the worldwide HIV epidemic and untold cases of cancer in children and adults. According to the National Vaccine Information Center,
“an article [was] published in the March 1992 issue of The Lancet in which attorney Walter Kyle provided evidence that the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) may have been created after simian immunodeficiency virus (SIV) entered the human population when African green monkey kidney tissues infected with SIV were used to produce polio vaccines. The Kyle article pointed out that scientists at the Food and Drug Administration and within industry suspected as early as the 1950’s and knew, by the mid-1970’s, that polio vaccine had been contaminated with simian viruses and that at least one of these monkey viruses – SV-40 – was later found to cause leukemia and cancerous tumors in lab animals.”
According to an archived fact sheet put out by the Centers for Disease Control, “more than 98 million American received one or more doses of polio vaccine from 1955 to 1963 when a proportion of vaccine was contaminated with SV40; it has been estimated that 10-30 million Americans could have received an SV40 contaminated dose of vaccine.”
Thimerosal
Thimerosal was a mercury-containing component of a several vaccines — the MMR (for measles, mumps, and rubella), DTaP (for diphtheria, tetanus, and pertussis), and flu shots. According to Shane Ellison, “The People’s Chemist“,
“The last entity to fund a thimerosal study in the United States was Eli Lilly, back in 1929. They’re not even a health agency; they’re a pharmaceutical drug company. That hardly offers proof of safety and efficacy. And, their test churned out horrific results, showing that 100% of the kids jabbed with trace amounts of Merthiolate — the trade name for thimerosal — died from meningitis. How could that possibly be considered safe? Meanwhile, the Pharma-funded authors (using ghostwriting) still concluded that there was no causal association between mercury in vaccines and harm.(4) Future court documents revealed, “Upon closer inspection, however, it is apparent that Lilly Scientists, deliberately withheld facts and, in doing so manipulated and distorted their conclusions, leading to corruption of published scientific literature concerning thimerosal.”
Thimerosal was supposedly taken out of vaccines around 2003 but it still appears in flu shots given to children and adults. Cases of autism in children have been linked to thimerosal. Dr. David Ayoub gave a very informative talk on this on a 2005 lecture linked here.
200 ppb mercury = level in liquid the EPA classifies as hazardous waste.
25,000 ppb mercury = Concentration of mercury in the Hepatitis B vaccine, administered at birth in the U.S., from 1990-2001.
50,000 ppb Mercury = Concentration of mercury in multi-dose DTaP and Haemophilus B vaccine vials, administered 4 times each in the 1990’s to children at 2, 4, 6, 12 and 18 months of age.
50,000 ppb Mercury = Current “preservative” level mercury in multi-dose flu (94% of supply), meningococcal and tetanus (7 and older) vaccines. This can be confirmed by simply analyzing the multi- dose vials.
Conclusion
At best, the history of vaccines is an example of gross human ignorance acting through the field of medical science. This ignorance comes from a lack of humility in our interaction with nature; the belief that science has all the answers; the belief that man can act as God.
At worst, vaccines were used knowingly for the purposes of eugenics. This is another kind of hubris — the usurpation of power by the few over the many, by an elite which believes it is in a position to best guide humanity and which is arrogant enough to believe it can engineer the whole world according to its own interests.
It is also clear that for the sake of money and profit, the pharmaceutical industry has knowingly caused disease and death, especially among poor and disadvantaged people in the world. And they have tried to cover it up. It is hard to accept the adage that “vaccines save lives” when we have so many examples of vaccines actually destroying lives.
Does the state have the right to inject anything into the bodies of children against the wishes of the child’s parents? According to the UN’s Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights, medical intervention must be accompanied by the “free and informed consent of the person concerned, based on adequate information.” What we are seeing today is an all-out war being waged by billion dollar pharmaceutical giants to bring more and more vaccines into a recommended schedule, and to make that schedule mandatory, while at the same time controlling the information parents need to protect their children. After so may lies and coverups, parents and doctors have very little reason to trust anything the pharmaceutical industry tells them.
Swedish Education Minister Anna Ekström has suggested that religious schools are “bad for society” and that stopping them was essential for integration.
The Swedish government intends to stop the future establishment of private charter schools, as a means of indicating that it is a secular state.
As a result of a consensus between the ruling left-of-the-centre red-green coalition and its junior support parties, the Centre and the Liberals, an investigation on the confessional elements in the educational system is now in progress. The assignment of special investigator Lars Arrhenius is to submit proposals for a total stop to the establishment of new primary and secondary schools which have a religious undertone.
“In recent years, we have seen examples of schools that, in the name of religion, separate girls and boys, barely teach about sex or cohabitation, and equate evolution with religious creationism myths. This is totally unacceptable. Now the government is taking the first steps towards stopping new religious schools,” Social Democrat Education Minister Anna Ekström said in a statement.
According to her, the possibility of starting new charter schools with a confessional orientation may ultimately be removed. Existing religious schools shall remain, but may have to revise their regulations.
“In a Swedish school, each student must be free to shape their own perception and future. Not a single child should be forced to participate in confessional elements or denied teaching about, for example, evolutionary doctrine or sex and cohabitation. It is a question of defending the very foundation of the school, that the main emphasis shall be placed on knowledge and education, not religious education,” Anna Ekström explained.
