Satan Worship: The Coming One-World Religion


Left, Illuminati Jewish program to discredit the Bible and Christianity
claims that a tomb containing the bones of Jesus and Mary Magdalene was found.

As James Perloff shows, the Illuminati set out
to systematically destroy Christianity and belief in God.
Do we need any more proof that we are ruled by a satanic cult?

by James Perloff

The Bible and the Protocols agree: one world government and religion are coming.

Revelation 13:7 says the Antichrist will have “authority over every tribe, people, language and nation.” Protocol 5:11 says the Illuminati plan to “absorb all the state forces of the world and to form a super-government.”

Revelation 13:8 says that “inhabitants of the earth will worship the beast.” Protocol 15:20 brags “they will acknowledge the autocracy of our ruler with a devotion bordering on ‘apotheosis’” [glorification as a god]. He “will be the real pope of the universe, the patriarch of the international church.” (17:4)

For Satan to rule Earth autocratically, he must not only consolidate governments and currencies, but belief systems. But how could he unite something so diverse as religions?


The long-term strategy: (1) splinter a religion into sects on the “divide and conquer” principle; (2) assault the religion’s foundations, creating doubts among believers; (3) finally, herd the remnants together with other religions – i.e., ecumenism.

Let’s see how this played out in Christianity. Protocol 17:5 says of churches: “we shall fight against them by criticism calculated to produce schism.” Over centuries, Christianity has been splintered into increasingly smaller sects. For example, the Jehovah’s Witnesses were founded by a Freemason, Charles Taze Russell.

To plant doubts in believers, Darwin’s theory of evolution was introduced as a “scientific” alternative to creation by God. Protocols 2:3 flaunts “the successes we arranged for Darwinism.”

Attacks on the Bible achieved what Protocol 17:2 terms “the complete wrecking of that Christian religion.” The Rockefellers funded seminaries that questioned the Gospel, most notoriously the Union Theological Seminary. In the late 19th century, Union Theological professor Charles Briggs introduced “Higher Criticism,” in America claiming the Bible was error-ridden.

fosdick66.jpgIn 1922, Harry Emerson Fosdick, left, gave a landmark sermon which cast doubt on the Bible being God’s Word, the Virgin Birth, the Second Coming, and Christ’s death as atonement for sins. He declared those holding these beliefs “intolerant.”

His sermon sparked outrage, and Fosdick was forced to resign. However, he was immediately hired as pastor of Riverside Church – attended and built by John D. Rockefeller, Jr. for $4 million. Rockefeller paid for 130,000 copies of Fosdick’s sermon to be printed and distributed to ministers. Fosdick’s brother Raymond was president of the Rockefeller Foundation.

The views expressed by theologians like Briggs and Fosdick were called “Modernism,” which included denying Christ’s divinity, miracles and resurrection. Modernism was not a quibbling over some gray area of theology; it was total repudiation of Christianity’s major tenets. With Rockefeller funding, it permeated seminaries and churches.

Recently Modernism has gone further; the Jesus Seminar (financial backers unpublicized) declared over 80 percent of sayings attributed to Jesus weren’t authentic. The Da Vinci Code - this century’s best-selling novel, thought by John Coleman to be a Tavistock creation – claimed Jesus wasn’t resurrected and married Mary Magdalene. Shortly after the film version’s release, a Discovery Channel documentary claimed a tomb had been found containing the bones of Jesus and Mary Magdalene.


Consolidation of churches required organizations. The Rockefellers funded the National Council of Churches. John Foster Dulles was chosen to spearhead the ecumenism drive.  Dulles was a Rockefeller in-law, chairman of the Rockefeller Foundation trustees, a founding CFR member who helped draft the UN Charter (which never mentions God.)

In 1942, Dulles chaired a 30-denomination meeting which called for “a world government of delegated powers.” Not content with unifying America’s churches, Dulles traveled to Amsterdam in 1948 to attend the founding conference of the World Council of Churches. Director of research for this foundation-funded conference was John Bennett – president of Union Theological and a CFR member.

Among today’s ecumenical traps: the Tony Blair Faith Foundation. The former British prime minister – a consummate insider – said he wanted to “promote respect, friendship and understanding between the major religious faiths” since “globalization pushes us ever closer.”

But even with structures for consolidation, the question remained: how to motivate churches to unite. Since denominations often disagree on theology, the strategy was to encourage collaboration where they did agree: values (e.g., helping the poor and sick.) This materialized in an action-based program, “the Social Gospel” (socialism masked as religion.)

Walter Rauschenbusch, trained at Rockefeller-funded Rochester Theological Seminary, became “Father of the Social Gospel,” declaring that “the only power that can make socialism succeed, if it is established, is religion.”

Perhaps the most notorious “Social Gospel” pusher: Rockefeller-backed Reverend Harry F. Ward, who long taught at Union Theological. Ward, the ACLU’s first chairman, was called by labor leader Samuel Gompers “the most ardent pro-Bolshevik cleric in this country.” Ward helped found the Methodist Federation for Social Action, which advised Christians to downplay the Gospel and fight for things like social justice, better labor conditions, and “world peace” – i.e., the goals Marxists proclaimed.

Missionary work was targeted. In 1930, John D. Rockefeller, Jr. funded the “Laymen’s Foreign Missions Inquiry,” which recommended missionaries downplay Christian doctrines and ally with other religions in doing good works. Although most denominations were critical of the report, former missionary Pearl Buck praised it in the media. Subsequently her novel The Good Earth received the Nobel Prize.

This “unity through action” strategy continues today. The Tony Blair Faith Foundation’s original website had a “Social Action Projects” page which asked viewers to sign a declaration stating: “I commit to working together with people of all faiths to fight against disease and poverty.”

warren.jpgRick Warren, author of The Purpose Driven Life (over 30 million sold) is America’s current Social Gospel point man.  In 2008, backed by a $2 million Rupert Murdoch donation, Warren launched the PEACE Coalition. Time magazine headlined it: “RICK WARREN GOES GLOBAL.” Warren said the coalition’s goal was “to mobilize 1 billion Christians worldwide.”

Warren, who is a CFR member, gave the invocation at Obama’s inauguration, and was dubbed “America’s pastor” by CNN.  He’s anointed, but by who?


The Illuminati haven’t forgotten Catholicism. Protocol 17:3: “When the time comes finally to destroy the papal court…we shall penetrate to its very bowels.”

Like other churches, Catholics have recently seen major ecumenical developments, such as: the signing of the Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification by Lutheran and Catholic representatives (1999); dialogue with Eastern Orthodox churches, resulting in the Common Declaration of Pope Benedict XVI and Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew I (2006); an unprecedented Catholic-Muslim summit at the Vatican (2008); and visits of Pope Benedict XVI to Israel and to the Great Synagogue of Rome (2009).

And Catholicism has experienced its own “social action” movement – comparable to the tactics of Harry F. Ward and Rick Warren – as in the doctrine of liberation theology, which was prominent in Latin America beginning in the 1950s and 60s, where the Gospel took a back seat to fighting poverty and social injustice via Marxist precepts.

Protocols 17:2: “as to other religions we shall have still less difficulty in dealing with them, but it would be premature to speak of this now.”


The final mechanism for one-world religion might be Project Blue Beam. According to Serge Monast, satellite-projected holograms in the sky (the “image of the beast” predicted by the Bible), will be tailored to religious populations in Earth’s different regions.

To induce worship, the Antichrist will not initially appear as a tyrant, but as a “savior.” To save us from what? Probably from all the chaos the satanic Illuminati will have created: wars ignited by false flags, famines from artificial food shortages, plagues from viruses synthesized in laboratories, HAARP-generated storms and earthquakes, and perhaps even a fake “Blue Beam” alien attack, simulated by holograms of spaceships. Having contrived these disasters, it will easy for him to stop them. By turning off HAARP, for example, he will appear to duplicate the feat of Jesus in quelling the storm on the Sea of Galilee. These high-tech counterfeit “miracles” will allow him to be accepted as God, as Christ returned.

But any “saving” will be short-lived. Once enthroned in Jerusalem (the end goal of Zionism), Satan will use his absolute dictatorship to unleash his greatest cruelties on the world. Worshiping the Antichrist will undoubtedly include human sacrifices – a practice consistently associated with Satan worship, from child sacrifices offered to the demonic Baal in the Old Testament, to today’s mock human sacrifices carried out by America’s elite at Bohemian Grove.

People of faith should stand united; not in their one-world religion but against the Illuminati.

Jesus warned: “Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravenous wolves.”

Protocol 11:4: “The goyim are a flock of sheep, and we are their wolves. And you know what happens when the wolves get hold of the flock.”

James Perloff is author of several books; his latest is Truth Is a Lonely Warrior.

First Comment from Dan:

No article on this subject can be complete without including the role of the last six Popes in this New World Order business plan. (I left out the one that only lived 33 days in 1978).   Since 1958 each Pope has rejected the primacy of Roman Catholicism and embraced the ecumenical policy called ‘interfaith dialog’.

I know most modern people think that’s about ‘brotherly love’, peace and understanding, but the fact remains that the religions and denominations contradict one another. When a pope says as John Paul II did that ‘all religions worship the same God’ he was coming from the pantheist paradigm of the United Nations.  His stated goal “to place the (Catholic) Church at the heart of a new religious alliance that would bring together Jews, Muslims and Christians in a great armada”.   Any religious person knows that every one of these religions would have to reduced to cultural meaninglessness to become one same thing.  Strip the religions to “unity” and what you get is pantheism – ie, “I am he and you are me and we are we and we are all together” like the Beatles song.  When I don’t know God from a bowl of cat food, or the cat, or a goldfish, or the trees – that’s pantheism.

Those in North America and Europe who assume the Vatican Church is gradually fading away don’t factor in the massive rise in converts in lower Africa and Southeast Asia. These very populations are also streaming into North America and parts of Europe.  The unspoken fact is that the Illuminati cult in control of the Vatican since 1958 have been deliberately chasing Europeans away, because we can figure out the New Church is counterfeit.  The “emerging Church” of new converts is along the lines of pantheist perception and “charismatic” expression. (the “false fire” of mass hypnotism and demonic obsession).

As the Jaques Attali article yesterday noted,  NWO Globalism was designed to created economic and other refugees who must perpetually be moving from zone to zone in pursuit of a living wage.   The “native” populations – currently indigenous Europeans and Europeans that settled North America have already dropped below the necessary birth rate to maintain their majority in their own countries – due to abortion as birth control and temporary self-sterilization with birth control pills or shots.


 By Seymour Light

Damascus 1840

What Henry Makow called  ‘the most famous instance of Satanic Jewish human ritual sacrifice’ took place in Damascus:

The salient points about the Damascus Affair are 1. a prominent Italian Capuchin monk, father Tommaso was ritually slaughtered (and his blood drained) by prominent Cabalist Jews. 2. They confessed and led authorities to his identifiable remains and clothing.

Read more… 9,073 more words

Freud’s Part in Our Satanic Possession

Shlomo Freud, a member of the Illuminati Bnai Brith, played a key role in mankind’s induction into the Cabala sex cult. Psychiatry may have a subversive hidden agenda; hardly a surprise given its origins.

Freud declined an invitation to travel saying, “a wealthy woman client might get well during my absence.”

“My mood depends very much on my earnings. Money is laughing gas for me.”

by Henry Makow Ph.D
(from Aug. 29, 2010)

Sigmund Shlomo Freud’s career illustrates how a satanic cult, the Illuminati, cast its morbid spell over humanity.

The Illuminati sprung out of the Sabbatean Jewish heresy of the 17th century.

Sigmund Freud (1856-1939) was a Sabbatean who sold his perverted satanist beliefs to the world in the guise of science and medicine. The Illuminati-controlled media and education system hailed him as a great prophet.

The Sabbateans were a sex cult that indulged in every sexual perversion imaginable as a way of spitting in God’s eye. This is what satanists do: incest, pedophilia, orgies, homosexuality, everything that is unnatural and unhealthy.

Freud and his B’nai Brith (Illuminati) backers convinced the world that sexual desire (libido) is the primary motivation of human life, and that sexual satisfaction is the universal panacea. He taught that repressing sexual urges is harmful and results in neuroses. He taught that males experience castration anxiety and females suffer penis envy.

As an overture to incest and pedophilia, he taught that children have sexual feelings for their opposite-sexed parents and feel hostility to their same-sex parent. At the extreme, his “Oedipus Complex” states that a boy subconsciously wants to kill his father and rape his mother.

The philosopher Karl Popper said Freudian psychoanalysis is as devoid of scientific method as palm reading. Freud’s Oedipus Complex “has absolutely no scientific basis.”

Typical of a Satanist, Freud denied man’s spiritual dimension, our hunger for God exemplified by our spiritual ideals like harmony, love, truth and beauty.

The Kabbalah teaches that God has no characteristics and is unknowable.

Influenced by the Kabbalah, Freud taught that God is merely the projection of imaginary father figure designed to make us repress our sexual urges.

According to Wikipedia, Freud “is considered one of the most prominent thinkers of the first half of the 20th century, in terms of originality and intellectual influence.”


After joining the Masonic Jewish B’nai Brith in 1897, Freud’s stillborn career began a meteoric rise.

Psychology Professor David Bakan describes Freudian psychoanalysis as derivative of the Lurianic Kabbalah and the Zohar. Lurianic Kabbalah is a 2nd century Gnostic formulation which was picked up by Jewish heretic Sabbatai Zevi. [Sigmund Freud and The Jewish Mystical Tradition, (Beacon Press, Boston 1958)]

Freud discussed Kabbalah with a rabbi Chaim Bloch in 1920. The rabbi told Prof. Bakan that the two men argued when Freud proposed that Moses had been an Egyptian pharaoh, not a Jew.

Freud stormed off, leaving the rabbi alone in his study. It was then that Bloch saw books on the shelves which identified Freud as a follower of Sabbatai Zevi, (the Sabbatean founder.)

Freud thanked the members of B’nai Brith lodge for their support. Indeed, several members of the lodge provided the initiating cadre who founded the quackery of psychoanalysis.

According to E. Michael Jones, Freud’s Psychoanalytical Association was structured as a secret society. (Libido Dominandi, p. 122) Presumably, it had the same secret goals as the B’nai Brith, to subvert, exploit and enslave.

Freud’s letters revealed he regarded his clients as suckers.

He compared himself to a lion in a cartoon he saw. The lion is checking his watch at feeding time and asks, “where are my Negroes?” Freud said his patients were his “Negroes”. (Jones p. 116)

Freud declined an invitation to travel saying, “a wealthy woman client might get well during my absence.”

“My mood depends very much on my earnings. Money is laughing gas for me,” he wrote. (116)

Called the “talking cure,” psychoanalysis was a scam. As Michael Jones writes, for a fee, rich people received absolution for their guilty pleasures and permission to proceed.

Jones believes psychoanalysis was based on the Illuminati initiatory ritual and is a form of mind control.

“Both were based on having the patient or adept give in-depth, quasi-confessional “examinations of conscience” during which they told the Illuminist controller or psychotherapist details of their personal lives which could later be used against them. Both Illuminism and psychoanalysis ended up as covert forms of psychic control, whereby the controller learned of the adepts dominant passion and manipulated him accordingly.” (p.127)

The bottom line is that psychiatrists, whether they know it or not, are part of this satanic secret society. The true Illuminati goal is to make people sick and take their money. This would explain why psychiatrists are putting millions of people, including children, on drugs. See also: “The Soviet Art of Brainwashing.”

The secret society model may apply to the medical profession as a whole, as well as to other professions.

Freud was a precursor of Alfred Kinsey, the pervert who killed himself trying to masturbate. Kinsey filled his famous Rockefeller-sponsored report with the behavior patterns of his fellow homosexuals. Thus, he convinced Americans that promiscuity and deviance were the norm.

Similarly Freud had an affair with his wife’s sister, Minna Bernays, who got pregnant. His psychiatric theories about incest and sex were attempts to exonerate himself. Ironically, Adam Weishaupt, the Illuminati organizer, also got his sister-in-law pregnant.

Freud went through a period where he was enamored by the salutary properties of cocaine. When some friends became addicted, he supposedly gave it up. However Wikipedia reports: “Some critics have suggested that most of Freud’s psychoanalytical theory was a byproduct of his cocaine use.”


Sigmund Freud illustrates that modern culture is controlled by a satanic cult, to degrade and enslave mankind. We have been duped by Satanists in the guise of science and medicine.

Satanists promote sexual excess and deviance to enslave humanity. “Anything goes,” is the satanist watchword. Freud gave society permission to go hog wild.

Free sex tramples marriage and family, institutions necessary for social stability and health. It debases every human relationship to the lowest common denominator, sex. It presents sex and “relationships” as the single gateway to personal development and happiness.

For the past 200 years, progress and enlightenment have been measured in terms of increased sexual license, until today we genuflect at the obscene antics of obese, naked “gay pride” paraders.

This is “progress” in satanic terms. We are the victims of a diabolical multi-generational conspiracy which grows more brazen every day.

Thanks to Richard Evans for his valuable research.

Related — “Sex and the Jews”

Sabbateans and the Golden Dawn



Savile’s Travels: How Sir Jimmy Was Fingered as Peter Sutcliffe’s Accomplice

21st Century WireIt’s not that big of a stretch, and you’d have to be in avoidance mode not to look into it.

There seemed to be an unnatural synergy between them, a correlation that appears to have escaped the authorities and the media, until now.

It’s known that Broadmoor’s esteemed patron, Sir Jimmy Savile, had befriended one Peter Sutcliffe, known as “The Yorkshire Ripper”, who was moved to the secure mental hospital in Berkshire following his mass murdering spree.

Jim’ll Fix it: Serial killer Peter Sutcliffe meeting with Frank Bruno, arranged by… Sir Jimmy Savile.

Sir Jim even fixed a meet-and-greet between the Ripper and boxing champ Frank Bruno at Broadmoor in 1991, when Big Frank came to open a boxing gym inside.

Pals Jim and Pete shared a passion for predatory, sadistic and violent sex practices. Nurses at Broadmoor can testify to hearing Sir Jim booming with laughter at the Ripper’s jokes coming from inside Sutcliffe’s cell.

But how did we miss this one: multiple murder crime scenes put Sutcliffe uncomfortably close to Savile at multiple locations in Leeds at the time of the murders – a realisation which places Sir Jimmy squarely in the frame with the Yorkshire Ripper.

According to the Sun’s Professor David Wilson, one of Britain’s top experts on serial killers, police must now investigate whether or not the pair’s unusual bond developed before Sutcliffe was caught. The Sun article explains:

 “Another crime expert even thinks BBC star Savile could have turned killer himself in his craving for more and more perverted thrills. And the family of Sutcliffe’s first victim are demanding that cops question the killer, now 66, to find out if Savile was involved in any of the 13 Ripper murders or helped cover them up.

The newspapers pushing the envelope on the Savile-Sutcliffe connection this past weekend were the Sunday Sport, the Sun and others – with broadsheets staying mostly clear of the that angle.

There is also the assertion by the Sunday Sport that Jimmy Savile may be connected with the murder of Crimewatch’s Jill Dando, of whom it’s been said was threatening to expose Savile’s paedophile activities nationally at the time. If there is a link here, then the media should also revisit the show trial of Barry George, the mentally ill patsy who was originally charged with Dando’s killing, but was eventually acquitted for the murder in 2008.

Savile also boasted of his use of ­violence and links to IRA gangsters when filmed during Louis Theroux’s infamous BBC documentary.

More interestingly, however, is that the Sunday Sport and Sun’s revelations appear almost verbatim from an Oct 11th interview on the UK Column Live show – where award-winning filmmaker Bill Maloney of Pie and Mash Films had  previously laid out out a damning case detailing the clear connection between Jimmy Savile and Peter Sutcliffe.

Maloney explains, “After the release of our documentary Sun Sea & Satan in 2008, a victim from Haut de la Garenne came forward with the names of Jimmy Savile and Wilfred Brambles (of Steptoe & Son). Later, in September 2012, a month before I did the UK Column Live interview with Brian Gerrish, I realized that there is horrendous information that the National press are not disclosing.”

Filmmaker Bill Maloney has been somewhat of a trailblazer in the arena of child abuse activism in the UK, through his personal crusade against chronic institutional child sex abuse throughout the UK, but most his work had fallen on deaf ears when it came to the mainstream media, until now.

Filmmaker Bill Maloney: knew about Savile long before the mainstream media and the BBC would admit it.

“We’re at the point now where the mainstream media is beginning to admit that the child abuse and paedophilia issue is not just about one man Jimmy Savile, but admitting to a wider systematic problem, because they’ve been forced into it by the alternative media such as ourselves”, says Maloney.

Among other revelations and connections, the Sunrevealed that Sutcliffe victim Irene Richardson was killed in 1977 – only yards from where Jimmy Savile demanded oral sex from his paperboy, and another murder victim was knifed by the Ripper in front of Savile’s other Leeds home at the time.

Allegations first surfaced following the infamous ITV documentary where Savile sexually abused inmates at hospitals – to which Sir Jim had his own set of keys. This is crucial, as both Savile and Sutcliffe, it seems, shared their dark enthusiasm for necrophilia. So investigators might consider here, the uglier possibility that Sir Jim could be involved in multiple murders, perhaps even whilst on duty, roaming the halls of the infirmary, looking for – or worse, creating, a freshly deceased, and still ‘warm’  fix. It’s safe to say that the mainstream media ignored much of the research carried out by the alternative media researchers like Bill Maloney who looked into crime scenes like Haut de la Garenne, and has not properly explored the links between serial predators like Savile and known serial killers like Sutcliffe.

Thus far, it’s the ‘tabloid press’ – namely the Mirror, Express, Sun, Daily Star, and Sunday Sport, who have taken on the more risky angles of this story, whereas editors at the Guardian, The Independent, Telegraph and Times have mostly stayed clear of dirty aspects of Savile like necrophilia, murder, and his affection for the Yorkshire Ripper. Perhaps they feel it’s too grim, and something reserved for the gutter press.

What is clear now, however, is that this is officially a national emergency which requires ‘all hands on deck’ from a press and media point of view.

But we have an even bigger theme now in play with the Savile-Sutcliffe link. If Savile is eventually linked to Sutcliffe or any other Savile murders turn up, then anyone who covered for Jimmy – including the BBC, would, in theory, be guilty, in theory, of aiding and abetting a mass murderer.

Everyone over the years it seems, the police, the press – even the great BBC, all covered for Jimmy Savile. Why?  Because he was a ‘fixer’. ….

Watch Bill Maloney’s harrowing documentary film, ‘Sun Sea and Satan’, bravely shot on corruption-ridden island of Jersey:

Former archbishop lambasts David Cameron

Government is aiding and abetting secularisation of UK and leaving Christians feeling persecuted, says Lord Carey

george carey former archbishop

George Carey: ‘This government is in danger of alienating a large minority who only a few years ago would have been considered pillars of society.’ Photograph: Murdo Macleod for the Guardian

A former archbishop of Canterbury has attacked David Cameron for doing more than any other recent political leader to feed Christian anxieties that they are part of a persecuted minority.

Lord Carey said it was a bit rich to hear Mr Cameron tell religious leaders to face down aggressive secularisation when the coalition seemed to be aiding and abetting such practices.

In an article for the Daily Mail, he wrote: “I like David Cameron and believe he is genuinely sincere in his desire to make Britain a generous nation where we care for one another and where people of faith may exercise their beliefs fully.

“But it was a bit rich to hear that the prime minister has told religious leaders that they should ‘stand up and oppose aggressive secularisation’ when it seems that his government is aiding and abetting this aggression every step of the way.

“At his pre-Easter Downing Street reception for faith leaders, he said that he supported Christians’ right to practise their faith. Yet many Christians doubt his sincerity. According to a new ComRes poll, more than two-thirds of Christians feel that they are part of a persecuted minority. Their fears may be exaggerated because few in the UK are actually persecuted, but the prime minister has done more than any other recent political leader to feed these anxieties.

“He seems to have forgotten, in spite of his oft-repeated support for the right of Christians to wear the cross, that lawyers acting for the coalition argued only months ago in the Strasbourg court that those sacked for wearing a cross against their employer’s wishes should simply get another job.”

Lord Carey said he was very suspicious that behind plans for gay marriage “there lurks an aggressive secularist and relativist approach towards an institution that has glued society”.

He added: “The danger I believe that the government is courting with its approach both to marriage and religious freedom is the alienation of a large minority of people who only a few years ago would have been considered pillars of society.”


Click to visit the original post

  • Click to visit the original post
  • Click to visit the original post
  • Click to visit the original post

By Seymour Light

 Oprah Winfrey Show

A case of Jewish child ritual murder  was described on the Oprah Winfrey show, in 1989.  For years the video was banned by the ADL, but it has nowresurfaced. (‘Jews Protest Sacrifice Tale on Oprah Show’ as reported in the Chicago Tribune, 5/7/89) A courageous lady called Vicky Polin was interviewed on May Day:

Read more… 5,164 more words

Understanding the Anti-Christ

By Rixon Stewart on July 19, 2013

Nearly one hundred years ago Russia underwent a revolution that was to be echoed decades later in China.

In historical terms, Russia transformed almost overnight from Imperial Russia to the Soviet Union. From being a largely peasant society ruled by an all powerful Emperor, Russia became a supposedly egalitarian state.
Ostensibly classless, Lenin’s proclamations about the proletariat and the rights of workers were used to dupe the masses. For ultimately Russian communism was based on one thing and one thing only: a belief in the absolute precedence of materialism.
That’s why according to his grandson John Schiff, to ensure its success millionaire Jacob Schiff “sank about 20 million dollars for the final triumph of Bolshevism”.  For communism was essentially the brainchild of the super rich and served their purposes, rather than those of the ‘workers’.
So despite claims of a more equitable distribution of wealth and although Russia’s leaders may have cloaked their real intentions with political jargon, materialism was still the bedrock on which Russian communism was built.
In the eyes of Soviet political commissars any type of spiritual belief was consequently seen as a form of heresy.
Resolutely atheistic, they elevated ‘scientific materialism’ over and above any spiritual faith, which they deemed as little more than superstition at best, and a threat to “communism” (i.e. faith in materialism) at worst.
However neither the industrial nor agrarian workers enjoyed much in the way of economic benefit from this new dispensation. They were too busy trying to meet harvest and production targets for that.
In other words, their lives were totally beholden to the dictates of materialism.
With hindsight we now know that Russian communism simply didn’t work. Beyond its failure as a political and economic system it also brought unprecedented suffering to millions in the gulags.
Although they are not openly saying as much, but perhaps mindful of the failures of Russian communism, China’s leaders seem intent on moving modern China away from its communist origins, although they haven’t entirely dispensed with the political nomenclature.
Nonetheless despite outward political transformation materialism still remains paramount in China. Only now flashy Western designer labels have replaced the drab garb of Maoist times
Having recently returned to China the ongoing economic growth is startling and it’s taking place at a phenomenal pace.
To give but one example: when I first visited Beijing just over a decade ago the city had but two subway lines. Today China’s capitol has an extensive subway network that is bigger than New York’s or the London Underground and it’s still growing. Indeed it is now the second biggest subway system in the world, after Shanghai’s.
In the seven years since I was last in Beijing some areas are now barely recognisable. Thankfully the hotel I stayed in before remained the same but many of the takeaways and work-a-day convenience stores in the surrounding area have now gone. Replaced instead by showrooms for Rolls Royce, Range Rover and Maserati.
While the other hotels in the area, which although respectable and middle range when I last visited, have been upgraded or replaced by new establishments that wouldn’t be of place in Mayfair or Las Vegas.
In essence it is materialism writ large, with the Chinese having been transformed from the regimented workers of little more than two decades ago into savvy consumers intent on getting ahead today.
Although China’s outward appearance may have changed the governing principle remains the same however. It is faith in materialism but like any faith differences come in how those principles are seen to operate in this world.
With materialism it can manifest as either capitalism or communism, because although we’ve been told that they are at opposite ends of the political spectrum they both stem from the same fundamental belief: a faith in the primacy of material wealth.
Making the differences between capitalism and communism little more than those within other faiths, such as Catholicism and Protestantism, or Sunni and Shia. In each case the faith has the same foundation, be it the Bible or the Koran, the differences come in how its fundamental principles are interpreted.
In materialism’s terms, is the article of faith dispensed equally or according to merit and if so who or what determines what is worthy of merit? Either way, belief in the primacy of materialism remains fundamental.
In view of this it’s no surprise that China and Russia have gone down the same route: empire and revolution followed by decades of communist totalitarianism and now, with the end of the old order, renewed economic growth.
Both nations are now seeing a burgeoning middle-class, a fact that was apparent on my most recent visit to Beijing, where unprecedented economic growth has been the norm for over a decade. While Russia has displayed the sort of economic resilience and stability that many in the West can now only yearn for.
So does that mean both nations will go the same way as the U.S.? Where the pioneering spirit of innovation that once prevailed in America’s early years has been replaced by Wall Street and a culture that thrives in consumerism and greed. Where the free market economy once vaunted as an integral part of the “American way of life” has transformed like Frankenstein into corporate monstrosities such as Monsanto.
Where the spirit of technical innovation that saw the Wright brothers pioneer flight just over a century ago has grown into a multi-billion dollar arms industry wreaking death and destruction across the world.
Of course this isn’t only confined to America, large parts of the West seem to be afflicted by a similar malaise. Only in America the fruits of a culture in terminal decline are all too evident and there may be a reason for this.
As Les Visible has opined in regard to other matters, this maybe for the purposes of demonstration. An episode in time that will provide future historians with an example to help illustrate a lesson. So that future generations will look back at America’s impending collapse and learn.
It may not be apparent for years yet or even decades but there may be a lesson in this for all humanity. It’s also why I don’t think either Russia or China will follow the same route the U.S. is about to go sprawling down.
Indeed it’s a lesson that may cause many to pause before following the same precipitous path.

Already the smarter Americans are getting out. Les Visible is one such and he’s not the only one, others are getting ready to leave too. Their haste to leave may be because they sense, if only subconsciously, what a gifted psychic friend spotted some time back.

Christ incarnated in this world nearly 2,000 years ago for the purposes of illustration; to demonstrate a point that humanity would hopefully learn from. Now his counterpoint has incarnated in this world, also to illustrate another complimentary lesson. We’ll call him what the ancient Zoroastrians and more recently Christian esoteric researcher Rudolf Steiner called him, we’ll call him Ahriman and he’s currently resident in North America.
His presence during America’s impending collapse is meant to illustrate a lesson about materialism and ourselves. Because far from being an inhuman ogre, Ahriman embodies many qualities that are an integral part of being human. Or to put it another way, humanity carries within it the same potential attributes as Ahriman. It’s just without equilibrium, without the counterbalance of qualities exemplified by Christ, these attributes become monstrous.
It cannot be overemphasised however, that he’s not incarnated as some monstrous figure presiding over blood sacrifices. He’s nothing like that. Instead he exhibits some very useful attributes: the sort of logical accomplishment, drive and management of material resources that has gone into the building of Beijing’s subway system.
We embody many of his characteristics and they can indeed be useful.
His current incarnation’s career path thus far has been a lesson in itself. He’s been a scientist and project leader in one of America’s most prestigious research organisations. From there, while still in his mid thirties, he moved into the world of banking and finance at the very highest level.
Now he appears to be preparing to enter the world of politics from where he will no doubt meet with more success. Yet he’s accomplished so much in so many different fields and, at the time of writing, he’s still not even 40.
However, I’m not going to name him because many will throw up their hands in disbelief and denial, especially Americans.
But then they would. As their country collapses, morally, spiritually, financially and maybe even militarily, if they embark on war with Iran, Ahriman will be there to preside over it all. His presence Illustrating for future generations the dangers of putting faith solely in material things: the inherent hazards in the pursuit of science, logic and financial fulfilment without consideration for compassion, common sense and deeply felt human emotions.
It’s this lack of balance and perspective that has given rise to the horrors of Depleted Uranium and Genetic Engineering. He’s here to illustrate the dangers of elevating science in pursuit of material profit to the exclusion of all else.
The inherent hazard of putting material considerations over and above any higher emotional impulses should be obvious. Nonetheless there are many who are completely blind to it, which is why he’s here to help illustrate this point. Just as Jesus Christ tried to exemplify its antithesis 2,000 years ago.
Indeed it may be that many so-called Christians, especially if they’re American, may even come to look upon this scientist and financier as he ascends politically as some sort of Messiah.
He’s not but there’s a lesson to be learned as he prepares to move into the realm of U.S. politics. I’m not going to provide a link to confirm this or provide a photo of him, although some exist. Nor do I expect readers to take my word for it. Just watch the U.S. political scene in the next 12 months.
Finally, for those who aren’t familiar with the name Ahriman he’s known by another moniker that maybe more familiar. Ahriman is an ancient name for Satan: Lord of the material realm and master of the dark sciences.

When Satanists Make the Rules


(“It is not a matter of what is true that counts, but of what is perceived as true.” -Henry Kissinger, left)

“It is not a matter of what is true that counts, but a matter of what is perceived to be true.” – Henry Kissinger – See more at:
“It is not a matter of what is true that counts, but a matter of what is perceived to be true.” – Henry Kissinger – See more at: REMINDER OF WHERE WE STAND

“The foundation of the Christian family is the sacrament of matrimony, the spring of all domestic and public morals. The anti-Christian societies [i.e. Illuminati] are opposed to the principle of home. When they have destroyed the hearth, the morality of society will perish.”  Benjamin Disraeli (Lothair, 1870)

by Henry Makow Ph.D,

Most people don’t understand the scale and success of the “Conspiracy.”

The “Conspiracy” is the Establishment now. The “New World Order” is not something in the future. The Illuminati were refreshed in 1776 and immediately gained the upper hand in Europe and America. Using Freemasonry as vehicle, they grew in power throughout the 19th century and have been in charge since 1913.

Freedom and democracy are fascades used to control the masses. They are window dressing to hide our true Masters and their agenda.

Our Masters began as a Jewish heresy called “Sabbatean-Frankists” who impersonated every religion and nationality to gain world power. They are the Iluminati. Their bankers finagled ownership of the British money supply in 1694 and are expanding this credit monopoly into a monopoly over human life, i.e. Communism. 

They are supplanting God and redefining reality according to their self-interest and perversity. When Satanists make the rules, they invert right and wrong, truth and falsehood, good and evil. For example, our leaders are mostly traitors to the nation state.

Wars are designed to kill or degrade the goyim. The Illuminati shaped modern history and culture with this end in mind.They control the corporations, politicians, military, Intelligence agencies, education and the all-important mass media. Our “leaders” are controlled through blackmail.


Society is a willing accomplice in its gradual self-destruction. In general, the goyim unconsciously know what  to do to get a piece of the scam.  Organized Jewry has been agents of the banker “internationalist” agenda for a long time. With their help, Western nations have been flooded by immigrants. Whites are becoming a minority. The Illuminati goal is to re-engineer and induct humanity into their satanic cult (Cabalism) by destroying “every collective [human] identity,” including race, religion, nation and family.


Freemasonry is Cabalism for gentiles, It’s a way for the goyim to get a share of the banker scam. It behaves like Judaism does, networking and discriminating against outsiders. Dr. Isaac Wise wrote: “Freemasonry is a Jewish Institution whose history, degrees, charges, passwords and explanations are Jewish from  beginning to end.”