In an interview with the Christian newspaper Dagen, Ekström suggested that religious charter schools were “bad for society” and that stopping them was a matter of integration.
However, there may be one notable exception. Jewish schools are to be exempted from the ban, fellow Social Democrat Civilian Minister Ardalan Shekarabi assured following the criticism from the Jewish Central Council.
“There are special rules for the minorities we have in Sweden. The Jewish minority is protected in that legislation and this means that they will be able to maintain their structure with special training,” Shekarabi was quoted as saying by Aftonbladet daily.
Columnist Ivar Arpi noted that virtually all arguments that are raised against confessional schools refer to Muslim schools and not Christian or Jewish ones.
“If everyone knows which schools are considered to inhibit the integration of immigrants, why not say it out straight? How about a little honesty?” Arpi wrote in his column in Svenska Dagbladet called “Christian schools punished for no reason.”
The school report must be finished no later than 19 December 2019.
At present, Sweden has some 70 schools that claim to have at least some confessional elements most of them are Christian or Muslim.
A 2017 Pew Research Center report found that 59.9 percent of Swedes self-identified as Christians, with 48.7 percent belonging to the Church of Sweden, and the majority of the rest being unaffiliated Christians.
The number of Muslims has been estimated at over 8 percent of Sweden’s population of 10 million.
By contrast, the Jewish diaspora numbers only 20,000. Of those, about 7,000 are members of a congregation.
One of the most intriguing takeaways from the 18th May Federal Election in Australia is how poorly Labor’s climate action political campaign focus played in working class areas:
Scott Morrison has earnt a permanent place as a Liberal Party legend — returning the Government in what was meant to be an unwinnable election for the Coalition.
Mr Morrison smashed the doctrine that disunity will lead to electoral death.
Despite three prime ministers in two terms of government, the Queensland swing to back the Coalition and swings in Tasmania and WA showed that ultimately jobs and fear of change are too dominant.
The Prime Minister made the campaign all about economic management and himself — out-campaigning Labor by running a brutal and stunning campaign demolishing Labor’s big-target policy agenda.
Mr Morrison made the campaign a referendum on him and Bill Shorten, and downplayed the Liberal brand — cultivating a new Scott Morrison image and promising to be a steady pair of hands on the economy.
He told a packed crowd of Liberal supporters in Sydney he had always believed in miracles.
“And tonight we’ve been delivered another one,” he said.
This isn’t the first time the climate movement has misjudged their audience. The wealthy elitism of the climate movement was on full display during the recent Extinction Rebellion shutdown of central London.
During the “rebellion”, leisure rich dilettante hippies partied in London, creating commuter misery for people who have to work for a living. Yet the out of touch Extinction Rebellion hippies somehow thought that raising “awareness” of climate change, by mocking workers with their privilege, would somehow win support from the victims of their disruption.
The Australian Labor Party was traditionally the party of workers. But like Extinction Rebellion in the UK, and the Democrats in the USA, the Australian Labor Party has lost touch with their base, and become the plaything of rich champaign socialists who want to assuage their self indulgent liberal angst by virtue signalling issues like climate activism.
The May 18 2019 Australian election is a message to the climate movement, and to out of touch politicians everywhere who somehow think climate messages are a way of connecting with voters; it’s not working.
Canadian Foreign Minister Chrystia Freeland has become a bit of a living parody of everything wrong with the detached technocratic neo-liberal order which has driven the world through 50 years of post-industrial decay. Now, two years into the Trump presidency, and five years into the growth of a new system shaped by the Russia-China alliance, the world has become a very different place from the one which Freeland and her controllers wish it to be.
Having been set up as a counterpart to the steely Hillary Clinton who was supposed to win the 2016 election, Freeland and her ilk have demonstrated their outdated thinking in everything they have set out to achieve since the 2014 coup in Ukraine. Certainly before that, everything seemed to be going smoothly enough for End of History disciples promoting a script that was supposed to culminate in a long-sought for “New World Order”.
The Script up until Now
Things were going especially well since the collapse of the Soviet system in the early 1990s. The collapse ushered in a unipolar world order with the European Union and NAFTA, followed soon thereafter by the World Trade Organization and the 1999 destruction of Glass-Steagall (1). The trans-Atlantic at last was converted into a cage of “post-sovereign nations” that no longer had actual control of their own powers of credit generation. Under NATO, even national militaries were subject to technocratic control. This cage was perfect for the governing elite “scientifically managing” from above while the little people bickered over their diminishing employment and standards of living from below.
Even though the former Soviet bloc nations were in tatters by 1992, their sovereign powers could only be undone by applying the liberalization process which took 30 years in the west in a short space of only a decade. This was done under the direction of such monetarist “reformers” such as Anatoly Chubais and Yegor Gaidar under Yeltsin. Similar privatization and liberalization reforms were applied viciously to Ukraine and other Warsaw pact countries during the same period. Those pirates that became the “nouveau riche” of the west were joined by such contemporary modern oligarchs such as Oleg Deripaska, Boris Berezovksy, Mikhail Fridman, Roman Abramovich in Russia, alongside Petro Poroshenko, Rinat Akhmetov, Mikhail Khodorkovsky and Viktor Pinchuk of Ukraine (to name a few). Not to forget their spiritual roots, many of these oligarchs soon purchased houses in the swank upmarket sections of London which has come to be known as “Moscow on Thames.” (2)
By the end of the 1990s a new phase of this de-nationalization was unleashed with the unveiling of the Blair doctrine explicitly calling for a “post-Westphalia” world order which unleashed a wave of hellish regime change wars in the Arab World beginning with 9-11, and with a long term intention to target Libya, Syria, Iran, and Lebanon while expanding NATO’s hegemony against the potential re-emergence of Russia and China.