Freemasonry, like Cabalism, is Satanism. So we are not in doubt, the Masonic archives were seized in Budapest in an anti-Jewish reaction in 1919. Christians read that at the B’nai Brith Conference in 1897, the Grand Master said:

“We must spread the spirit of revolt  among the workers. It is they whom we shall send to the barricades, seeing that their desires are never satisfied, for we have need of their discontent to ruin Christian civilization and hasten anarchy. It is necessary that the moment arrive when the Christians shall come themselves and implore the Jews to take control.”
(Cecile Tormay, “An Outlaw’s Diary”)

Clearly, Organized Jewry and their Masonic goy lackeys are Illuminati tools. Banning criticism of Jews and Israel is another way of saying you cannot name or criticize your Masters. Ordinary Jews are kept in the dark, better to be duped and serve as camoflage.

ottawa.jpg(City logo. 666. If this were not intentional, someone would have noticed and changed it.)


None of this is new to many of you. We live in a cognitive dissonance. The media is constantly telling us we’re free while at the same time censoring the truth and diverting us with nonsense. We have to keep repeating the truth like a mantra. Masonic monuments dot our cities. The Ottawa city logo is 666. It is everywhere– on all street signs, city vehicles and buses!


Illuminati symbols are on major corporations. Movies and TV purvey obscenity. Society has been thoroughly sexualized. Schools teach children to experiment with homosexuality. Governments launch terror attacks on their own citizens with the complicity of the mass media. Increasingly, society risks going insane.

In its Gadarene drive to decadence, society has alienated its sane minority. What does this tiny minority do? Is Civil Disobedience the answer?

The Illuminati are “banking” on the slaves loving their slavery.
We have no choice but to be bystanders in a satanic freakshow until conditions get so bad that even the slaves revolt. Is the novel “1984″ prophetic?

In the meantime, we can set a positive example in our personal lives, and help others to understand that our political and social institutions have lost moral legitimacy.  That is why the Illuminati need to create a police state, to rule by force rather than by right. -

James said (May 30, 2013):

Another great article re: the Illuminati slave masters, concise and to the point.

I find almost all the people I know, family members included, are completely unaware of anything you wrote about.

And what is alarming to me is they do not want to know. They seem to be complacent in their ignorance. Almost arrogant about it.

I live just south of you in West Central Minnesota. Today I had conversations with two different men both in the local farming business.
I broached the subject of GMO seeds and crops with both of them, one a farmer, the other operates the local farmers cooperative selling seeds and other agriculture supplies.

When I conversed with the farmer and asked him why he and other farmers in our area plant GMO corn. He answered by rubbing his forefinger and thumb together indicating is was the money. He had no other comment even when I told him that GMO seeds were being banned in many European and Asian countries. My comments diidn’t even prompt a question or a comment.

When I asked the cooperative manager how much of his business entailed the sale of GMO corn and soy bean seeds, he replied all of the farmers in the area plant them. He knew of none that used the “old fashioned” kind. He also made no comment when I remarked about that GMO seeds were being banned.

These men are “brain dead”, ignorant , or they are stupid. They don’t care to even be informed.
They are the ‘slaves’ you write about. And they really don’t know it. They do not have eyes that see reality. They really live in the “matrix”, and don’t know it.

Thank you for being “there”. Don’t go away.

Asim said (May 29, 2013):

Excellent and timely article. Over here in the UK, Ofsted, the regulating body that checks the teaching standards in schools and other public services, recently recommended that children in primary schools be taught about -Pornography!!…and the dangers associated with it. They made a serious case for it-that it be incorporated in all schools as part of their Personal, social, health and education syllabuses.

What sickened me more was how a number of spineless parents were all too eager to renounce their parental rights and duty and agree to children being exposed to pornography, all the better to inform that on the subject. Schools are a breeding ground for their satanic agenda, Henry, and I can attest to that. Recently, my daughter who is 7 years old, started her school swimming lessons. She was forced to strip naked in front of her entire class, boys and girls alike, as all the changing rooms were being occupied by other pupils from different schools!!! 30 7 year old boys and girls being indoctrinated to strip naked in front of each other and their teachers, without a question raised. Needless to say, my wife put a stop to that. All this from a top Church of England school with supposedly high christian values!!!!!

On another note, the government is pushing through the Communictions Data Bill, otherwise known as the snoop charter. It will give them access to peoples emails/phone calls and internet records, all in the name of preventing islamic extremism. Oooops, better watch what I say! At least I can lead them to your excellent website Henry!!!

The satanists are truly in full swing.

Dan said (May 29, 2013):

“When Satanists Make the Rules”

Paddy Chayevsky (author of 1975 screenplay, “Network”) , said nearly 40 years ago, “How do you preserve yourself in a world that doesn’t mean much anymore?”

Back when most Americans thought “Illuminati” was an Italian pasta, the movie said out loud that “there is no America, there is no democracy. There’s only IBM, ITT, and AT&T, Dupont, Dow, Union Carbide, and Exxon. Those ARE the nations of the world today”.

“It is the international system of currency which determines the totality of life on this planet…. am I getting through to you, Mr. Beale?”

Chayevsky also showed how everyone in the TV network succumbed through their own ethical weaknesses. The head of the news department was courageous enough to lose his career rather than embrace new socially irresponsible programming for ratings, but he was easily seduced by a young TV programmer, leaving his wife with massive emotional damage to his family. The young TV programming director stole his job – which was her real goal.

That’s how Freemasonry works. Advancement eventually requires betrayal of friends and family – at first to ‘prove’ trustworthiness to the Order, but it becomes a brotherhood of secrets of sins. The moral compass is turned upside down, it becomes a ‘virtue’ to betray “the profane” – the suckers.
Freemasonry is one of many incarnations of cult of Cain.

Church father Hippolytus exposed the secret of such secret societies in the ‘Refutation of all Heresies’ that their initiations drew naive members into greater ‘degrees’ of perverted and criminal acts to make them accomplices in deeds that were not only embarrassing if revealed, but carried severe criminal penalties if made public. The members were therefore bound forever to the ‘brotherhood’. Consider why criminal sexuality is so prevalent among politicians and religious authorities. Blackmail and extortion are Satanist’s specialty.
Network – “We no longer live in a world of nations and ideologies”

JG said (May 29, 2013):

Kissinger well knows that what the world perceives as truth is an Illuminati Manufactured Lie. There is no turning back now, the path to world destruction is on cruise control. The populations of the western nations have fallen to these Cabalists because they loved their lives of “ease and luxury” too much and were willing to cut any kind of deal with the devil to keep that life.

- See more at:

Drones for Christ

Source: Sojourners
Wednesday, June 19, 2013

LIBERTY UNIVERSITY in Lynchburg, Va., was founded by televangelist Jerry Falwell. Its publications carry the slogan “Training Champions for Christ since 1971.” Some of those champions are now being trained to pilot armed drones, and others to pilot more traditional aircraft, in U.S. wars. For Christ.

Liberty bills itself as “one of America’s top military-friendly schools.” It trains chaplains for the various branches of the military. And it trains pilots in its School of Aeronautics (SOA)—pilots who go up in planes and drone pilots who sit behind desks wearing pilot suits. The SOA, with more than 600 students, is not seen on campus, as it has recently moved to a building adjacent to Lynchburg Regional Airport.

Liberty’s campus looks new and attractive, large enough for some 12,000 students, swarming with blue campus buses, and heavy on sports facilities for the Liberty Flames. A campus bookstore prominently displays Resilient Warriors, a book by Associate Vice President for Military Outreach Maj. Gen. (Ret.) Robert F. Dees. There’s new construction everywhere you look: a $50 million library, a baseball stadium, new dorms, a tiny year-round artificial ski slope on the top of a hill. In fact, Liberty is sitting on more than $1 billion in net assets.

The major source of Liberty’s money is online education. There are some 60,000 Liberty students you don’t see on campus, because they study via the internet. They also make Liberty the largest university in Virginia, the fourth largest online university anywhere, and the largest Christian university in the world.

More than 23,000 online students are in the military—twice as many as students who live on campus. Liberty offers extra financial support to veterans and those on active duty, allowing them to be credited for knowledge learned in the military and to study online from a war zone.

Liberty has been turning out “Christ-centered aviators” for a decade. In fall 2011, Liberty added a concentration in Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS, aka drones), making it one of the first handful of schools to do this. Now at least 14 universities and colleges in the U.S. have permits from the Federal Aviation Administration to fly drones, and many institutions, including community colleges, offer drone training.

If one chooses to concentrate studies on piloting drones, the load will include a half dozen courses on “intelligence.” Liberty students can also pick up a minor in strategic intelligence and take courses in terrorism and counterterrorism. (Liberty’s school of government brags that Newt Gingrich helped develop its course on “American exceptionalism.”)

Currently, the vast percentage of drone pilots are training for war, but that is widely expected to change in the next few years. Congress has instructed the FAA to integrate drones into U.S. domestic airspace by September 2015.

Liberty’s School of Aeronautics has six faculty members, five of whom have spent 15 to 30 years in the military—four in the Air Force, one in the Navy. Dave Young, dean of the SOA, spent 29 years in the Air Force and retired as a brigadier general. Last summer, Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell appointed Young to serve on the Virginia Aviation Board.

“[Drones] are going to be a viable part of the aviation industry,” Young said in a Liberty Journal article last summer. “It offers a grand opportunity for employment during a time when college graduates are entering a highly competitive job market.” He also acknowledged that the technology could be misused. “Our mission is to produce graduates who are not only skilled, but who are going to go out in the world as strong Christians,” Young said.

John Marselus, SOA associate dean, concurred. “We want to have graduates serving the Lord in this area of aviation,” he said.

I exchanged emails with Young about Liberty’s drone program. He described it as a four-year degree program in Unmanned Aerial Systems and said that it includes “flying UAS vehicles in an authorized and controlled environment.” But, he added, “the focus on the program is not only on actual drone operations, but the command and control aspect, management of resources, and the various missions that UAS are capable of supporting.”

The Virginia legislature recently became the first in the nation to impose a moratorium on drone use—lasting two years. That might have been a concern for Liberty. But before he would sign the bill, Gov. McDonnell made some exceptions to the drone ban, including emphasizing quite strongly that educational drone programs, including Liberty’s, would not be affected.

“We very much appreciate the governor’s continuing support of the development of the Unmanned Aerial Systems presence in the Commonwealth,” Young wrote to me. “Particularly as it is a rather contentious issue due to the lack of understanding concerning the missions UAS can perform that aid the public at a much reduced cost.”

I asked Young about drones’ most common use today, namely war fighting. “Is that kind of drone use Christian?” I asked.

“I can only offer my perspective as a Christian,” he replied. “UAS are like any other aerial vehicle that can be used for a variety of missions including law enforcement, aerial surveillance, search and rescue, and crop spraying as well as for military reasons. As a former military combat aviator, I believe that UAS can be employed just like a manned aircraft and that there should not be a distinction between the two.”

A brochure promoting the Liberty School of Aeronautics features a photo of  Dan McCready, First Lieutenant USAF, who is quoted, “Since I was very young, I’ve dreamed about becoming a pilot in the U.S. Air Force. Liberty’s aviation program gave me the opportunity to make my dream a reality, helping me to realize that I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me.”

Tim Carentz obtained his undergraduate degree from Liberty, works for the Air Force now, and is pursuing a master’s in divinity from Liberty. Carentz told me he could not speak for the Air Force, but as a Liberty student and a pastor he believes “it’s biblical to have a national pride.”

“I believe authorities are put in place with the approval of God,” Carentz assured me. “If he didn’t want them there, he could easily remove them.”

Jesus flipping the bird

He also discussed how good members of the military can be and how there are opportunities for evangelism.

“If there were no Christians in the military, how would they instill love and discipline?” he said. “There are people pulled right from the ghetto who have nothing and who come into the military. And maybe their first supervisor is a Christian, and he takes them to the foot of the cross and leads them to Christianity, and they share that with their family, and you save generations.”

At Liberty, the military is considered a tool for Christian missionaries. But what, I asked, about killing people with drones?

“I can understand why some support [them], and I can understand why others don’t support [them]. Our job is to pray,” said Carentz, “and to understand that things will continue to get worse until Christ returns.”

Richard Emery obtained a bachelor’s in finance from Liberty and went to Afghanistan with the Air Force. But Emery left the military in 2010. He told me he was troubled by what he saw as a pursuit of vengeance rather than justice.

“I’ve thought about this a lot, how we’re supposed to be forgiving and yet fight wars against enemies,” he said. “We blame Osama bin Laden for what happened on Sept. 11; one time I was in Japan, and they had a picture of him in a urinal. You were supposed to pee on his face. I thought, ‘I don’t feel right about this.’ I’m not going after some kind of vendetta. I just want to bring justice. You’re supposed to be forgiving, but you’re supposed to do your job. I’m not going over there holding a grudge against Osama bin Laden. All the people we’re killing, you know, I’d like to see them get saved.”

“I have no problem taking another person’s life,” said Emery, “if it would promote peace and liberty and the interest of the country we’re in. I have no problem giving my life for it. I’d end up going to heaven, so it doesn’t really bother me. But it becomes a problem when I start to doubt what we’re there for.”

Emery proposed the nuclear bombing of Japan as a model for how Afghanistan should be handled. “It was painful, but we dropped a couple of atomic weapons and they quit fighting, and now Japan is one of our closest allies.”

Emery expressed general disagreement with President Obama on “moral issues” until I asked about drones, and then he praised him.

“They’re cheaper. They’re effective. They’re tiny,” he said. “The difference between an F-15 and a drone is just the cost. If a baby is killed by a drone or an F-15 or a gun, the problem is with the intelligence, not with the drone.”

Emery, however, was clear on one thing. He doesn’t want drones patrolling our own skies or listening in on our cell phone conversations. In the view of this graduate, and others at Liberty, that wouldn’t be a godly thing to do.

David Swanson, host of Talk Nation Radio, is the author of War is a Lie and When the World Outlawed War.

Insider Explains that Satanist are Not all Alike


pedophilia.jpgNon-Traditional Satanists are truly bad guys.

They share the beliefs of their Traditional brethren,

but also employ extreme physical, sexual and

ritual abuse up to and including ritual human sacrifice.”

by Elijah  

I was raised in the Midwest during the 1960′s and ’70′s in a middle class American home. My dad was an avowed atheist. My mother was a Methodist who forced me to go to church, Sunday School, Vacation Bible School etc. Being a typical kid, church occasionally scared me half to death, but usually bored me to tears. I quit going as soon as I was old enough that she could no longer force me to go.

There was, however, a spiritual curiosity within me that made me begin to search for the truth – whatever that was. A co-worker and I became friends and over time he began to share his spiritual beliefs to me. As it turns out, he was an occultist – specifically a Rosicrucian. He began teaching me and opened my eyes to a spiritual universe that I did not even know existed. Eventually, I left the occult, but I became acquainted with its practices and beliefs.


One of the biggest mistakes that Christians make is that they lump all occult practitioners into a single group – calling them either “witches”, Devil Worshipers” or Satanists. This is a colossal mistake. There are literally thousands of occult brotherhoods and sisterhoods – called within their respective circles as “traditions”. 
Wiccan-300x200.png(Left, University of Missouri recognizes pagan, wiccan holidays.) 


Each Tradition has very specific beliefs, customs, rituals, practices etc. For example, Celtic witchcraft and Wicca hold very similar beliefs. They are both “White Magick” and seek to harness natural forces (IE Elemental Spirits) to do good (or at least what they see as good.) Their motto is “Harm none, do as ye will”. They worship “The Goddess” – a feminine deity that is sort of nondescript – she is often referred to as Diana, The Moon Goddess, or can also be seen as Mother Earth. Her male (and slightly subordinate) counterpart is Horus, or “The Horned One”. Wiccans can be the lady down the street, your local librarian or the girl (or boy) next door. They are generally harmless to anyone except themselves and those whom they deceive into joining them.


Generally, these traditions despise Satanists, seeing themselves as morally superior. Major “un-holy” days include Wolpurgis Night (April 30) Beltane (May 1st) Samhain (pronounced sah’-wen October 31, later changed to Halloween) and Yule (December 21st) – these “un-holy”days are shared by Druids, as well as many Traditional and Non-Traditional Satanists)


Satanists have literally a legion of sub groups, but they fall into one of two general categories: Traditional and Non-Traditional.


lavey.jpgA traditional Satanist does not necessarily worship Lucifer as a deity, but rather they are uber hedonists. They worship their own desires and have few if any moral limitations on how they go about fulfilling their lusts. Their rituals often employ a nude (and beautiful) woman lying horizontally on a table as an altar. Sexual gratification, and material wealth are often their end goals. While they do have the potential for violence, their practices are by far and away much more benign than their Non-Traditional counterparts. A textbook example of a Traditional Satanist is Anton Levey and his First Church of  Satan. This “church” was quite popular with the Hollywood A list elite from the late ’50′s thru the 70′s.


Non-Traditional Satanists are truly bad guys. They share all of the beliefs of their Traditional brethren, but also employ extreme physical, sexual and ritual abuse up to and including ritual human sacrifice. Pedophilia is commonplace and women are kept within the various groups as “breeders” specifically for the purpose of providing infants and children as sexual play toys and sacrificial victims.


dcodex_41.jpgThese folks often will use sex magick and ritual murder to summon demons to do their bidding and are almost without limit in power. Many, many public figures and world leaders are Non-Traditional Satanists. Michael Aquino’s Temple of Set is a prime example of the Non-Traditional Satanist. In fact, eye witnesses have claimed to have seen members of the US Congress and other ranking public officials actually kneel before him.