The Economic Meltdown Was Always the Intention
Let’s be clear: the whole point of the post-1971 world was directed with the intention of destroying the moral-political and economic foundations for western society. The belief in scientific progress and industrial growth was the cause of all true progress from the 15th century Golden Renaissance to the assassinations of the 1960s. The intended consequences of this post-1971 (zero growth) policy were:
1) The destruction of the productive forces of labor vis a vis outsourcing to “cheap labour markets” driven by shareholder profit.
2) The consolidation of wealth into an ever smaller array of private multi-billionaire owners under a logic of Darwinian survival of the fittest.
3) The creation of a vast speculative bubble supported by ever greater rates of unpayable debt and totally detached from the physically productive forces of reality.
Just like 1929, after years of speculation known as the roaring twenties, the “plug could be pulled” on the bubble in order to impose a bit of shock therapy onto a sleeping population who would beg for fascism as a solution if only it would put bread on their tables. Though this plan failed 80 years ago due to the American rejection of fascism under President Roosevelt, the belief that the formula could succeed in the 21st century was adhered to most closely as long as America was brought firmly under control of the City of London and their Wall Street lackies (3).
Although the fascist “solution” to their manufactured crisis was put down during WWII, this new attempt was premised upon the policy that a new system of Global Government managed by draconian regulation would be imposed under a “Green New Deal” framework whereby the instruments of banking regulation, state directed capital and centralized government (not evils unto themselves), would be directed only to green, low energy flux density forms of energy which inherently lower the population of the earth. This is very different from the protectionism, bank regulation, state credit and central authority exerted by America during the 1930s New Deal (or Eurasian New Silk Road policy today). The difference is that one system empowers sovereign nations, and increases the productive powers of labor and energy flux density of humanity while increasing quality of life, the other “Green” agenda has the opposite effect whereby monetary incentives are tied to decreasing the “carbon footprint” of the earth. The image of a drug addict getting paid heroine as an incentive to bleed himself to death is useful here.
With the slow collapse of first world economies after the assassination of nationalist leaders in the 1960s, the plan for depopulation and global government seemed to be unfolding without serious opposition.
The Role of Chrystia Freeland
Freeland’s bizarre role in this whole affair was to do what every good Rhodes Scholar is conditioned to do upon their completion of their indoctrination at Oxford: facilitate the tough transition of the “pre-collapse” world economy into a new operating system that was meant to be the “green post-collapse” world economy. It wasn’t going to be easy to tell a new “pirate class” of billionaires that they would have to accept losing much of their wealth (less population equals less money), and operate under a strict new global operating system of regulation necessary to contract the society. The Rhodes Scholarship program begun in 1902 to advance a re-organized British Empire and had worked alongside the Fabian Society for over a century producing more than 7000 scholars who have permeated across all fields of society (media, education, government, military and corporate).
In his 1877 will, Cecil Rhodes said this group should be “a society which should have its members in every part of the British Empire working with one object and one idea we should have its members placed at our universities and our schools and should watch the English youth passing through their hands just one perhaps in every thousand would have the mind and feelings for such an object, he should be tried in every way, he should be tested whether he is endurant, possessed of eloquence, disregardful of the petty details of life, and if found to be such, then elected and bound by oath to serve for the rest of his life in his Country. He should then be supported if without means by the Society and sent to that part of the Empire where it was felt he was needed.”
After leaving Oxford in 1993, Chrystia Freeland learned the ropes of “perception management” by working for the London Economist, Washington Post, Financial Times and Globe and Mail and Reuters. After serving a stint as editor-at-large of Reuters, the time had come for her to play the role of Valery Jarrett to the “Barack Obama” of Canada then being prepped for Prime Ministership of Justin Trudeau.
She was perfect.
As an asset of the global propaganda system, Freeland had made high level contacts with those Ukrainian, Russian, and Western oligarchs mentioned above including Viktor Pinchuk and Mikhail Khodorkovsky. Larry Summers, George Soros and Al Gore, were just a few players in the west whom she considered her “close friends” and whom she was happy to bring into Canada during the period of re-organization of the Liberal Party (2011-2014) as it prepared to take power under the banner of the Canada 2020 think tank. What made Freeland even more special was that she was bred from a zealous family of Ukrainian nationalists under the patriarchy of her Nazi grandfather Michael Chomiak. This network was brought to Canada after WWII by Anglo-American intelligence and cultivated as a force with ties to pro-Nazi Ukrainian counterparts ever since.
Freeland’s admission into politics was managed by another Rhodes Scholar named Bob Rae who served as interim controller of the Liberal Party during several of the Harper years and was a major player in Canada 2020. Rae, who had been the NDP Premier of Ontario from 1990-1995 was happy to abdicate his seat to Freeland ensuring her entry into Trudeau’s inner circle and thus becoming his official handler (4).
Freeland Promotes the New Global Elite
Freeland has made it clear that she understands well that there is a fundamental difference in cultural identities of the “new rich” relative to the older oligarchic families which she serves. In the 2011 Rise of the New Global Elite, she describes it as follows:
“To grasp the difference between today’s plutocrats and the hereditary elite, who “grow rich in their sleep” one need merely glance at the events that now fill high-end social calendars.”
Freeland then breaks down the categories of “new plutocrats” into two subcategories: the good, technocratic friendly plutocrats who are ideologically compatible with the New World Order of depopulation, such as Bill Gates, Warren Buffet, George Soros, et al and the “bad” plutocrats who tend not to conform to the British Empire’s program of global governance and depopulation under the green agenda. In Freeland’s world “good oligarchs” are those who adhere to this agenda, while “bad oligarchs” are those who do not. Trump is a terrible Plutocrat, and – Viktor Yanukovych was a good plutocrat until he decided to not sacrifice Ukraine on the altar of the collapsing European Union and chose to throw Ukraine’s destiny into the Eurasian Economic Union in October 2013.
In the same paper, Freeland wrote:
“if the plutocrats’ opposition to increases in their taxes and tighter regulation of their economic activities is understandable, it is also a mistake. The real threat facing the super-elite, at home and abroad, isn’t modestly higher taxes, but rather the possibility that inchoate public rage could cohere into a more concrete populist agenda– that, for instance, middle-class Americans could conclude that the world economy isn’t working for them and decide that protectionism… is preferable to incremental measures.” Quoting billionaire Mohamed El-Erian, the CEO of Pimco she wrote: “one of the big surprises of 2010 is that the protectionist dog didn’t bark.”
Freeland ended her article with this message:
“The lesson of history is that, in the long run, super-elites have two ways to survive: by suppressing dissent or by sharing their wealth… Let us hope the plutocrats aren’t already too isolated to recognize this”.
But what does Freeland really think of the technocratic management under a plutocratic governance of society? In Plutocrats vs. Populists (Nov. 2013), Freeland lets her pro-plutocratic worldview out of the bag when she gushes:
“At its best, this form of plutocratic political power offers the tantalizing possibility of policy practiced at the highest professional level with none of the messiness and deal making and venality of traditional politics… a technocratic, data-based, objective search for solutions to our problems”
Since a technocratic managerial class committed to a common ideology must be solidified for this system to work, Freeland goes on to make the case to recruit young people to the imperial civil service:
“Smart, publicly minded technocrats go to work for plutocrats whose values they share. The technocrats get to focus full time on the policy issues they love, without the tedium of building, rallying– and serving– a permanent mass membership. They can be pretty well paid to boot.”
The End of a Delusion?
Now that Russia and China’s new operating system shaped by the Belt and Road Initiative has created a force of opposition to this British-run Deep State design, nothing which those would-be gods of Olympus have attempted to achieve has succeeded. Syria stands strong and the Arab nations are increasingly joining China’s Belt and Road Initiative. Venezuela has failed to fall the way so many regimes have done before 2014 and NAFTA has been seriously challenged by a nationalistic president in the USA who has also totally rejected the Malthusian agenda with the killing of COP21 and the Green New Deal. Trudeau’s usefulness has withered away quicker than you can say “SNC Lavalin” and now the decision appears to be seriously humored whether Freeland will take the reins of Canada after Trudeau is eliminated in order to “preserve the dying British Empire” and the dream of Cecil Rhodes. While the universe may be organized by a principle of reason, no one can say the same applies to the mind of an oligarchic.
Notes
(1) The separation of speculative from commercial banking was the bedrock of financial regulation since its implementation in 1933. Its destruction as Clinton’s last act in office resulted in the creation of the largest bubble in history amounting to a $700 trillion derivatives time bomb now ready to explode.
(2) When Putin began exiling many of these unrepentant oligarchs, they quickly made their way to London where many became disposable playthings of the British Empire.
(3) The self-professed “Fabian Society of Canada” was set up in the height of the Depression by five Rhodes Scholars in order to create a Canadian fascist regime in 1932. This organization known as the League of Social Reconstruction, set up a political party called the Cooperative Commonwealth Federation (CCF) which later changed its name to the New Democratic Party (NDP) in 1961. While good people have found themselves members of the NDP and Liberals over the years, it is useful to keep in mind that this rotten core tied to the highest echelons of the British oligarchy are real.
(4) It is a useful point to make here that as Premier of Ontario Bob Rae brought in Maurice Strong as President of Ontario Hydro from 1992-1994 during which time Canada’s nuclear sector was nearly shut down and a prototype for a “green New Deal” was applied. Strong had famously described a “fiction book he wished to write someday saying: “What if a small group of world leaders were to conclude that the principal risk to the Earth comes from the actions of the rich countries? And if the world is to survive, those rich countries would have to sign an agreement reducing their impact on the environment. Will they do it? The group’s conclusion is ‘no’. The rich countries won’t do it. They won’t change. So, in order to save the planet, the group decides: Isn’t the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn’t it our responsibility to bring that about?”
Facebook is receiving congratulations from the darkest corner of the web for reverting to the discredited gatekeeping of the legacy media and further eroding freedom of inquiry on the Internet, which in its early days gained popularity as an antidote to the very censorship we see Facebook (and Paypal and Amazon) imposing.