Luciferians are a whole other group. Their beliefs are essentially that Lucifer is the good “god” and Jesus usurped Lucifer’s rightful place as heir to the Throne of Yahovah – (called “God the Father” in church speak). Most of the Illuminati are Luciferians and are the originators of the concept of “The End Justifies the Means”. They consider their family blood lines to be superior to the rest of humanity, marrying only among other Illuminati families. In their minds, they are the Elite, superior to the entire human race in all ways, and the only ones qualified to rule because of their superior education, breeding, intellect, etc.


Contrary to popular myth, they are not Jewish, although some of them claim to be. Their blood lines are actually Europe’s “Black Nobility”, tracing their family trees back thru Ancient Rome, Ancient Greece, Ancient Egypt all the way back to Ancient Babylon, where it all started with Fallen Angels breeding with human women (See Genesis 6).


actual zepperlintribune.jpgThere is some scientific evidence to support their belief that their family members do differ genetically from the rest of humanity. This group is mentioned in Revelation 2, Verse 9 as being members of “The Synagogue of Satan”. Side note: The Synagogue of Satan is a reference to where these people’s loyalties lie. However, there was a literal place called the Seat of Satan in Pergamos, which Hitler had deconstructed piece by piece and brought to Germany and reassembled. This is the location from which many of his more significant speeches were given.


Some luciferians are quite moral, ethical people, living by a very strict set of rules. These rules, however, are not generally the same morals shared by the rest of humanity. It is interesting to note, however, that one of their moral imperatives is that they warn the masses of their plans and intentions prior to their implementation. If the masses are “too stupid” or “too decadent” to recognize it, they are seen to “deserve” whatever destruction befalls them as a result. 


And while their honor code seems to allow for all manner of lies, deceit, deception to be perpetrated upon the masses, they do not break their word among themselves. Luciferians have a calendar all of their own, and quite frankly, I don’t know much about it except to say that they do place some emphasis on the dates I listed above, but I believe they have other days of significance as well.


There are literally thousands of other occult type practices found everywhere from Native American culture to the Caribbean (and ultimately West African) black arts generally lumped together under the generalized heading of Voodoo, to occult practices originating in Asia.

Pop culture

Simon in it, are you?

Simon’s in it, are you?

Sex Plague: The Normalisation of Deviance and Depravity

By Dr Lasha Darkmoon on January 31, 2014

By Lasha Darkmoon — Jan 31, 2014

Is there a covert campaign to deprave and corrupt the masses?
If so, who are the Architects of Evil behind this psyop? [1]

Poster on a classroom wall. Do our children need this? Click to enlarge

A recent pamphlet published by the German government contains these chilling words:
“Fathers do not devote enough attention to the clitoris and vagina of their daughters. The child touches all parts of their father’s body, sometimes arousing him. The father should do the same.” [2]
Toddlers are encouraged to indulge in “unlimited masturbation.” Their parents are expected to offer practical demonstrations if need be — the better to produce sexual precocity in their offspring. “Children should learn there is no such thing as shameful parts of the body,” the booklet advises. “The body is a home you should be proud of.”
Children, it is suggested, should be taught the movements of copulation as soon as they reach the age of four, giving them what virtually amounts to a crash course in the Kama Sutra as soon as they have learned to walk.
Depravity, it seems, cannot be taught too early.
In Holland, things have gone further. Here a political party, set up by convicted pedophiles, clamors for the legalization of child pornography and intergenerational sex between children of twelve and adults old enough to be their grandparents. I forgot to mention bestiality. They want to legalize that too. [3]
Who is to blame for the sex addictions we see suppurating all round us? This licentiousness, growing by the day, thanks to the internet and the mass media, is far deadlier and more destructive than it was half a century ago, before the sexual revolution.
Those who are responsible for this sickening depravity are clearly the people who started the sexual revolution. They are the people, moreover, who control the mass media.
Who controls the media?
Who determines the imagery and attitudes drip-feeding steadily into the minds of the public? Who runs Hollywood? Who contaminates mass consciousness? Who defiles the collective mind? Who pulls the puppet strings of marionette man? Who are the Bad Shepherds leading the sheeple astray?
Who are to blame, in short, for letting the world go to hell in a handcart?
I won’t bother to answer these questions. More to the point, I dare not. If you don’t know who owns the media — lock, stock and barrel — you’re wasting your time reading this article.

Art and Sexual Subversion: The Vaginocentric Female Artist

Let me resume here my discussion of sexual depravity which formed the basis of my recent article Secret Sex Life of the Jews; and let me begin by saying a few words on art, a subject I know something about.[4] And then let me proceed to the subject of pornography and consider its deployment in the systematic demoralization of the masses. [5]
First, ask yourself this question: is there anything intrinsically admirable or aesthetically pleasing about British painter Tracey Emin’s attention-seeking leg-and-vagina paintings? When other artists offer us self-portraits, they usually show us their faces. Not Ms Emin. Her idea of a “self-portrait” is to show us her uterus. [6]
Consider only these titles by the outrageously untalented Emin and draw your own conclusions about the decadent crap being rammed down the throat of the public by the Jews who control the art world [7]:
Everyone I Have Ever Slept With,Fucking Down An Ally (sic), Asleep Alone With Legs Open (several large-scale canvases of her splayed legs and vagina), I’ve Got It All (legs splayed again, clutching banknotes to her crotch), Weird SexCV Cunt VernacularIs Anal Sex LegalMasturbatingGet Ready For the Fuck Of Your Life. [8]
With titles like these, Tracey Emin could hardly fail. Her rich Jewish patron, advertising mogul Charles Saatchi, knew he was on to a good thing when he decided to promote the career of this pretentious confidence trickster masquerading as an artist. [9]
As the Gadarene swine hurtle over the cliff top, Tracey Emin and her kind lead the pack on their way down into the bottomless abyss. These are the dupes of organized Jewry. By doing exactly what appeals to art patrons (almost all Jewish; see below), these infinitely corrupt and untalented opportunists know they will become rich and famous.
The sad truth is that so many female “artists” — almost all of them rabid feminists and sexual exhibitionists — have nothing to sell but vaginas. [10]
Here are ten other vagina-obsessed females, apart from Tracey Emin and the notorious Annie Sprinkle, who use sex — especially a focus on their own vaginas — to sell their “art”:  Karen Finley, Hannah Wilke, Carolee Schneeman, Andrea Fraser, Sarah Lucas, Marlene McCarty, Vanessa Beecroft,  Malerie Marder, Katy Grannan, and Kembra Pfahler. [11]

Jewish artist Carolee Schneemann, drawing a paper snake from her vagina and calling it “art”

Being unable to paint properly or produce objects of lasting value, these exhibitionists like to display their vaginas to the world and call it “art”. Here is one such exhibitionist, Jewish performance artist Carolee Schneeman [12], pulling a paper snake out of her vagina:
I saw the vagina as a translucent chamber,” she says, “of which the serpent was an outward model: enlivened by it’s (sic) passage from the visible to the invisible, a spiralled coil ringed with the shape of desire and generative mysteries.” [13]
Someone who had no idea what a vagina looked like would have a pretty tough time trying to figure out its appearance from Ms Schneemann’s deathless prose.
Who helps to promote this kind of pretentious claptrap? You don’t need three guesses to answer that question.
In 2001, ARTnews listed the world’s Top Ten Art Collectors. Eight of them were Jews. Ponder these staggering statistics: A people who constitute 0.2% of the world’s population make up 80% of the world’s richest art collectors.
Out of every thousand people in the world, roughly two are Jews. To be precise, one in every 457 people are Jews. [14] Yet go to a conference at which 1000 of the world’s wealthiest art collectors have gathered and you will find, to your amazement, that 800 of them are Jewish.
Phenomenal, isn’t it? [15]
Some of the vaginocentric exhibitionists mentioned above, like lesbian “performance artist” Annie Sprinkle, maintain websites blocked by porn filters. The aptly named Sprinkle—a nom de porn in honor of urolagnia [16] —  is the lady who douched her vagina onstage in 1991, before lying down and opening her legs so that members of the audience, mostly male, could inspect her cervix with the help of a flashlight and speculum.

Annie Sprinkle, Jewish feminist and pornographer, practicing indecent exposure in a public venue and pretending it’s an “art form”. Click to enlarge

Performance artist, prostitute, porn actress, feminist icon, and lesbian diva of depravity, Ms Sprinkle would like us to believe that it is a form of  “art” to masturbate onstage with sex toys, her legs wide open, and invite members of a predominantly male audience to peer up her vagina with torchlight and speculum. (See picture)
She was recently invited by academic officials to show her vagina off at the University of Illinois, a hotbed of Zionist propaganda and power; here she was encouraged to give students an “orgasm workshop” — all this ostensibly in pursuit of “higher education”.  [17]

To make matters worse, Sprinkle’s pathetic “look-at-my-pussy” acts were funded by the National Endowment for the Arts, a mini-empire controlled by the hidden hand of organized Jewry. [18]

If Annie Sprinkle was to acquire fame and fortune by letting dirty old men take a peep between her legs, Hannah Wilke and Karen Finley sought variations in which the vulva was again put to good use.
The Jewish Wilke, being sadly deficient in originality, molded bits of chewing gum into vulvas and stuck them all over her body, calling it “art”.  [19]
Not to be outdone, Karen Finley decided to smear her naked torso with chocolate syrup [20] and performed public acts — using a yam — which I won’t describe in detail in case nuns are reading this article. Rape, flatulence and menstruation formed the least offensive items in Finley’s repertoire. [21]
Like Sprinkle, Wilke and Schneemann, Finley is also Jewish, given that her mother is of Jewish ancestry. [22].
So that’s four Jewish “artists”, all playing with their pussies in front of the world and being paid to do it by a Jewish-controlled government organization called the National Endowment for the Arts.
One begins to discern a subtle pattern here; or maybe it isn’t so subtle.
Performance artist Andrea Fraser [23] — amazingly, she isn’t Jewish! — deserves first prize for sheer chutzpah. She is perhaps an illustration of the truth that however low a slutty Jewess  can sink, a slutty shiksa can sink a bit lower.
This raunchy non-Jewish performance artist, who nevertheless finds it necessary to move in Jewish circles like Madonna and so many other gentile sycophants,  arranged to meet a man at the Royalton Hotel in Manhattan, owned by Jewish hotelier Ian Shrager.
Above the bed, an overhead camera played Peeping Tom. The man was persuaded to part with $20,000 in cash for the privilege of helping to create a “work of art” with the frisky Fraser, the said work of art being a pornographic video filming the two participants copulating on a Queen-size bed. This sex video, now available for posterity, is pretentiously called “Untitled”.  [24]
It’s not “art” we’re dealing with here, of course; it’s pornography pure and simple.

The Jewish Affinity for Porn

Jews are famously known to dominate [25] the world’s $100 billion a year porn industry, roughly 90 percent of which is generated within the United States. As many as 260 new porn sites go online daily, more than 10 sites an hour. [26]
Since Jews are known to dominate the porn industry and comprise only 2% of America’s population, it is reasonable to suppose that most of the new sites being started up every hour are being started up by Jews.

“CHRIST SUCKS!” — Jewish pornographer Al Goldstein

It is even more alarming to note how sex is now deployed by many American Jews as a weapon against Christianity with its socially cohesive and family-friendly values.
Jewish pornographer Al Goldstein’s infamous words — “The only reason that Jews are in pornography is that we think that Christ sucks” — surely tell us all we need to know about the bitter hatred felt by so many Jews for the Western countries that have harbored them and given them hospitality for so long. [27]
Jewish hatred for Christianity is legendary, spanning the Jewish political spectrum, from the far left [28] to the neoconservative right [29].
It can hardly be doubted, as the ugly picture of the Jewish pornographer (left)makes only too clear.
The arrogance and sense of entitlement of so many Jews, whose values Al Goldstein seems to have imbibed with his mother’s milk, never cease to astonish me.
“The difference between a Jewish soul and the soul of non-Jews,” Rabbi Kook assures us, “is greater and deeper than the difference between a human soul and the soul of cattle.” [30]
Given that Rabbi Kook would be the first to agree that rabbis form the intellectual and spiritual backbone of Jewry, one is tempted to ask what makes a man become a rabbi in the first place. Is it the thirst for God? Is it the wish to save one’s soul and help others along the path to salvation?
Here is Jewish actor Richard Pacheco who couldn’t quite make up his mind whether to become a rabbi or a porn star:
Five years before I got my first part in an adult film … I went to an audition for an X-rated film with my hair down to my ass, a copy of Wilhelm Reich’s Sexual Revolution under my arm and yelling about work, love and sex, which were Reich’s three principles. These things have got to be in balance or your life is going to be fucked. [31]
Note that Pacheco had signed on to the radical left-Freudian views of Wilhelm Reich — the wackiest and most extreme of the subversive sexual ideologies that emerged from psychoanalysis.
Jewish devotees of psychoanalysis typically saw it, first and foremost, as a blow against Christian sexual mores; hence, as a sneak attack on Christianity itself.
For Jews, psychoanalysis  placed Western culture on the couch. It was an assertion of Jewish  contempt for Christian culture: the culture of the outgroup now destined for the dustbin of history. [32]
Pacheco didn’t get the job, but he kept on auditioning, since all he really wanted was to screw gorgeous blonde shiksas — doubtless an atavistic expression of Jewish hatred for the goyim, every act of sex being an act of revenge.
Five years later I auditioned for another X-rated film. That very day, I also interviewed at Hebrew Union Seminary to do rabbinical study. I made the choice that the kind of rabbi I would be, if I became one, was one that could have been performing in sex films as part of his experience. [33]
Mindboggling, isn’t it?
This dupe of the sexual revolution couldn’t make up his mind whether to sing hymns to God or kiss the devil’s ass!
In the end, it’s the devil who won out.
Pacheco decided to build a career in pornography — with the full blessings, incidentally, of ADL chairman Abe Foxman who said that porn offered American Jews a valid and worthy way “to pursue the American dream.” [34]

Porn star Richard Pacheco: he also wanted to be a rabbi.

Richard Pacheco (born 1948) was the scion of an orthodox Jewish family from Pittsburg [35] From an early age, bizarrely, he was attracted to the rabbinate and to pornography in equal proportions.
He had wrestled for years with the decision whether to become a rabbi or a porn actor, praying in the morning for guidance and masturbating in the evening for fun, when it occurred to him one day that he could up his number of orgasms per day if he chucked all the spiritual stuff and concentrated on raw sex.
So he did. And a  porn star was born.
Featuring in over 100  X-rated films and winner of countless awards for his sexual prowess in front of the cameras, Pacheco was lucky to receive the loyal support of his wife Ashley.
Managing somehow to juggle  a career in porn with a commitment to family life, Pacheco later had sex with with his wife — so we are told in Wikipedia — “considerably less often after they had children and AIDS became a threat, but he credits his pornography career for giving him the opportunity to continue sexual encounters for a time without endangering his home life.” [36]
Here is Pacheco being interviewed after his retirement from porn. If you are a nun or under eighteen, I would advise you to skip the next bit:
As a young husband, I had no idea how to ask my beloved wife to be my “fuck-your-ass whore”.
Yeah, I wanted some of that kind of sex, some very, very selfish lust with a sex kitten. A “fuck-me-fuck-me” woman. There’d be corsets and leathers, high-heeled boots laced up to crotchless panties, breasts spilling out of nippleless bras in lush bordello bedrooms filled up with sex toys. Like blindfolds and vibrators, handcuffs and paddles.
Yeah, and there’d be me with a genuine tarted up won’t-say-no-woman. All the best drugs and oils in the world and plenty of time. And there’d be no “I love you” in any of it!
I would meet this X-rated woman at the hotel where they were holding the auditions…and I would have sex with her right there in the hotel elevator! And then I would go home to my wife.” [37]

Richard Pacheco, a recent photo. (Ain’t he cute?)

Asked if he still watched adult movies now that he was a Senior Citizen, the former rabbinical student replied: “Not much. Occasionally I’ll toss one on for masturbation if my wife ain’t around.” [38]
One has to hand it to Pacheco. His neo-Marxist mentor, Wilhelm Reich, would have been proud of him. Because he managed to turn shamelessness into a virtue. Still, it couldn’t have been much fun for his poor wife having a guy like this prowling round the house.
In 1984, Pacheco won the Best Couples Sex Scene (video) with porn star Nina Hartley. [39] In 1999, he was inducted into the AVN Hall of Fame   with feminist porn diva Annie Sprinkle. [40] In 2000, along with Sprinkle, he was given a Lifetime Achievement Award by the Free Speech Coalition [41], an organization that had given Nina Hartley an award only a few months earlier. [42]
Note that these three luminaries of lust — Pacheco, Sprinkle and Hartley — are all Jewish pornographers and that the impressively named “Free Speech Coalition” is in fact a trade association set up in 1991 to safeguard the interests of “adult entertainers” — pornographers who for the most part are Jewish and are based largely in the Jewish enclaves around Hollywood.
So make no mistake: this sleazy industry, built on a foundation of onanistic lust and sexual libertinism, is Jewish through and through.
The “Free Speech Coalition” naturally rejects all claims that pornography is addictive, given that they themselves are directly responsible for nurturing that addiction and making money out of it. It also refuses to consider the possibility that serial killers and rapists could in any way be influenced by inflammatory erotica, though the evidence for this is enough to convince anyone except those engaged in the peddling of the same poisons.
For compelling evidence that  pornography plays a significant role in the crimes of serial killers, see my earlier essay on this subject, “Masters of Porn: The Systematic Promotion of Sexual Deviance”. [43]

America 2050. Click to enlarge

In an important court case in 2002, Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition, the US Supreme Court decided in the Coalition’s favor, thereby making it easier for pornographers to demoralize Americans, corrupt their children, and promote a general debasement of values — all this in accordance, incidentally, with the Frankfurt School agenda [44] of producing a “culture of pessimism” designed to foster anarchy and promote impotent anger and despair.  [45]
Our new elite is clearly engaged in the business of mind manipulation and mass demoralization, nor will it rest until it has rebuilt the world in the image of a new Sodom and Gomorrah — a dystopic nightmare.


I have said before in an earlier article, and I will say it again:
A great storm is brewing and only a military coup or revolution can now save America. Save it from what?  From the spiritual cancer that is consuming it from within, and from the foreign wars into which it is being lured — Afghanistan, Iraq, and soon perhaps Iran — on behalf of another nation and its indefatigable agents in America.
Unless a miracle soon occurs and some charismatic leader comes to our rescue, an unimaginably bleak future surely awaits us: a future in which the only consolations left to us will be mindless entertainment, drugs, alcohol, sexual intoxication — and suicide. [46]
Depravity appears to have no limits, as those who have surfed the internet have often discovered to their cost. The most appalling sexual addictions now render even children helpless. Many a marriage is blighted and ends in ruins amid these terrifying toxins.
And yet we are only at the beginning. We have many a slime-green step to go before we reach rock bottom. Abyss yawns below bottomless abyss and even to peer into these black moral chasms is to make us giddy with vertigo.
There is indeed no end to man’s depravity or the deadly machinations of the Architects of Evil.
“If a Jew is tempted to do evil,
he should go to a city where he is not known and do the evil there.”

— The Talmud, Moed Kattan, 171  [47]

A completely revised and updated version of an article originally published here
Published first on Veterans Today



1.  For an answer to these questions, see also: (1) The Frankfurt School: Conspiracy to Corrupt, by Timothy Matthews. [2] Masters of Porn: The Systematic Promotion of Sexual Deviance, by Lasha Darkmoon. [3] Child Pornography in the Classroom(presented by Noor al Haqiqa, Snippits and Snappits).

An academic corespondent writes: “Though one ethnic group, the Jews, is demonstrably to blame more than any other for the sexual demoralization of the masses in Western countries, it would be disingenuous to pretend that they are solely responsible. The primary corruptors could never have succeeded so spectacularly but for the enthusiastic collaboration of degenerates within the corrupted societies.”

2.  John-Henry Westen, German Government Publication Promotes Incestuous Pedophilia as Healthy Sex Ed.

3.  Ibid.

4.  See Lasha Darkmoon, [1] The Plot Against Art (Parts 1 and 2)  and Spitting Mad Jews and Angry Artists (Parts 1 and 2).

5.  I have tackled the subject of mass demoralization through pornography — a planned psyop of the New World Order —  in greater detail elsewhere, particularly in Masters of Porn: The Systematic Promotion of Sexual Deviance.

6.  See Tracey Emin: Self-portraits. Don’t worry, you are unlikely to be shocked by these crude, cave-wall sketches of Ms Emin’s nether regions!

7.  Lasha Darkmoon, The Plot Against Art.

8.  Tracey Emin, typical titles.

9.  The Talmudic Blog: CHARLES SAATCHI, the bad taste art collector and Jew, plans to display painting of the Nazi Himmler.

10.  Jerry Salz, Pudenda Agenda, The Shaved Vagina Monologues.

11.  Ibid.

12.  Carolee Schneemann.

13.  The full Schneemann quote describing the vagina may be read here.

14.  World Jewish population figures.

15.  Lasha Darkmoon, The Plot Against Art, Part 2.

16.  Urolagnia: a sexual perversion  in which sexual excitement is associated with urine. Its basis lies in sadomasochism and usually involves a woman urinating on a man, his pleasure consisting in the humiliation of being “pissed on” by a domineering woman — as in this 19th century illustration of a woman urinating into a man’s mouth.

17.  See University of Illinois invites porn star to teach orgasm.

18.  Jeff Jacoby,  How the NEA pollutes American culture (The Boston Globe, January 24, 1995).

19.  Hanna Wilke, Wikipedia. Here you can see a picture of the bare-breasted Jewess  covered with blobs of vulva-shaped chewing gum.

20.  Karen Finley, Wikipedia.

21.  Echoes and Reverberations: Karen Finley and the Delicate Art of Disgust

22.  Karen Finley … “her mother of Jewish ancestry.”

23.  Andrea Fraser, Wikipedia.

24.  Jerry Saltz, Critiqueus Interruptus. (Broken Angel Artnet Magazine).

25.  The locus classicus for the “canard” — no longer a canard today — that Jews control the porn industry is this jaw-breakingly entitled article, “Triple-exthnics“, by Jewish academic Dr Nathan Abrams. This was published in the winter 2004 edition of the prestigious Jewish Quarterly. What the title means is anyone’s guess. Suffice to say that Dr Abrams tactlessly let the cat out of the bag in this article, much to the embarrassment of organized Jewry. As a result, no one can be in doubt any longer as to who controls the world’s porn industry. We now know it is the usual suspects: the Jews.

See also Jewish Dominance in the Porn Industry.

26.  For the figure $100 billion as being the total revenues per annum from world porn,  see Family Safe Media’s “Pornography Statistics.” (The figure mentioned here is $97 billion, but that is a 2006 figure. Since then, the figure has topped the $100 billion mark.) For the other figures cited in the paragraph, see Michael Arrington’s Internet Pornography Stats.

27. Dr E. Michael Jones, Rabbi Dresner’s Dilemma: Torah v. Ethnos

28.  Kevin MacDonald, Memories Of Madison—My Life In The New Left.

29.  Link lost.

30.  Israel Shahak on Jewish Fundamentalism and Militarism

31.  Quoted in Dr E. Michael Jones, Rabbi Dresner’s Dilemma: Torah v. Ethnos

32.   See Kevin MacDonald, The Culture of Critique, Chapter 4, Jewish Involvement in the Psychoanalytic Movement.

33.  Quoted in Dr E. Michael Jones, Rabbi Dresner’s Dilemma: Torah v. Ethnos

34.  Jewish Dominance in the Porn Industry.

35.  Richard Pacheco, Wikipedia

36.  Richard Pacheco . . . “the opportunity to continue sexual encounters for a time without endangering his home life.”

37.  Richard Pacheco . . . “and then I would go home to my wife.”

38.   Rishard Pacheco . . . “Occasionally I’ll toss one on for masturbation if my wife ain’t around.” (See here)

39.  Nina Hartley, Wikipedia

40.   Richard Pacheco, Pornography Career (Wiki)

41.  Free Speech Coalition (Wiki)

42.  Richard Pacheco, Wikipedia

43.  Lasha Darkmoon, Masters of Porn: The Systematic Promotion of Sexual Deviance. Scroll down to the section entitled “The link between pornography and sex crime”; for further confirmation, scroll down to the section entitled “The Cases of Ted Bundy and Gary Bishop, Serial Killers” in Dr Victor Kline’s classic academic paper “Pornography’s Effects on Adults and Children. See also Pornography and Sexual Crime andPornography and sex: Ted Bundy’s fatal addiction.

44.  Frankfurt School agenda. This is hugely important subject and there is a vast amount of material available to the internet reader. Those who wish to know more about the philosophical milieu of modernity — i.e., the cultural swamp of sexual bolshevism in which the benighted masses are forced to flounder today — are advised to make a careful study of the following eight core articles:

(1)   Arnaud de Lassus’s The Frankfurt School: Cultural Revolution
(2)  Kevin MacDonald, The Culture of Critique, Chapter 5
(3)  William S. Lind, What is Cultural Marxism?
(4)  William S. Lind, Who Stole our Culture?
(5) Timothy Matthews, The Frankfurt School: Conspiracy to Corrupt. 
(Or my own shorter adaption of this with extended commentary, Satan’s Secret Agents: The Frankfurt School and its Evil Agenda.)
(6)  Michael Minnicino, The Frankfurt School and ‘Political Correctness’
(7) Cultural Marxism: (Metapedia).
(8) Sexual Bolshevism: (Metapedia).

45.  See Lasha Darkmoon’s The Plot Against Art (Part 1) and Goodbye America (Part 2).

46.  Lasha Darkmoon, Secret Sex Life of the Jews.

47.  Quoted in Michael A. Hoffman, The Truth about the Talmud

Put your money where your mouth is…

This is from this week’s Jewish Chronicle.It’s about how Simon Cowell has given a huge donation to the IDF. Now, I’m sorry if I’ve spoiled the story for you – actually, who cares, it really isn’t much of a story – but the point is that Cowell says that his dad was Jewish and that giving to Jewish causes is ‘in his blood’.

As I said, who cares, except it puts me in mind of two scenes from my past:
The first is around June 4th 1967. I, and my best friend Danny (both aged seventeen)  are at the Albert Hall in London. It’s just hours before the outbreak of the Six-Day War and we ordinary Jews have been well whipped up to believe we’re facing a second Holocaust. (BTW, I can’t entirely rule out the possibility of a bloodbath if Israel’s victims did get the upper hand. Well, what would you do if you’d been treated like that?)
Anyway, there we were in the Albert Hall and we’ve had the speeches and now black plastic bags are being passed round the packed hall and, I tell you, men were stuffing in wads of banknotes and women were tearing the rings off their fingers.
Now fast forward thirty years to September 1998 to the boardroom of the Council for the Advancement of Arab-British Understanding (CAABU) in London’s fashionable Knightsbridge area, I’m there with Dan McGowan, founder of Deir Yassin Remembered. I’d met Dan for the first time a couple of hours ago and had asked him for an interview. Now, it’s about nine in the evening and we’ve come to the end of the interview during which Dan has spoken eloquently for an hour into my microphone. He’s spoken about Deir Yassin, about its history and meaning and about the organisation he’s founded. Now, I’m no joiner but there’s something about this that makes me want in so…..
…..but hey, I don’t need to reminisce, here’s the transcript from the tape I made that night.

“OK Dan, now, tell me what can I do? How can I help?”

 “Well, you can support us in a couple of ways the most important is to join us….
“Well, I’ll certainly do that and I’d like to make a contribution. I notice on your leaflet that there are various grades of support: Supporter; Contributor; Patron; Friend…Well if I give you this, I know it’s not quite enough but can I be a Friend”?
“You certainly can…”
“And can I give it to you in cash?”

“That would be great…I would appreciate that…”
“There you go…… (AND HERE I PEEL OFF TWO BEAUTIFUL PINK FIFTY POUND NOTES) Aren’t they great? I bet you haven’t got anything like that in the states.”
“We most certainly don’t. Do they have the silver strip in them?”“Well they should do. I made them myself this morning.” (N.B:THAT WAS A JOKE)

“You know you told me already that you were Jewish and your attitude is somewhat indicative of your being Jewish…and I mean that in a very flattering sense, in that you put your money where your mouth is. This, I’ve noticed, is a very Jewish thing and that’s a lesson that I am in the process of trying to teach Palestinians.

Now, I probably shouldn’t say this, but I’m going to anyway: Palestinians and their supporters would do well to take heed of this.

Now, over to the horrible JC and even more horrible Simon Cowell.

IDF has the X Factor for Simon Cowell

By Marcus Dysch, October 24, 2013
X Factor’s Simon Cowell

Music mogul Simon Cowell has boosted the Israeli Army with a sizeable donation at a gala dinner in Los Angeles.

The X Factor chief gave a sum thought to be in the region of £150,000 at the annual fundraising event hosted by the American Friends of the IDF.

The event was hosted by Power Rangers creator Haim Saban, who pledged to donate $1 million if Mr Cowell joined him to sing the show’s theme song, “Go, Go Power Rangers”.

Mr Cowell did break into song, but quickly said he would make a donation himself if Mr Saban allowed him to stop.

The event is understood to have raised around $20m in total for the IDF.

Lionel Richie also performed for the 1,200 guests. The audience included serving Israeli soldiers.

Mr Saban said Los Angeles’ Jewish and Israeli communities “appreciate and embrace the soldiers of the IDF, and will continue to do everything in order to give thanks to them and strengthen them in whatever is needed”.

Mr Cowell has previously spoken of his Jewish roots and work with communal charities in Britain. Last year he told a Norwood dinner: “My dad is Jewish. He never told me or my brother or his wife. It’s in my blood and drew me to the charity.”

Former Pink Floyd frontman sparks fury by comparing Israelis to Nazis

Religious leaders react angrily to Roger Waters’ latest outspoken attack on treatment of Palestinians
Roger Waters at the Eastside Gallery in Berlin, Germany - 04 Sep 2013

Roger Waters said the parallels between Israel and Germany in the 1930s were ‘crushingly obvious’. Photograph: Rex

Inflammatory remarks by the musician Roger Waters, formerly of Pink Floyd, comparing the modern Israeli state to Nazi Germany have put him at the centre of a furious dispute.

Performers and religious figures reacted angrily to the veteran rock star’s argument that Israeli treatment of the Palestinians can be compared to the atrocities of Nazi Germany. “The parallels with what went on in the 1930s in Germany are so crushingly obvious,” he said in an American online interview last week.

Waters, 70, a well-known supporter of the Palestinian cause, has frequently defended himself against accusations that he is antisemitic, claiming he has a right to urge fellow artists to boycott Israel.

This summer he was criticised for using a pig-shaped balloon adorned with Jewish symbols, including a Star of David, as one part of the stage effects at his concerts. Waters countered that it was just one of several religious and political symbols in the show and not an attempt to single out Judaism as an evil force.

Now leading American thinker Rabbi Shmuley Boteach has raised the stakes by describing Waters’ views as audacious and clearly antisemitic.

Writing in the New York Observer, the rabbi said: “Mr Waters, the Nazis were a genocidal regime that murdered six million Jews. That you would have the audacity to compare Jews to monsters who murdered them shows you have no decency, you have no heart, you have no soul.” The rabbi was responding to Waters’s latest comments on the Middle East.Speaking to the leftwing CounterPunch magazine, the musician criticised the US government for being unduly influenced by the Israeli “propaganda machine”.

The former Pink Floyd frontman, who has recently toured the world with a show based on the influential 1979 album The Wall, went on to describe the Israeli rabbinate as “bizarre” and accused them of believing that Palestinians and other Arabs in the Middle East were “sub-human”. Waters suggested the “Jewish lobby” was “extraordinarily powerful”. On the subject of the Holocaust, he said: “There were many people that pretended that the oppression of the Jews was not going on. From 1933 until 1946. So this is not a new scenario. Except that this time it’s the Palestinian people being murdered.”

Speaking from New York on Saturday night, Waters strongly rejected Rabbi Boteach’s characterisation of his views. He said: “I do not know Rabbi Boteach, and am not prepared to get into a slanging match with him. I will say this: I have nothing against Jews or Israelis, and I am not antisemitic. I deplore the policies of the Israeli government in the occupied territories and Gaza. They are immoral, inhuman and illegal. I will continue my non-violent protests as long as the government of Israel continues with these policies.

“If Rabbi Boteach can make a case for the Israel government’s policies, I look forward to hearing it. It is difficult to make arguments to defend the Israeli government’s policies, so would-be defenders often use a diversionary tactic, they routinely drag the critic into a public arena and accuse them of being an antisemite.”

Waters continued: “The Holocaust was brutal and disgusting beyond our imagination. We must never forget it. We must always remain vigilant. We must never stand by silent and indifferent to the sufferings of others, whatever their race, colour, ethnic background or religion. All human beings deserve the right to live equally under the law.”

Karen Pollock, chief executive of the Holocaust Educational Trust, said: “Everyone is entitled to an opinion and to advocate passionately for a cause, but drawing inappropriate parallels with the Holocaust insults the memory of the six million Jews – men, women and children – murdered by the Nazis. These kinds of attacks are commonly used as veiled antisemitism and should be exposed as such.”

Jo-Ann Mort, vice-chair of US Jewish group Americans for Peace Now, is calling for musicians and other entertainers to go to Israel to understand that there is also Israeli opposition to discrimination against Arabs. Speaking to the Observer from California, she said it was important for international performers to “speak their mind to audiences about the nation’s successes and failures. Just as Israeli musicians – Jewish, Muslim and Christian – do.”

“The media in Israel flock to foreign entertainers. Performers would have the opportunity to make their viewpoints known – and it will also help to break the logjam that fundamentalists have had on both sides,” she argued.

Mort supports the anti-boycott approach of Israeli singer and activist David Broza, whose forthcoming album East Jerusalem/West Jerusalemfeatures covers of songs that urge understanding, including Waters’s own song Mother, from the album The Wall.

“Music captivates your head and your mind,” Broza recently argued. “If it comes with good vibes, then everyone wants to be part of it. The hard work comes from having a belief in what you are doing and in not stopping at the barricades that are posted at every corner.”

Last week Waters’s words drew a strong response from the Community Security Trust, the body that monitors anti-Jewish activity in Britain. A spokesman told the Jewish Chronicle that Waters’s comments “echo the language of antisemitism” and added that the musician was “living proof of how easily people who pursue extreme anti-Israel politics can drift into antisemitic statements and ideas”.

Bicom, the UK-based Israel advocacy organisation, also condemned Waters’s views. Chief executive Dermot Kehoe said: “The statements by Roger Waters calling for a cultural boycott of Israel and comparing the country to Nazi Germany are repugnant and fly in the face of both the reality in Israel today and the ongoing peace talks between Israel and the Palestinians.”

In August Waters used his Facebook page to respond to allegations that he was an “open hater of Jews”, made by Rabbi Abraham Cooper of the Simon Wiesenthal Centre in an interview with an American weekly Jewish newspaper, the Algemeiner.

“Often I can ignore these attacks, but Rabbi Cooper’s accusations are so wild and bigoted they demand a response,” Waters wrote, adding that he had “many very close Jewish friends”.

The Sexual Decadence of Weimar Germany, by Lasha Darkmoon

“The decay of moral values in all areas of life—the period of deepest German degradation—coincided exactly with the height of Jewish power in Germany.”  — Dr Friederich Karl Wiehe, Germany and the Jewish Question. [1]

Otto Dix, Metropolis (1928). Berlin in the heyday of the Weimar Republic: a hedonistic hellpit of sexual depravity.