When they were all up and coming capitalists, the CEOs of these companies preached freedom of expression. Now that they’ve made it into the billionaire’s club they have abandoned the very ideals which brought them fame and fortune. Their conceit that they are avatars of new thinking for the digital age is now exposed as a cheap trick driven by the college campus nanny doctrine that there must be “safe spaces” erected where “micro-aggression” emanating from radical ideas cannot be allowed to penetrate.
Freedom of speech means nothing if it doesn’t mean freedom for your fiercest rivals in the ideological and political struggle. The Tech Tyrants have a megalomaniacal confidence in their own righteousness, which has increasingly transformed the Internet into a zone of conformity. As Heather Mac Donald notes, “They consider any disagreement with their own political outlook as a manifestation of ‘hate,’ and as such, fair game for suppression.”
What they ignore in their hubris is that there are few things more disturbing to Americans than suppression of the advancement of human knowledge through the free competition of ideas. Not so very long ago rights for homosexuals and their marriage were offensive topics proscribed by gatekeeping media. Today that suppression appears to modernists like a relic from a dark age, while suppressing conspiracy theorists and black Muslims is hailed as a virtue. It’s a case of the double standard, freedom of speech for me, but not for thee: my radical cause deserves to be publicized, while your radicalism is offensive to my dogma and therefore will be policed off Facebook and eventually, social media in general.
Mark Zuckerberg and his Facebook cohort have banned and removed Minister Louis Farrakhan of the Nation of Islam from Facebook and Instagram. Farrakhan dissents from the conformist narrative about Israeli Zionism and Talmudic Judaism, while having the highest respect for true Jews. He is demonized and expelled by invoking “anti-Semitism.” All it takes is for the charge to be made and under the dictatorship of the Tech Tyrants, the accused is banned without the right of appeal or due process. This is from the playbook of Communist despot Vladimir Lenin and Nazi Judge Roland Freisler.
Last February Amazon banned three magisterial volumes of black history produced by the Nation of Islam’s scholars, The Secret Relationship Between Blacks and Jews. To add insult to injury, this ignominious book-banning occurred during Black History Month. Amazon claims for public relations’ purposes to be an anti-racist organization, yet here we observe the white liberals who own Amazon sneaking through a ban on brilliant and thus far irrefutable works of black history.
The Canadian-Israeli researcher David Sheen appears to draw upon these books as the foundation of his lectures on the forbidden fact of the Judaic role in the black slave trade. As a white Judaic man he has the privilege of saying without fear of being banned, what Louis Farrakhan and his organization were the first to uncover and publish. This is white supremacy of the most hypocritical type.
Underneath all the slogans and name-calling is the struggle between ideas. The white nationalists who parade in the streets and fire guns at Judaic people, are too obtuse to perceive that their alleged combat contra Judaism is in truth a losing battle against their own philosophical allies. Talmudism of the “settler” type practiced since the founding of the Israeli state in 1948 is a form of racial-supremacist neo-Nazism. Hitler was under the influence of Kabbalistic and Talmudic ideology from 1919 onward. He was channeling the most ferocious racism on the planet.
Decades ago Hebrew University Prof. Yeshayahu Leibowitz warned of the ascendance of what he termed “Judeo-Nazis.” There are indeed Nazi rabbis teaching young people in the Israeli state today. They convey Hitler’s ideology to their students. For this writer to report it may cause me to be banned.
Facts have been judged too hot for you to handle and your infantilization is enforced by self-appointed commissars of the news, imitating the old model of gatekeeping perfected by the increasingly obsolete legacy media. This is a betrayal of the very idea of the Internet. In the 1990s John Perry Barlow, one of the earliest advocates of the Internet, witnessed it functioning as a revolutionary alternative to the censorship common to television and the newspapers, “We are now, as a global group, going into a period where the old editorial system, the old way of stomping down consciousness to a bearable aperture is about to get blasted.”
This is less the case in 2019. The bold promise of a new liberty online is being circumscribed and narrowed by a thousand incremental acts of suppression, which if it continues, over time will forge an Internet which mirrors the decrepit censorship system it was supposed to surpass and overcome.
For the advancement of knowledge without interdiction by partisan expurgators masquerading as objective journalists, a free and untrammeled Internet is absolutely essential, indeed fundamental to what it means to be fully human. “Human rights” is an empty shibboleth if it does not signify the right to know and argue freely according to conscience, something John Milton proposed in 1644, in his essay Areopagitica. He wrote, “If reading is regulated, then music, conversation, every incident of social life must be regulated too.” Four hundred years later and we have yet to learn what Milton knew.
Facebook, Paypal and Amazon will not suppress the Nazi rabbis or the pro-rape rabbis. Just as liberal white supremacy is the covert weapon against blacks in the Nation of Islam who are not willing to submit to the plantation mentality, Nazi ideology and genetic supremacy can be preached with impunity as long as it is done under Zionist or Talmudic auspices. If you understand this, then you know what a mockery is the solemn piety and finger-wagging that accompanies the suppression of heretics like Paul Joseph Watson and Louis Farrakhan.
Rabbis at the Israeli-government-funded Bnei David academy, an elite yeshiva (Talmud school) preparing Israeli youth for leadership positions in the Israeli army, glorify Hitler and the Nazis and urge the enslavement of Arabs. Don’t ask Wikipedia or the legacy news about these Israeli Nazis. You’re not supposed to know. This is what Facebook, Paypal and Amazon are working toward: a vacuum where Correct Think can safely extinguish vital information that has been damned as hateful by people who hate freedom.
Rabbi Eliezer Kashtiel lectures his students at Bnei David academy as follows:
“The gentiles will want to be our slaves. Being a slave to a Jew is the best. They’re glad to be slaves, they want to be slaves. Instead of just walking the streets and being stupid and violent and harming each other, once they’re slaves, their lives can begin to take shape….Yes, we’re racists. We believe in racism. There are races in the world and there are genetic traits inherent in nations. This demands that we think how to help them. There are differences among races…. There are nations around us with genetic defects. The Arab wants to be under Occupation because they have a genetic defect. They don’t know how to run a state. They don’t know how to do anything. Look at how they act.”
Rabbi Giora Radler, addressed the Bnei David academy youth:
“Let’s begin by asking the question: was Hitler right or not? He is the most correct person there is. He was definitely right in every word he said. His ideology was correct. There is a male world which fights, which deals with honor and the brotherhood of soldiers. And there is the soft, ethical feminine world which turns the other cheek.”
Louis Farrakhan has the highest respect for true Jews. But he has righteous anger when he sees Palestinian civilians murdered weekly with no tears shed by the white rulers of America. Neither does he suffer gladly black youth being summarily gunned down by members of American police departments which have been trained by Israeli police in the same tactics they use to wantonly take the lives of Palestinian youth.
The Internet Overlords are turning toward a dictatorship over the mind which they are imposing incrementally, using the pretext of combating white nationalism. (Last time we checked, Minister Farrakhan was not white). Combatting the white Talmudic extremism that is reviving the Hitler cult and has taken thousands of Palestinian lives is not on the agenda. How can it be, when the driving force behind Facebook’s censorship is its own deeply concealed white supremacy?
Our thoughts turn to China and other nations not captive to the Anglo-Zionist networks. American diplomats and newspaper and Internet pundits pompously lecture China on freedom of expression and democracy, presuming, as the British empire did in the 19th century, that the Chinese are dull and slow-witted. Can anyone expect the Chinese to loosen their hold on the Internet when they see American tech tyrants such as Mr. Zuckerberg practicing censorship and limiting free expression?
Facebook boss Mark Zuckerberg is encouraging the closing of minds around the world in the name of opposing racism and hatred. Communist Party boss Xi Jinping censors to maintain “Confucian harmony.” Both are pretexts for thought control and the fear that a political or theological rival might get the best of the argument and win adherents.
Gaslighting Farrakhan presupposes that his support among people of color will decline because Facebook has silenced him. Yet the record shows that he has gone from strength to strength as a result of the attacks of the white power structure. Blacks in America are aware that Minister Farrakhan is being censored because he will not behave on the plantation. Moreover, his defiance is a lightning rod for people of all colors who are fed up with the crushing dominion of money over the free spirit of humanity.
Mr. Farrakhan’s position in the black community is not dependent on where he’s at in digital cyberspace. He’s the visionary who organized and led The Million Man March in the streets of Washington D.C. He is the one who has healed and empowered the black family. He has ennobled the black man and woman in the face of the pernicious hate and racism of the prestigious Rabbi Maimonides, who centuries ago taught the western world that blacks are lower than the level of human. Farrakhan reminds his people that they are the imago Dei, even as Maimonides classed them only slightly above apes. So who is the hater?
Louis Farrakhan’s love for his people cannot be disputed. Telling the black community he is a hater flies in the face of everything they know about him. Meanwhile, buildings are named and statues are erected to Maimonides by the closeted liberal white supremacists who cleverly sear their rivals with the stigma of “hater.”
The world is to be made safe for white supremacist Talmudism by any means, including making a charade of the West’s own hallowed principles of free speech. The blowback has already begun, however. In the HipHop World they are saying, “Minister Farrakhan has been instrumental in quelling beef, guiding the leaders like (rapper) Snoop and mending wounds that have been long-standing in the community. He’s a staple. Now, he has said something that people of a certain persuasion may take the wrong way, but what do you think Black people and others of color must contend with daily?”
The history of martyrdom demonstrates that blatantly repressive tactics against women and men who put their life on the line for their ideals will always help to propagate those ideals. Such a man is the Honorable Minister Louis Farrakhan. Zuckerberg, Bezos and the other Internet monopolists will never defeat him.
Michael Hoffman is a former reporter for the New York bureau of the Associated Press. His writing has appeared in the New York Times and the New York Review of Books. He is the author of the textbook Judaism Discovered, and a popular condensation, Judaism’s Strange Gods: Revised and Expanded. Mr. Hoffman is managing editor of Revisionist History® newsletter.
Leader of Britain’s opposition Labour Party is facing attacks from pro-Israeli lobbies in the country for merely endorsing thoughts of a thinker who suggested a century ago that Jews control the media and political discourse through their dominance on the European financial system.
Labour politicians and other notable political and social figures called on Corbyn on Wednesday to apologize for a foreword he wrote to a book first released in 1902 and re-published in 2011.
In his foreword to John Atkinson Hobson’s ‘Imperialism: A Study’, Corbyn said the economist’s description of how a certain Jewish household controlled banks and newspapers were “brilliant”, “very controversial at the time” and “a great tome.”