No account of the Jewish Question in Germany can be complete without some mention of the tidal wave of sexual immorality that was to engulf the country during the period of the Weimar Republic (1919-1933) following World War One. This also happened to be the apogee of Jewish power in Germany. Every single sphere of major influence had now fallen under Jewish control.


Dr Karl Wiehe, in his Germany and the Jewish Question, is painstaking in the details he provides:
Well before 1933 the Jews had taken possession of the film industry even more thoroughly than of the theater. That was understandable, because the earnings in the film industry overshadow the earnings of any other artistic activity….
The biggest step in the direction of the decline of the German cultural life [however] was taken in the field of the light entertainment genre. Here—in the genre of musical comedy and above all in revue and burlesque—frivolity and lasciviousness were to rear their ugly heads. So much so that during these years Berlin was quite correctly considered the most immoral city in the world.
It was Jews who introduced this pornographic “art form” to Germany, a debased genre completely unknown before the Great War, and so it is the Jews who can be held responsible for the general decline in morals.
The Jewish sexologists Ivan Bloch and Magnus Hirschfeld became the representatives of “sex research” camouflaged as science—a bogus science that was merely an excuse for pornography and propaganda designed to destroy the institute of marriage and the sanctity of the family.  [2]
Wiehe provides the following useful facts and statistics:
In 1931, over 60 percent of German films were produced by Jews and 82 percent of the film scripts were written by Jewish writers, though Jews made up less than 1 percent of the German population (0.9o%). A quick look at the names of directors, producers, stage managers, actors, script writers and critics, “revealed everywhere an overwhelming preponderance of Jews.”

Alexander Szekely, German brothel in Ghent. Click to enlarge

A cursory survey of the film titles, Wiehe tells us, shows us that the Jews had only one thing on the brain: sex. Here are some typical titles: “Moral und Sinnlichkeit” (Morals and Sensuality); “Was kostet Liebe?” (What is the Price of Love); “Wenn ein Weib den Weg verliert” (When a Woman loses her Way); “Prostitution” (Prostitution); “Sündige Mutter” (Sinful Mama);“Das Buch des Lasters” (The Book of Vices).
“The sensational titles correspond to the sleazy contents,” Wiehe complains. “All wallow in filth and display with cynical frankness the vilest scenes of sexual perversion.” [3]
Light entertainment (revue/burlesque) was a Jewish innovation. The revue theaters, all concentrated within great cities such as Berlin, were owned and run almost exclusively by Jews. Shows consisted of little more than excuses for sexual titillation involving the display of the female form in lascivious dances that were to degenerate later into striptease and scenes of public masturbation. “In these revues,” Wiehe notes indignantly, “the uninhibited sex drive surrendered itself to disgusting orgies. All life was reduced to a common denominator of lust and its satisfaction. Chastity and self-discipline were mocked as old-fashioned prejudices.”
The Jews had managed, in the space of a mere fourteen years, to bring about a major “transvaluation of values” [4] in Weimar Germany. The vices of the past were now its virtues. The only vice that remained was chastity.
A glance at the revue titles is again sufficient:  “Zieh dich aus” (Get Undressed); “Tausend nackte Frauen” (One Thousand Naked Women); “Die Sünden der Welt” (The Sins of the World); “Häuser der Liebe” (The Houses of Love); “Streng Verboten!” (Strictly Forbidden!);  “Sündig und Süss” (Sweet and Sinful). [5]
Finally, there was the rich field of sexology: a new science consisting largely of dubious “case histories” purporting to reveal the depraved sexual habits of various anonymous patients. In order to give an air of academic respectability and erudition to these masturbatory fantasies—thrilling adventure stories involving necrophilia, bestiality and handkerchief fetishism—the more exciting details were often given in vulgar Latin “in order to exclude the lay reader.” [6] However, it was not long before the Latin was diligently translated into the vernacular for the benefit of the unlatined lay reader, thus defeating the purpose of the prim “schoolmaster’s Latin”.
Wiehe reels off a long list of Jewish sexologists who he claims were in the forefront of writing such salacious treatises that were no more than pornography masquerading as science. Drs Magnus Hirschfeld [7] and Ivan Bloch [8] were the star writers in this field, their books still read avidly today by a gullible public hungry for details of the bizarre, the kinky and the perverse. Drs Ludwig Lewy-Lenz, Leo Schidrowitz, Franz Rabinowitsch, Georg Cohen, and Albert Eulenburg are some of the names Wiehe mentions.

Otto Dix, The Salon, 1921 Berlin prostitutes awaiting the pleasures of the evening. Click to enlarge

Here are some of their depressing titles: “Sittengeschichte des Lasters” (The History of Perversions); “Sittengeschichte des Schamlosigkeit” (The History of Shamelessness); “Bilderlexikon der Erotic” (Picture Lexicon of Eroticism); “Sittengischichte des Geheime und Verbotene” (The History of the Secret and the Forbidden). And here are some of the titles published by Dr Magnus Hirschfeld’s Institute of Sexual Science in Berlin [9]: Aphrodisiacs, Prostitution, Sexual Catastrophes, Sexual Pathology, The Perverted. Wiehe describes all these books as “the filthy publications of these pseudo-scientists”, all of them written by Jewish authors and published by Jewish publishers. He continues in the same acerbic vein:
These books were allegedly supposed to be scientific treatises, their ostensible purpose being to “educate” the broad masses about the dangers of sexual excesses. Under the guise of science, however, they speculated in the lust and lower instincts of their audience. Criminals, prostitutes and homosexuals took center stage in their repertoire. One looks in vain for any known non-Jewish “sexual scientist”! [10]
Wiehe points out that masturbation, hitherto a hole-in-corner vice, began to be shamelessly promoted for the first time in Weimar Germany by Jewish-run organizations. He mentions Dr Max Hodan, Jewish medical officer for Berlin, and ticks him off for circulating a booklet recommending regular masturbation for the working classes.
It is worth noting that one of the world’s worst serial killers, Peter Kürten, committed all his crimes in Germany during the 1925-1930 period.
This was of course the  heyday of the Weimar Republic when the German people lay completely under Jewish domination and when the first dress rehearsal for the later Sexual Revolution of the 1960s was arguably being run.
Significantly, when asked what his primary motive for murder was, Kürten replied: “to strike back at an oppressive society.” [11]
This was a society in which the serial killer was to become a popular icon, enough to create a whole genre of sensational sex crime literature. (See book title on left).  [12]


British historian Sir Arthur Bryant describes throngs of child prostitutes outside the doors of the great Berlin hotels and restaurants. He adds: “Most of them—the night clubs and vice resorts—were owned and managed by Jews. And it was the Jews among the promoters of this trade who were remembered in after years.” [13]
Arriving in Berlin during the hyperinflation crisis (1923), Klaus Mann—son the great German novelist Thomas Mann—remembered walking past a group of dominatrices:
Some of them looked like fierce Amazons, strutting in high boots made of green, glossy leather. One of them brandished a supple cane and leered at me as I passed by. ‘Good evening, madam,’ I said. She whispered in my ear, ‘Want to be my slave? Costs only six billions and a cigarette.’ [14]

Georg Grosz, Before Sunrise. Prostitutes and their clients in the red-light district… this is how they actually dressed and paraded themselves in the garish, lamp-lit streets.

10-year-old children turned tricks in the railway stations. A group of 14-year-old Russian girls, refugees from the Red Terror in Stalin’s Communist slaughter house, managed to make a lucrative living in Berlin as dominatrices. Little girls were freely available for sex not only in child brothels and pharmacies but could be ordered by telephone and delivered to clients by taxi, like takeaway meals. Particularly bizarre were mother-and-daughter teams offering their services to the same client simultaneously. Mel Gordon writes: “One French journalist, Jean Galtier-Boissière, described, in sickly pornographic detail, the creeping horror of feeling a nine-year-old girl’s tiny, but proficient, fingers stroking his upper thigh while the broken-toothed mother covered his face with hot sucking kisses.” [15]
In Mel Gordon’s Voluptuous Panic: The Erotic World of Weimar Berlin, we enter a depressingly sordid milieu akin to the subterranean world of the sewer rat: a world which owed its existence in large part to German Jewry. Without Jewish money and influence, such a world would never have come into being. Nor was there anything the Germans could do to extricate themselves from this artificially created hothouse of erotomania and sexual deviance in which they now found themselves ensnared.
There were no fewer than 17 different prostitute types in this Jew-created brothel city: eight outdoor types and nine indoor ones, each with their specialities and slang terminology.
Outdoor prostitutes:  (1) Kontroll Girls: legal prostitutes checked for venereal disease.  (2) Half-Silks: part-time amateurs with day jobs as office workers, secretaries and shopgirls; evening and weekend workers.  (3) Grasshoppers: lowly streetwalkers who gave handjobs and standup sex in dark alleys.  (4) Nuttes: Boyish teenage girls who worked for “pocket money” after school without their parents’ knowledge.  (5) Boot-girls: dominas (or dominatrices) in shiny patent leather boots who offered to stamp all over their clients.  (6) Tauentzien girls: Chic mother-and-daughter teams, fashionably dressed, who offered their services to men who wanted threesomes.  (7) Münzis: Heavily pregnant women who waited under lampposts (very expensive, since they offered an erotic speciality). (8)  Gravelstones: hideous hags with missing limbs, hunchbacks, midgets, and women with various deformities. “The most common German word for them was Kies. In other accounts, they were referred to as Steinhuren.” [16] 
Otto Dix, Three Wenches. These prostitutes were willing to work individually or in a team. Click to enlarge
Indoor prostitutes: (1) Chontes: Low-grade Jewish prostitutes, mostly Polish, who picked up their clients in railway stations.  (2) Fohses (French argot for “vaginas”): Elegant females who discreetly advertised in magazines and newspapers as private masseuses and manicurists.  (3) Demi-castors (or “half-beavers”):Young women from good families who worked in high-class houses in the late afternoons and early evenings.  (4) Table-ladies: Ravishingly beautiful escorts of exotic appearance who came with the reserved table in an exclusive nightclub. Clients had to be fabulously rich in order to afford the cultured conversation of these high-class call girls who accompanied the caviar and champagne and who later unveiled their charms in a sumptuously furnished chamber of delights. (5)Dominas: Leather-clad women, athletic and Amazonian, who specialized in whipping and erotic humiliation. They were often found in lesbian nightclubs which also catered for kinky males.  (6)Minettes (French for “female cats”): Exclusive call girls who offered S&M fantasy scenes, foot worship, bondage, and enforced transvestism. They worked in top class hotels.  (7) Race-horses: Masochistic prostitutes who let themselves be whipped in “schoolrooms” or “dungeons” liberally supplied with instruments of torture. Clients were carefully screened to make sure they didn’t go too far.  (8) ‘Medicine’: Child prostitutes (age 12-16), so called because they were prescribed as “medicine” in pharmacies. All  the client needed to do was tell the pharmacist how many years he had suffered from his ailment (e.g., 12), without mentioning what ailment it was, and  request the color of the pill he preferred (e.g., red). He was then escorted to a cubicle where his “medicine” awaited him: a 12-year-old redhead. (9) Telephone-girls (often billed as “virgins”): expensive child prostitutes (ages 12-17) ordered by telephone like a takeaway meal; the nymphettes were delivered by limousine or taxi. [17]
Luigi Barzini, in his social memoir The Europeans, describes the saturnalian scene in the Tingel-Tangels or sleazy bordellos of sex-crazed Berlin in the 1920s, the Golden Age of the Jews:
I saw pimps offering anything to anybody: little boys, little girls, robust young men, libidinous women, animals. The story went the rounds that a male goose whose neck you cut at just the right ecstatic  moment would give you the most delicious frisson of all—as it allowed you to enjoy sodomy, bestiality, homosexuality, necrophilia and sadism at one stroke. Gastronomy too, as one could eat the goose afterwards.  [18]
In October 1923, when one US dollar could buy 4.2 billion marks and six wheelbarrows of banknotes could barely buy a loaf of bread, it was said that “the most exquisite blow job to be had in Berlin never cost an American tourist more than 30 cents.” [19]

WEIMAR BERLIN BROTHEL SCENE. Erich Schütz, Raiding the Nacktlokal, 1923

“Berlin nightlife, my word, the world hasn’t seen anything like it!” Klaus Mann, son of the great German author Thomas Mann, enthused sardonically. “We used to have a first-class army. Now we have first class perversions.” [20]
German author Erich Kästner, writing of Weimar Berlin, was to reflect on the topography of the soul sickness that had now taken possession of the once proud city: “In the east there is crime; in the center the con men hold sway; in the north resides misery, in the west lechery; and everywhere—the decline.” [21]
German Jewish author Stephan Zweig has much to say about homosexuality, pointing out that even in Ancient Rome—where fourteen of the first fifteen Roman emperors were homosexual—the degree of drunken depravity and public shamelessness was far less shocking than in Weimar Berlin:
Bars, amusement parks, honky-tonks sprang up like mushrooms. Along the entire Kurfürstendamm powdered and rouged men sauntered and they were not all professionals; every high school boy wanted to earn some money and in the dimly lit bars one might see government officials and men of the world of finance tenderly courting drunken sailors without any shame. Even the Rome of Suetonius had never known such orgies as the pervert balls of Berlin, where hundreds of men costumed as women and hundreds of women as men danced under the benevolent eyes of the police. In the collapse of all values a kind of madness gained hold. Young girls bragged proudly of their perversion; to be sixteen and still under suspicion of virginity would have been a disgrace.” [22]

THE CITY OF DREADFUL JOY Weimar Berlin, 1928


My own impression, though I could well be mistaken here, is that Weimar Germany can be seen as a trial run or dress rehearsal for the Sexual Revolution of the 1960s, a revolution in attitudes and behavior that was to convulse America and then spread like a moral virus to Europe and the rest of the world.
Recollect that it was in Germany during the Weimar period—in 1923 to be exact—that the Institut für Sozialforschung was set up at the University of Frankfurt. Financed by the Argentian Jew Felix Weil, this was later to become the infamousFrankfurt School. [23]
It is my own hypothesis that the Germans were to be the initial guinea pigs of theseCultural Marxists [24], all of them initially Jewish apart from Habermas. These were revolutionaries intent on complete social control by the imposition of their Marxist worldview on the rest of society. It is self-evident that there is no other way to get control of a society with strong moral values than to weaken those values. The formula is simple: destroy the belief system on which that society is founded, especially its religion and its traditional codes of honor and decency. Promote godlessness and a philosophy of despair. To put it in even plainer language: reduce men to beasts if you wish to control them.
It was George Lukács [25], one of the founding fathers of the Frankfurt School, who had called for “a culture of pessimism and a world abandoned by God.” [26] And it was one of their most fanatical ideologues, Willi Munzenberg [27], who had said he wanted to turn the world upside down and make life a hell on earth. His exact words:
We must organize the intellectuals and use them TO MAKE WESTERN CIVILIZATION STINK! Only then, after they have CORRUPTED ALL ITS VALUES AND MADE LIFE IMPOSSIBLE, can we impose the dictatorship of the proletariat. [28, emphasis added]
With Jewish intellectuals like this at the helm, doing their utmost to promote moral anarchy and create an Orwellian dystopia, is it any wonder that the Germans went helter-skelter down the slippery slope and ended up where they did?
In America the Cultural Marxists were to apply a variation of their Weimar techniques, but refined and honed to a high degree. This time, they would use multiculturalism as a weapon of mass destruction in addition to moral corruption. They would flood the country with immigrants, legal as well as illegal. They would turn race against race (engineered ethnic conflict), parent against child (attack on authority), and man against woman (radical feminism). Above all, they would teach the non-White races to regard the White race as the ultimate evil: “the cancer of human history”, to quote Jewish feminist Susan Sontag. [29]
The above comments are admittedly controversial and will elicit anger in many quarters. For this I apologize. My purpose is simply to give voice to an urgent and widespread perception. Not to be able to say what many people increasingly believe is clearly undesirable.
What did the cultural Marxists learn from Weimar Germany?
They learned that the Sexual Revolution, in order to succeed, had to be a slow and gradual process. “Modern forms of subjection,” the Frankfurt School had learned, “are marked by mildness.” [30] Weimar had failed because the pace had been too frenetic. People were aware they were being corrupted. That was fatal.
To corrupt a nation effectively one must make sure that the descent into degradation is an infinitely slow and imperceptible process, one miniscule step at a time—just as those who wish to cook frogs alive in a saucepan, reducing them to a state of comatose stupor, are advised to place them in cold water and boil them to death as slowly as possible. [31]
Lest I be accused of antisemitism by this portrayal of the systematic sexual corruption of the German people at the hands of their Jewish masters—a classic instance of social engineering practiced on an entire population—let me allow a well-known and respected Jewish authority on the Weimar era to have the final word. He is Dr Manfred Reifer, and he is writing in a prestigious Jewish publication:
Whilst large sections of the German nation were struggling for the preservation of their race, we Jews filled the streets of Germany with our vociferations. We supplied the press with articles on the subject of its Christmas and Easter and administered to its religious beliefs in the manner we considered suitable. We ridiculed the highest ideals of the German nation and profaned the matters which it holds sacred.”  —  Dr Manfred Reifer, in the German Jewish magazine Czernowitzer Allegemeine Zeitung, September 1933
In the same month those words were written, September 1933, Adolf Hitler removed every single Jew from positions of influence in the mass media: from the fields of literature, art, music, journalism, the cinema, and popular entertainment in general [32]. The influence that the Jews had exerted on the German psyche was to be regarded henceforth, rightly or wrongly, as pernicious. And Kulturbolschewismus, or “Bolshevik culture”, a derogatory term for Jewish culture itself, became synonymous with moral anarchy and sexual decadence.