The book mainly argues that men of a singular and peculiar race use centuries of financial experience to control finance in Europe. It says that the dominance puts the Jews “in a unique position to control the policy of nations” and gives them a control that “they exercise over the body of public opinion through the press.”
However, pro-Israeli activists and politicians labeled Corbyn’s endorsement of the idea as a clear form of support for antisemitism and asked him to apologize.
“Jeremy Corbyn endorsed book that peddles racist stereotypes of Jewish financiers and imperialism as “brilliant” and a “great tome”,” said former Labour MP Ian Austin.
“The revelation Jeremy Corbyn wrote the foreword for a reportedly deeply antisemitic book is damning and damaging,” said Euan Philipps, of the campaign group Labour against antisemitism.
Corbyn, well known for his support of the Palestinian cause, has repeatedly been described by pro-Israeli lobbies in Britain as a threat to the life of Jews in the country if he takes office. He has denied having anything against the Jews and has sought to sort out differences with the Jewish community in the UK.
A senior Labour lawmaker said on Wednesday that Corbyn’s endorsement of Hobson’s thoughts in economy and politics was not antisemitic.
“I haven’t read the book myself but as I understand it, Jeremy like many politicians, has quoted this relevant political thinker,” said Rebecca Long-Bailey, a Labour frontbencher, adding, “I think he was looking at the political thought within the whole text itself, not the comments that were antisemitic in any shape or form.”
Jane Eisner wrote an editorial in the Forward yesterday entitled “Spare Me your Thoughts and Prayers. The US Has Betrayed Its Jews.” Her thesis is that by abiding by a “perverted, outdated, self-serving view” of the constitution, the government has failed in its “oblig[ation] to ensure that citizens have the freedom to live lives of dignity, equality and security.”
Specifically she blames the Second Amendment right to bear arms which she claims “was not meant to turn America into a killing field,” and the freedom of speech clause of the First Amendment which she opines, “was not meant to allow a few powerful, private corporations to ignore their civic responsibilities to prevent incitement and promote social harmony.”
Ms Eisner dismissively allows that “scholars” have noted that the Constitution was drafted to define rights as “negative rights.” She bemoans the lack of emphasis on “positive rights,” that would make it the duty of the “government to ensure that citizens have the freedom to live lives of dignity, equality and security.”
Perhaps Ms Eisner has failed to read the Constitution which sets forth the various powers of the federal government and then in its amendments makes clear its intent that the government interfere with its citizens to the least extent possible. The Ninth and Tenth Amendments specifically grant nonenumerated rights and powers to the States or the people. Importantly, even the 14th Amendment which has expanded certain rights of citizens is phrased in the negative. “No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens… ; nor … deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person … the equal protection of the laws.”
Nowhere is there a positive obligation placed on the government to ensure that its citizens “live lives of dignity, equality and security.” Instead the constitution prescribes equality under the law and protection from government interference. Understanding this makes axiomatic the right to own a gun or to allow speech that Ms Eisner does not like.
Yet, Eisner claims the federal government has totally failed in its “central” job to “protect its people.” From what constitutional or other law does Eisner derive this “central job?” Would a government attempt to prevent attacks on what Eisner calls “vulnerable minorities (her list – Jews, African Americans or Muslims or gays and lesbians or random children in a school.) by eliminating guns and free speech deprive all of us of liberties?
The United States has existed for 240 years with our constitution and its particular blend of rights and obligations. Ms Eisner’s apparently seeks to add additional restrictions in order to ensure the safety of the Jews. This is a dangerous route. The framers (of the Constitution and its Amendments) were wise enough to understand that positive obligations placed on the government must be balanced by the burdens they place on individual freedom. If we were to enact some version of Eisner’s ‘dignity and security’ we would be inviting the government to control more aspects of our lives.
Neither private citizens nor corporations are obliged to let everyone speak nor to police other’s speech. Of course some may plan nefarious deeds on Facebook, but information canned is published in other ways. The shooter in Poway, John Ernest, posted his manifesto on pastebin. In addition, allowing speech that Ms Eisner does not like may defuse anger rather than cause shootings. Christopher Poole, creator of 4chan, said he was often thanked for providing an outlet to vent frustrations, “an outlet to say what they can’t say in real life.”
Perhaps the constitution Eisner wants might be more appropriate for Israel. After all, Rabbi Yosef Berger, has said that “[the shooting] is clearly Hashem telling the Jews to come home, to return to Jerusalem because “the sanctity of Israel can protect the Jews.” Israel has made clear that it considers itself the homeland of the Jewish people. Jews who want safety at the expense of the United States’ cherished constitutional rights might be happier in a country not committed to the US Constitution.
This is an excerpt from a much longer article by Ron Unz originally entitled Oddities of the Jewish Religion, which we highly recommend.
We reproduce it here because there is so very little written about this important book, which debunks much of what was taught in the West in the 20th century about Russia.
Throughout most of my life, Nobel Laureate Alexander Solzhenitsyn was generally regarded as the greatest Russian literary figure of our modern era, and after reading all of his works, including The First Circle, Cancer Ward, and The Gulag Archipelago, I certainly concurred with this assertion, and eagerly absorbed Michael Scammel’s brilliant thousand page biography.
Although Russian himself, many of his closest friends were Jewish, but during the 1980s and 1990s, whispers of his supposed anti-Semitism began floating around, probably because he had sometimes hinted at the very prominent role of Jews in both financing and leading the Bolshevik Revolution, and afterward staffing the NKVD and administering the Gulag labor camps.
Late in his life, he wrote a massive two-volume history of the tangled relationship between Jews and Russians under the title Two Hundred Years Together, and although that work soon appeared in Russian, French, and German, nearly two decades later, no English translation has ever been authorized. His literary star seems also to have greatly waned in America since that time, and I only very rarely see his name mentioned these days in any of my regular newspapers.
Samizdat versions of major sections of his final work may easily be located on the Internet, and a few years ago Amazon temporarily sold a 750 page hard copy edition, which I ordered and lightly skimmed.
Everything seemed quite innocuous and factual, and nothing new jumped out at me, but perhaps the documentation of very heavy Jewish role in Communism was considered inappropriate for American audiences, as was the discussion of the extremely exploitative relationship between Jews and Slavic peasants in pre-revolutionary times, based on liquor-dealing and money-lending, which the Czars had often sought to mitigate.
When a ruling elite has limited connection to the population it controls, benevolent behavior is far less likely to occur, and those problems are magnified when that elite has a long tradition of ruthlessly extractive behavior. Enormous numbers of Russians suffered and died in the aftermath of the Bolshevik Revolution, and given the overwhelmingly Jewish composition of the top leadership during much of that period, it is hardly surprising that “anti-Semitism” was deemed a capital offense. Kevin MacDonald may have been the one who coined the term “hostile elite,” and discussed the unfortunate consequences when a country comes under such control.
After the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, reborn Russia soon fell under the overwhelming domination of a small group of Oligarchs, almost entirely of Jewish background, and a decade of total misery and impoverishment for the general Russian population soon followed. But once an actual Russian named Vladimir Putin regained control, these trends reversed and the lives of Russians have enormously improved since that time.
America’s media organs were overwhelmingly friendly toward Russia when it was under Jewish Oligarchic rule, while Putin has been demonized in the press more ferociously than any world leader since Hitler.
Indeed, our media pundits regularly identify Putin as “the new Hitler” and I actually think the analogy might be a reasonable one, but just not in the way they intend.
The Japanese government apologized to thousands of people forcibly sterilized under a now defunct eugenics program, and offered the victims money in compensation.
The government of Prime Minister Shinzo Abe devoted 3.2 million yen (US$28,000) to all surviving victims of the program, while Chief Cabinet Secretary Yoshihide Suga extended “sincere remorse and heartfelt apology.”
What we know:
Conducted under Japan’s Eugenics Protection Law, the program ran from 1948 until 1996 and targeted people with hereditary diseases for forced sterilization surgeries and vasectomies.
The law was designed to “prevent the birth of poor-quality descendants,” and Tokyo until recently viewed the sterilizations as legal.
In around 16,500 cases, no consent was given for the procedures, while some victims were as young as nine years old.
Under the program, more than 8,000 additional people gave consent to be sterilized, while nearly 60,000 women agreed to terminate their pregnancies due to hereditary illnesses, according to the Japan Federation of Bar Associations.
The redress payments and official apology follow a spate of lawsuits filed by victims of the program, who argue it violated their right to self-determination, reproductive health, and equality.
One group of survivors sought 30 million yen per victim, nearly 10 times the amount offered by the government.
A recently declassified CIA document prepared in 1983, and released on 20 January 2017, shows that the United States had at the time encouraged Saddam Hussein to attack Syria, which would have led to a vicious conflict between the two countries, thus draining their resources.
The report, which was then prepared by CIA officer Graham Fuller, indicates that the US tried adamantly to convince Saddam to attack Syria under any pretense available, in order to get the two most powerful countries in the Arab East to destroy each other, turning their attention away from the Arab-Israeli conflict. … continue
This site is provided as a research and reference tool. Although we make every reasonable effort to ensure that the information and data provided at this site are useful, accurate, and current, we cannot guarantee that the information and data provided here will be error-free. By using this site, you assume all responsibility for and risk arising from your use of and reliance upon the contents of this site.
This site and the information available through it do not, and are not intended to constitute legal advice. Should you require legal advice, you should consult your own attorney.
Nothing within this site or linked to by this site constitutes investment advice or medical advice.
Materials accessible from or added to this site by third parties, such as comments posted, are strictly the responsibility of the third party who added such materials or made them accessible and we neither endorse nor undertake to control, monitor, edit or assume responsibility for any such third-party material.
The posting of stories, commentaries, reports, documents and links (embedded or otherwise) on this site does not in any way, shape or form, implied or otherwise, necessarily express or suggest endorsement or support of any of such posted material or parts therein.
The word “alleged” is deemed to occur before the word “fraud.” Since the rule of law still applies. To peasants, at least.
Fair Use
This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more info go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
DMCA Contact
This is information for anyone that wishes to challenge our “fair use” of copyrighted material.
If you are a legal copyright holder or a designated agent for such and you believe that content residing on or accessible through our website infringes a copyright and falls outside the boundaries of “Fair Use”, please send a notice of infringement by contacting atheonews@gmail.com.
We will respond and take necessary action immediately.
If notice is given of an alleged copyright violation we will act expeditiously to remove or disable access to the material(s) in question.
All 3rd party material posted on this website is copyright the respective owners / authors. Aletho News makes no claim of copyright on such material.