*            *            *


[1]        Dr Friedrich Karl Wiehe, Germany and the Jewish Question. Published in 1938 in Berlin by  the Institute for Studies of the Jewish Question, this eight-part booklet runs to approximately 23,500 words in the English translation. As I have quoted this important work extensively both here and in my forthcoming 4-part essay How the Jews Rose to World Power, I felt it would be advisable to paraphrase/translate the defective Germanic English of the English version completely, quoting the original translation only when the English was free from grammatical and orthographical  errors. Readers who know German are invited to consult the original German essay here: Deutschland und die Judenfrage.
[2]       Wiehe, Ibid.
[3]       Wiehe, Ibid.
[4]       “transvaluation of values”
[5]       Wiehe, Ibid.
[6]       Krafft-Ebing’s Psychopathia Sexualis
[7]       Magnus Hirschfeld (1868-1935). The first advocate for homosexual and transgender rights  and himself a homosexual, Hirschfeld figured out that there were 64 different types of male, ranging from the extremely masculine heterosexual male to the extremely feminine homosexual male. Whether there are also 64 different types of females, ranging from the extremely feminine heterosexual female to the extremely masculine butch lesbian, is not clear. Described as the “the Einstein of Sex”, Hirschfeld thought abortion was a good thing and approved of miscegenation and the mongrelization of the White race.
[8]       Ivan Bloch (1872-1922).  Like Hirschfeld, Bloch was a Jewish homosexual whose main interest in life was sexual perversion. Author of the 3-volume Handbuch der gesamten Sexualwissenschaft in Einzeldarstellungen (“Handbook of Sexology in its Entirety Presented in Separate Studies”), Bloch was an expert on sadism and helped to popularize the work of the Marquis de Sade. He apparently discovered the manuscript of de Sade’s The 120 Days of Sodom and published it under a pseudonym in 1904, presumably pocketing the royalties.
[9]      The Institute for Sexual Science (Institut für Sexualwissenschaft). Founded in 1919 in Berlin, the Institute was housed in a villa purchased by Hirschfeld not far from the Reichstag building. It housed his immense library of sex books, most of them pornographic, and offered the public advice on their sex problems (“medical consultations”). People from around Europe visited the Institute, including the homosexual duo Auden and Isherwood, “to gain a clearer understanding of their sexuality.” (Wikipedia).  The Institute, which encouraged “educational” visits from school children, included a Museum of Sex full of pornographic pictures, dildos, “masturbation machines”, and other curiosities of a similar nature. In May 1933, after the Nazis had come to power, the Institute was attacked and thousands of its pornographic books and erotic artifacts destroyed in a “bonfire of the vanities” — this event later being portrayed by Jewish interests as a tragic loss to civilization, comparable only to the burning of the Great Library at Alexandria in 645 AD.
[10]      Wiehe, Ibid.
[11]       Peter Kurten, “to strike back at an oppressive society.”
[12]      An example: Marina Tatar’s Lustmord: Sexual Murder in Weimar Germany.
[13]      Sir Arthur Bryant, Unfinished Victory (1940), pp. 144-145
[14]      Mel Gordon, Voluptuous Panic: The Erotic World of Weimar Berlin, p.39
[15]      Mel Gordon, Ibid., p.43
[16]      Mel Gordon, in an email to this author (1 March 2013).
[17]      Mel Gordon, Ibid., pp.28-32
[18]      Quoted in Stephen Lemons, Paradise regained: Weimar Berlin’s depraved, sin-filled nights tantalize the imagination anew in Mel Gordon’s “Voluptuous Panic”.
[19]     Stephen Lemons, Ibid. If 30 cents for a blowjob was considered a bargain for the American tourist in Weimar Germany, it is of interest to note that the blowjob rate for sex tourists in Moldova today is considerably lower—only  20 cents a pop. We learn this from a book originally published in Hebrew in Israel (In Foreign Parts: Trafficking in Women in Israel, by Ilana Hammerman. Am Oved. 199pp). “The local rate for sex services at the Chisinau  train station,” we are told, “is about NIS 0.70 for a blowjob.” (Quoted in “Land of Filth and Honey”, by Eli Shai, Jerusalem Post, November 5, 2004).  0.70 New Israeli shekels works out to 20 cents. Moldova, the poorest country in Europe, where the average income is US $300 per month and 20 percent of the population live in abject poverty on $3 per day, is a favorite destination for European and Israeli sex tourists, especially for pedophiles. Chisinau is the capital of Moldova, and it is at its railway station that gaunt, hollow-eyed children—some of them as young as 7—line up to offer their services to the incoming sex tourists. (See here).
[20]     Klaus Mann, The Turning Point (1942), quote.
[21]      Erich Kästner, quoted in “Institute for the study of western civilization: the twentieth century. Lecture 9: Weimar Culture.”
[22]     Quoted in Columbia University Press review of Weimar Cinema: An Essential Guide to Classic Films of the Era, edited by Noah Isenberg
[23]     The Frankfurt School: Wikipedia. For an alternative and more dissident viewpoint, see The Frankfurt School: Metapedia and its numerous links.
[24]     Readers who wish to know more about the philosophical milieu of modernity—i.e., the cultural swamp of sexual bolshevism in which the benighted masses are forced to flounder today—are advised to make a careful study of the following eight core articles:
(1)   Arnaud de Lassus’s The Frankfurt School: Cultural Revolution
(2)  Kevin MacDonald, The Culture of Critique, Chapter 5
(3)  William S. Lind, What is Cultural Marxism?
(4)  William S. Lind, Who Stole our Culture?
(5) Timothy Matthews, The Frankfurt School: Conspiracy to Corrupt. (Or my own shorter adaption of this with extended commentary, Satan’s Secret Agents: TheFrankfurt School and its Evil Agenda.)
(6)  Michael Minnicino, The Frankfurt School and ‘Political Correctness’
(7) Cultural Marxism: (Metapedia).
(8) Sexual Bolshevism: (Metapedia).
[25]     Georges Lukács, Wikipedia.
[26]     Timothy Matthews, The Frankfurt School: Conspiracy to Corrupt.
[27]     Willi Munzenberg, Wikipedia. See also Sean McMeekin’s The Red Millionaire: A political biography of Willi Münzenberg, where Münzenberg  is described as “the perpetrator of some of the most colossal lies of the modern age…. He helped to unleash a plague of moral blindness upon the world from which we have still not recovered.”
[28]     Lasha Darkmoon, The Plot Against Art (Part 1).
[29]     “The truth is that Mozart, Pascal, Boolean Algebra, Shakespeare, parliamentary government, baroque churches, Newton, the emancipation of women, Kant, Marx, and Ballanchine  ballets don’t redeem what this particular civilization has wrought upon the world. The white race is the cancer of human history.”  — Susan Sontag, Partisan Review,   Winter 1967, p. 57. This infamous quote, once cited in the Wikipedia article on Sontag, has recently been removed.
[30]     Arnaud de Lassus, The Frankfurt School: Cultural Revolution.
[31]      Boiling Frog (Wikipedia)
[32]    The Holocaust Timeline

Originally posted in Veterans Today

A-JAX and Ladies’ Code: Two Blatant Examples of Mind Control Culture in K-Pop

Illuminati mind control symbolism does not only exist in the Western world. In Asia, the widely popular K-Pop scene is also replete with the same imagery. We’ll look at the symbolism of A-JAX’s “Insane” and Ladies’ Code “Hate You”, two blatant examples that prove the elite’s symbolism is truly international.

K-Pop (pop music from South Korea) has garnered an incredible following across the world as its machine keeps creating new boy and girl bands and music videos that become instant YouTube hits. The “Korean wave” has hit not only Asia, but also Latin America, Northeast India, the Middle East, and North Africa. However, while K-Pop appears to have become somewhat of an alternative to Western pop culture, it is not exempt from the Illuminati symbolism and the Agenda found in Western pop. In fact, the symbolism is often more blatant and in-your-face with K-Pop videos, causing me to ask: Is K-Pop truly an alternative to Western pop or just an effective way for the elite to get its message across in Asia?

A quick look at K-Pop videos such as A-JAX’s “Insane” and Ladies’ Code “Hate You” is all it takes to realize that mind control symbolism is as heavily pushed in K-Pop than it is in the West. In fact, both of these videos basically read like a MK-101 manual, using all of the symbols associated with it and portraying the stars as slaves. K-Pop has effectively become another outlet for the elite to promote its “mind control culture”, even alluding to its sadistic practices in stylish videos aimed at young (and unaware) people. (For more information mind control, read the article Origins and Techniques of Monarch Mind Control.) Let’s look at the videos and see how they fit right in with the MK Agenda that is also pushed in the Western world.

If you’re a regular reader of this site, you can by now easily recognize the specific set of symbols that is used by the occult elite its promote MK culture. Those who are part of the Monarch programming system have created a disturbing culture surrounding it, complete with esthetics and symbols that are now omnipresent in mass media. All of this is packaged with catchy tunes and good-looking performers, which causes young people to subliminally associate this culture with positive feelings, even making it fashionable. As the above videos prove, this is all becoming increasingly blatant and interpreting these videos through the mind-control lens is almost impossible.

While the mind-control culture appears to have originated in the United States, the exact same set of symbols and meanings are also present in the booming South Korean pop scene. The fact that this is happening proves two things: First, the set of symbols I describe in videos is NOT a result of coincidence. It is cohesive imagery that originates from Monarch mind control. Second, it is obvious that at the top of all music industries, whether it be in America, Europe or Asia, the same occult elite are promoting the same Agenda. Why does Baphomet have to be in all of these videos across the world? Because the horned head represents those in power, and those in power are not your locally elected politicians, but a global elite. Through these videos, you are being told what the elite believes in and the sick practices it engages in. Are people rebelling against this? No, quite to contrary, they are dancing to it and paying money to purchase it. I guess A-JAX aren’t the only ones who are Insane.

The Rolling Stones, Sympathy For The Devil And The Phoenix

Posted on June 30, 2013 by 

 Reblogged from Merovee:

Click to visit the original post

  • Click to visit the original post
  • Click to visit the original post
  • Click to visit the original post
  • Click to visit the original post

Last night, at the Glastonbury music festival, the Rolling Stones rolled out their zimmer frames once more to increase their bank balances a little bit more .

But I don’t think it was the money which was the main reason for their inclusion . At the start of“Sympathy for The Devil”, a huge Phoenix rose above the Pyramid stage, as it was transformed into a Hell and flames licked the stage .

Read more… 182 more words

Roger Waters’ The Wall live, Wembley Stadium, review

James Hall is taken aback by a pulverising live performance of Pink Floyd’s The Wall.

4 out of 5 stars
Roger Waters performs Pink Floyd's The Wall

Roger Waters performs Pink Floyd’s The Wall Photo: Chiaki Nozu
At one point during Roger Waters’ pulverising performance of The Wall at Wembley Stadium, the former Pink Floyd member started duetting with a 50 ft high video of himself, filmed over 30 years ago at Earls Court when he performed the same show. Before he did so, he told the 70,000-strong crowd that he didn’t want to appear “narcissistic”.

Waters’ attack of modesty was amusing given that the entire 30 million-selling The Wall album is a vast autobiographical mush of his upbringing and worldview. The ‘Roger Waters The Wall Live’ tour, now in its third year, has seen the 70-year-old perform the rock opera over 200 times to close to 4 million people in arenas around the world. Bashful? The very thought is, like Waters himself, a bit rich.

But what a show. Beefed up for stadiums, the £37 million production was an immersive sensory extravaganza featuring huge Gerald Scarfe puppets, state-of-the-art animation, flying pigs, fireworks and the famous white wall that gets built up as the show progresses and knocked down at its climax. (The wall was so big that it made Wembley seem cosy).

Grey, lithe and in good voice, Waters prowled the stage looking like a grouchy Richard Gere. The sound was exceptional, the best I’ve heard at a stadium gig; loud, crisp and ‘in surround’. When a replica Spitfire flew across Wembley’s rafters and crashed into the wall in flames, it was the sound that rendered it not only believable but chilling.

Almost as extraordinary as the sound were the mind-bending animations. It was therefore baffling that when presented with probably the most advanced visuals in the world, half the crowd decide to watch them through the screen on their camera phones.

Musical highlights were a devastating Comfortably Numb and the moving, new Ballad of Jean Charles de Menezes, killed by police in the wake of the 7/7 attacks. Thematically it was bit all over the shop. On the surface The Wall is the story of an alienated rock star called Pink (Waters), who has an overbearing mother and hates school. Everything he goes through is “another brick in the wall” of life. But it is also about loss, war and grief.

Last month Waters sparked controversy by calling for fellow rock stars to boycott Israel for what he called its “crimes” and “apartheid”. The Wall in the show certainly appeared to make references to Israel’s West Bank wall: at one point a projected plane dropped hundreds of Star of Davids from its undercarriage as if they were bombs. It would be tempting to read some kind of message into this. However, given that the plane also dropped crucifixes, hammer and sickles, and the corporate logos of Shell and Mercedes-Benz, the only real message we could take from this was that someone in Waters’ graphics team has been busy. (Waters has also denied any suggestions of anti-semitism).

But The Wall was really about spectacle, not politics. Over 30 years after its release, it still sets the bar for stadium rock shows.

Roger Waters Fires Back at Rabbi Who Called Him a ‘Hater of Jews’

English: This image file, Roger Waters O2 Aren...English: This image file, Roger Waters O2 Arena London 18 May 2008, is a cropped image from WikiCommons, the original source file is listed below (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Roger Waters Fires Back at Rabbi Who Called Him a ‘Hater of Jews’

Roger Waters called for a boycott of Israel earlier this year, and now the former Pink Floyd singer-bassist is defending his The Wall Live Tour from accusations of anti-semitism in a Facebook post, titled “An open letter from Roger Waters.”

Waters begins the letter by explaining the recent controversy that erupted after a performance in Belgium last week: An Israeli man alerted a news source with video footage of a Star of David-marked prop pig that was featured in the show and destroyed by the audience at the end of the performance.

The story gained traction and was picked up by Jewish newspaper The Algemeiner. Rabbi Abraham Cooper, Dean of the Simon Wiesenthal Center, told The Algemeiner that Waters “is an open hater of Jews” and urged other artists to “denounce his anti-Semitism and bigotry.” In his Facebook post, Waters calls Cooper’s words “wild and bigoted” with an “entirely predictable resulting rant.”

Waters first criticizes Cooper’s use of “anti-Semitic,” saying the Anti-Defamation League has ruled his work has no anti-Semitic intent. “I also use the Crucifix, the Crescent and Star, the Hammer and Sickle, the Shell Oil Logo and The McDonald’s Sign, a Dollar Sign and a Mercedes sign [in the show],” writes Waters.

Waters then defends himself from Cooper’s claims of Jew-hating by noting that he himself has close Jewish friends, including Wiesenthal’s nephew, and a Jewish daughter-in-law. “[She] is Jewish and so, in consequence, I’m told, are [my grandsons],” he writes.

Waters’ third and final point addresses Cooper’s use of the word “Nazi.” Waters points to his father, who died fighting for Britain in Italy during World War II, and his upbringing in post-war England. “I received the most thorough education on the subject of Nazism and where I was spared no horrific detail of the heinous crimes committed in the name of that most foul ideology,” writes Waters, also pointing to his mother’s political involvement.

“I for my part, as best I can, have continued along my parent’s path,” Waters continues. “At the age of nearly 70, in the spirit of my Father and Mother and all they did, I have stood my ground, as best I can, in defense of Mistress Liberty.”

Read More: Here

Miley Cyrus: Pedophilia-The Next Frontier

August 30, 2013

(2008 Vanity Fair Pedo Pictorial- Miley Cyrus at 15) 

As society is inducted into a satanic cult, people become more demonic.
Witness our leaders gassing Syrian civilians and, waxing indignant, use it as a pretext for wider war. Witness our schools grooming children for homosexual pedophiles.

So too our entertainment increasing resembles satanic rituals, which use sex to degrade and dehumanize. As “Hannah Montana,” Miley Cyrus was a role model for millions of young girls. Her obscene performance Monday where she simulated sex surrounded by human-size teddy bears  now prepares them for pedophilia.  Along with other reactions, I re-post my 2008 article which discussed this degenerate Illuminati agenda. 

Illuminati Huffington Post on :

“Why Miley Cyrus Is Actually a Good Role Model for Girls”  (Aug 29)

“Miley’s performance may have been raunchy, but no one can deny that she seemed to be enjoying flaunting her sexual power and prowess. She would be no man’s sexual victim. She modelled for our girls that even a sweet Hannah Montana could grow into a sexually confident young woman who was having a very good time with her sexuality.

I think we were maybe too quick to judge…or maybe we judged her so harshly because she reminded us of those fleeting moments when new relationship energy emboldened our own sexual enjoyment, so soon submerged again under layers of shame and fear. I think we may need more, rather than fewer, reminders that when women and men together decide to revel in their sexuality, magic happens.”

But most of the Mass media was not Impressed. The Toronto Globe and Mail :

(Crazed satanic pedo-slave theme – 20 year old girl rubbing against a 36 yr old married man, Robin Thicke )

“According to witnesses, ["Hannah Montana's] death occurred [Monday night] when Miley Cyrus, 20, joined Robin Thicke for a rendition of his smash-hit homage to the patriarchal hegemony, Blurred Lines, during the VMAs. Cyrus, wearing a skin-coloured latex bikini, ground her twerking derriere into Thicke’s groin, patted his nether regions with a foam finger, used the same foam finger to replicate a tumescent male penis, stuck her tongue out about six times too many and generally pranced around with the clunky and airless charm of a 75-year-old woman who lives her entire life without ever doing anything naughty and suddenly throws her reputation out the window during one bad moment at a wedding reception.

Viewers watching her performance who were not paralyzed by shock tweeted such words as “disgrace,” “uncomfortable” and “mortification,” and asked fellow tweeters to remind them to never let their children go into show business. Others urged her to “THINK OF THE CHILDREN!” - See more at:


……..” We will make the West so corrupt that it stinks”. 
Willi Munzenburg

PREAMBLE: Extracts from CPS website:Parliament has passed legislation aimed at outlawing crime where the offender is motivated by hostility or hatred towards the victim’s race or religious beliefs (actual or perceived).”A racial group means a group of persons defined by reference to race, colour, nationality (including citizenship) or ethnic or national origins.””A religious group means a group of persons defined by reference to religious belief or lack of religious belief. This includes Muslims, Hindus and Christians, and different sects within a religion.” It also includes people who do not hold any religious beliefs at all.“HOSTILITY”

To prove that an offence is racially or religiously aggravated, the prosecution has to prove the “basic” offence followed by racial or religious aggravation, as defined in section 28 Crime and Disorder Act 1998. An offence will be racially or religiously aggravated if:
a) at the time of the offence (or shortly before or after), the offender demonstrates to the victim hostility based on the victim’s membership (or presumed membership) of a racial or religious group, or
b) the offence is motivated wholly or partly by hostility towards members of a racial or religious group based on their membership (or presumed membership) of that group.
– demonstrating hostility is not defined by the Act. The ordinary dictionary definition of hostile includes simply being “unfriendly”. Proving this limb of the offence requires evidence of words or actions which show hostility toward the victim. However, this hostility may be totally unconnected with the “basic” offence which may have been committed for other, non-racially or religiously motivated reasons. For example, an assault which takes place because of an argument over a parking place, but where the offender then utters racial abuse to the victim of the assault would come within the scope of this part of section 28.
– motivated by hostility may prove more difficult in practice. In the absence of a clear statement by the accused that his/her actions were motivated by his hostility to his victim based on his race or religious belief, for example, an admission under caution, how can motive be shown? In some cases, background evidence could well be important if relevant to establish motive, for example, evidence of membership of, or association with, a racist group, or evidence of expressed racist views in the past might, depending on the facts, be admissible in evidence.
A member of my family bought me a ticket for a fairly new musical, ‘The Book of Mormon’. I’ve just completed writing a musical myself so it appeared an ‘appropriate’ present. They hadn’t seen it themselves but had been told the show was “very funny”. I went to see it last Friday night.
No one considers themselves narrow-minded and neither do I, but I have to say that the experience was, for me (and in more ways than one), quite shocking.
More than shocking. Nauseating.
Firstly, having watched a couple of footballers being fined for making run-of-the-mill racist comments last year, it was staggering to me that this ‘show’ had not simply been sued out of existence. It was surely impossible that black people, and Ugandans in particular, would not be gravely offended by this racist filth. As a Christian I found the depiction of Christ and Christianity intolerable, if (knowing the Zionist agenda and the cultural dominance of this group) less surprising. I was glad I was not a Muslim as I might have felt obliged to obey my feelings and burn the theatre down. Having what you regard as ‘holy’ (not criticised, nor argued against but) violated in this abominable manner is gratuitously abusive. The kind of abuse in which only a coward who knows he is well protected would dare to indulge.THE PLOT
Briefly, a group of insanely grinning newly-trained male Mormon missionaries are about to be sent to evangelize in some, as yet unknown, corner of the earth. Our two ‘heroes’ win the short straw, i.e. Uganda, the a*sehole of the earth, a place where villagers are tyrannised by a sodomising war-Lord, penniless and where most have AIDS. The cure for AIDS is to f*** a virgin, but as there no virgins left this has become…to f*** a baby. See scriptextract below:
Mafala: You’re in Northern Uganda now, and in this part of Africa we all have a saying. Whenever something bad happens, we just throw our hands to the sky and say “hasa diga eebowai.”
Cunningham: Hasa Diga eebowai?
Mafala: It’s the only way to get through all these troubles. And, there’s war! Poverty! Famine! But, having a saying makes it all seem better.
There isn’t enough food to eat. Hawa diga eebowai. People are starving in the street.
Ugandans: Hasa diga eebowai.
Women (Men): Haaaasa Diga Eeebowai! (Haaaasa Diga Eeebowai)
Haaaasa Diga Eeebowai! (Haaaasa Diga Eeebowai)
Price: Well that’s pretty neat.
Cunningham: Does it mean no worries for the rest of our days?
Mafala: Kind of…
We’ve had no rain in several days.
Ugandans: Hasa diga eebowai.
Mafala: And 80% of us have AIDS
Ugandans: Hasa diga eebowai.
Mafala: Many young girls here get circumcised. Their clits get cut right off!
Ugandans: Weyo!
Women: And so we say up to the sky
Ugandans: Hasa diga eebowai.
Women (Men): Haaaasa Diga Eeebowai! (Haaaasa Diga Eeebowai)
Haaaasa Diga Eeebowai! (Haaaasa Diga Eeebowai)
Mafala: Now you try it! [the other Ugandans react] Just stand up tall, tilt your head to the sky, and list off the bad things in your life!
Cunningham: Somebody took our luggage away.
Ugandans: Hasa diga eebowai.
Price: The plane was crowded and our bus was late.
Ugandans: Hasa diga eebowai.
Mafala: When the world is getting you down, there’s nobody else to blame.
Ugandans: Weyo! [an Ugandan woman hands her baby over to Price and then joins the others in dance.]
Mafala: Raise your middle finger to the sky and curse his rotten name!
Price: Wait, what? [tries to give the baby back to the woman, but isn't able to, so he turns to address Mafala]
Cunningham: Hasa diga eebowai. Am I saying that right?
Women: Hasa diga eebowai.
Price: [burping the baby] Excuse me, sir, but, but what exactly does that phrase mean?
Mafala: Well let’s see: eebowai means God. And hasa diga means “Fuck you.” So I guess in English it would be, “Fuck you… God!”
Ugandans: Hasa diga eebowai.
Price: What??
Mafala: When God fucks you in the butt,
Ugandans: Hasa diga eebowai.
Mafala: Fuck God right back in his cunt.
Ugandans: Hasa diga eebowai.
Cunningham: Hasa diga eebowai. What a nifty phrase.
Ugandans: Weyo! [Price tries to find the right woman to give the baby back to, and his search gets frantic. He finally finds her and gives the baby back]
Cunningham: Hasa diga eebowai. Hasa diga eebowai. [gets carried away and Price pulls him aide]
Price: You have to stop saying that!
Cunningham: I do??
Price: It means something very bad.
Cunningham: What?
Price: They are saying F U to Heavenly Father.
Cunningham: F U to Heavenly Father??? Holy moly I said it like thirteen times!
Women (Men): [they begin sticking out their middle fingers] Haaaasa Diga Eeebowai! (Fuck you, God!)
Haaaasa Diga Eeebowai! (Fuck you, God!)
Price: Excuse me, sir, but you should really not be saying that. Things aren’t always as bad as they seem.
Mafala: Oh really? Well take this fucking asshole Mutumbo here. He got caught last week trying to rape a baby.
Price: What?? Why??
Mafala: Some people in his tribe believe that having sex with a virgin will cure their AIDS. There aern’t many virgins left, sooo, some of them are turning to babies.
Cunningham: But that’s horrible!
Mafala: I know!
Ugandans: Hasa diga eebowai.
Mafala: Here’s the butcher, he has AIDS
Here’s the teacher, she has AIDS
Here’s the doctor, he has AIDS
Here’s my daughter, she has a_____
Wonderful disposition
She’s all I have left in the world
And if either of you lays a hand on her…
I will give you my AIDS!
Ugandans: If you don’t like what we say, try living here a couple days.
Watch all your friends and family die! Hasa diga eebowai!
Men: Fuuuck you!
Ugandans: Fuck! You!
Women: Hasa diga eebowai! [Price and Cunningham sit on the ground now]
Ugandans: Fuck you God in the ass, mouth and cunt-uh!
Fuck you God in the ass, mouth and cunt-uh!
Fuck you God in the ass, mouth and cunt-uh!
Fuck you in the eye!
Men (Women): Fuck you God in the ass, mouth and cunt-uh! (Hasa)
Fuck you God in the ass, mouth and cunt-uh! (diga eebowai)
Fuck you God in the ass, mouth and cunt-uh! (Hasa)
Ugandans: Fuck you in the other eye! [Price and Cunningham get up. Mafala begins to dance with Cunningham and Nabulungi begins to dance with Price]
Women (Men): Fuck you, God! (Fuck you, God!)
Fuck you, God!
Fuck you, God! (Fuck you!)
Ugandans: Hasa Diga, Fuuuck Youuu Goddd! In the cuuuuuunt! [the villagers put up their middle fingers one last time, then leave. Mafala's daughter takes Price and Cunningham to their quarters]
Fuck you, God!

You’re getting a feel for this stuff now?

As one might expect there were a large number of ‘gays’ in the audience. The screeches and roars of approval, the standing hands-above-the-head ovations were, for me, as shocking as anything happening on stage. Yes, much of the prancing ‘gay’ stuff was funny but the obviously offensive material (well, obvious to me anyway) did not seemingly detract from enjoyment of the evening. Small were the number who did not stand and applaud tumultuously.

The leading missionary gets anally raped by ‘the general’ and much fun is had watching our hero painfully trying sit down. The weaker missionary becomes a hero. He tells the Ugandans they shouldn’t f*** babies, That’s wrong! (but how would they know? Being black? And seemingly subhuman. O, go on tell me! I’m missing the point. Why don’t you bring on Ricky Gervais for a few ‘post-modern ‘spastic’ jokes).

The missionary tells them that his ‘Holy Book’ (which he has not read) says they must f*** frogs instead… much onstage f***ing of frogs ensues.

He also gets to ‘baptise’ the villages pretty girl. In this scene of hideous double-speak (for any Christian) ‘baptism’ actually means he gets to shag the girl.

The whole village converts although their version of Mormonism is wildly ‘inappropriate’ and misconstrued (but how would subhumans begin to understand such a thing?). They celebrate their conversion by cavorting about the stage wearing 18 inch erect penises.

Meanwhile Christ, Joseph Smith, Darth Vader, Hobbits, Hitler and various other characters (they’re mostly fictional, mostly evil) are represented as interchangeable and (it is implicitly suggested) equally valid, sources of human inspiration.

(All this stuff can be found in the script, if you’re interested)


It can be no coincidence that one of the main writers describes himself as ‘ethnically Jewish’ (no available info on the other one).

The utter cultural dominance of anti-Christian Zionists is in our faces for all to see. That it should come to this is no great surprise. That so few seem to care about it testifies to the brilliance, thoroughness (and the intensive funding) of their enterprise.

As our Zionist leaders prepare to bomb Syria from a safe distance.

As they prepare to sacrifice poor US blacks and ‘Appalachians’.

As the Zionist elite prepare to flee Israel (as they are ready to do at a moment’s notice (see Jewish Christian convert Roi Tov’s “The Cross ofBethlehem“)

….happy to sacrifice Israeli ‘schnorrers’ (the poor Jews who don’t matter) when Iranian, Russian or Chinese missiles strike.

As World War Three gets underway……..

Look around you.

Look carefully.


Deep breath.

…….catch the smell?

Have we been degraded and polluted beyond belief?

If so, can it all be someone else’s fault?

Jimmy Savile And The Paedophile Ring

Further to recent revelations from the BBC about abuse against children carried out at Fort Augustine Abbey, a Catholic boarding school in Scotland, it has emerged that Jimmy Savile was a regular visitor to the school .

From Daily :

“Predator Jimmy Savile was a frequent guest of monks at the Catholic boarding school at the centre of a sex abuse scandal.

The serial sex attacker regularly drove to Fort Augustus Abbey at a time when ex-pupils claim they were being terrorised by some of the monks.

A BBC TV investigation, Sins of the Fathers, this week alleged that nine monks at the Benedictine Order school repeatedly beat, sexually assaulted and, in one case, raped boys in their care over several decades.

Victims of the abuse complained but their testimony was ignored and covered up. Police are now investigating.”

savile faa

Jimmy Savile – Fort Augustus Abbey

Other schools Savile took an interest in .


Jimmy Savile – Haut de la Garenne Jersey

savile duncroft school

Jimmy Savile – Duncroft School

The main point I’m trying to make with all the Savile articles is that he didn’t turn up at these institutions by chance . The evidence indicates that there was a major ‘Establishment’ paedophile ring within the United Kingdom during this period . Other cases that spring to mind are Kincora, North Wales, Islington, Elm Guest House in Richmond and Lambeth . Everyone knew where to go to get their kicks and what should be of concern to the police is whether this paedophile ring still exists . Just because they say it’s ‘historical’ doesn’t mean it is . And I doubt whether, it’s just confined to Britain .

If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, etc, etc .

The Can Of Worms

In a recent post BBC Stop Jimmy Savile Child Sex Claim Programme, I ended the post saying “Maybe, someone doesn’t want a can of worms opened .” The ‘can of worms’ I was referring to was the ingrained paedophilia within British institutions from the 1960s onwards . My area of research takes in the south of England and I realise it has effected all parts of the British Isles eg North Wales Bryn Esten child care paedophile enquiry, the Kincora boys home in Northern Ireland and the unanswered questions in Scotland regarding Dunblane, Thomas Hamilton and Hollie Greig .

Jimmy Savile is a good place to start, to open the can of worms . Savile was one of the top TV presenters in Britain from the 1960s onwards . During his career, there were suspicions and claims he was a paedophile but due to his profile and money, he was able to quash these allegations . It is only with his death are the victims coming forward and journalists within the BBC gained interviews with three women who said they had unpleasant experiences with Savile when they were teenagers but we do not know what these claims entail, as the BBC hierarchy spiked the programme .


It seems Savile had a penchant for underage teenage girls, and whilst some would say this is pretty low down on the list of paedophile behaviour, it is still upsetting for his victims . But where Savile becomes interesting is his link to Jersey . When the abuse at Haut de la Garenne in Jersey became public, Savile claimed not to have visited the school at Haut de la Garenne but The Sun newspaper then published an old photo of Savile at the school (see above) . Savile’s reaction was to slap an injunction on The Sun who had to withdraw the picture .

Jersey is where the story gets very dark . A politician in Jersey, Senator Stuart Syvret had investigated claims from adults who had been in the care of Jersey Social Services when children and uncovered systematic abuse, both physical and sexual, centred on a state run school Haut de la Garenne . Unknown to him, Jersey police led by Lennie Harper were conducting their own enquiry  and it soon became a big media story . Predictably, the Jersey establishment attempted to limit the damage and accused Syvret of “shafting Jersey internationally” and with the retirement of Harper from the police, the investigation closed for all intents and purposes . Stuart Syvret has just served two months in prison on dubious data protection charges . Nice people in Jersey .

A few individuals were charged but it soon became apparent that the abuse at Jersey was not a private matter . Syvret discovered that Jersey was a centre for paedophiles for Britain’s rich and famous . From correspondence, he received :

“The plot thickens! I wonder who else amongst Jersey’s ever so distinguished government and residence will be exposed for what they really are?

Many, many years ago when aged about 14/15, a well known and convicted Jersey paedophile told me (as he and his sicko friends entrapped me), that he supplied children from HDG and Jersey in general, to well known TV personalities!

The link between Jersey paedophilia and these `celebs’ was the Jersey `Opera House’!”

Reading between the lines, he was given names but for whatever reason did not go public with them but he did out Wilfred Bramble, an actor famous for his role in Steptoe and Son (remade in America as Sanford and Son.) One of the comments on his blog, referred to Jimmy Savile and Edward Heath a former British Prime Minister and it seems Jersey was well known amongst the paedophile world, where you could go for your kicks and it would be supplied .

However, it appears police on the mainland in Britain knew about Jersey during the investigation in the early 1990s, into a paedophile ring which had wormed its way into Islington council in London and preyed on the children in its Care homes . The Islington enquiry into the paedophile ring was a disgrace and Margaret Hodge, later Minister for Children! attempted to close down the investigation . Only four people were disciplined by Islington Council and the police failed to investigate whether there was any link to the murder of Jason Swift who is believed to have lived in Islington council’s Conewood Street .

A journalist, Eileen Fairweather who had investigated the Islington case in the 1990s, disclosed in 2008 the link between Islington council and Jersey and also revealed police suspicions that powerful and wealthy men were involved .

From Mail Online :

I met the frightened policeman at an isolated country restaurant, many miles from his home and station. Detective Constable Peter Cook had finally despaired, and decided to blow the whistle to a reporter.

He was risking his career, so made me scribble my notes into a tiny pad beneath the tablecloth.

He had uncovered a vicious child sex ring, with victims in both Britain and the Channel Islands, and he wanted me to get his information to police abuse specialists in London.

Incredibly, he claimed that his superiors had barred him from alerting them.

He feared a cover-up: many ring members were powerful and wealthy. But I did not think him paranoid: I specialised in exposing child abuse scandals and knew, from separate sources, of men apparently linked to this ring.

They included an aristocrat, clerics and a social services chief. Their friends included senior police officers.

Repeatedly, inquiries by junior detectives were closed down, so I, a journalist, was asked to convey confidential information from one police officer to others. It seemed surreal.

We did, however, prove that every home included staff who were paedophiles, child pornographers or pimps. Concerned police secretly confirmed that several Islington workers were believed “networkers”, major operators in the supply of children for abuse and pornography.

Some of these were from the Channel Islands or regularly took Islington children there on unofficial visits. In light of the grisly discoveries at Haut de la Garenne, the link now seems significant, but at the time we were so overwhelmed by abuse allegations nearer home that this connection never emerged.

What we did report prompted the sort of vehement official denials that have come to characterise child abuse claims. Margaret Hodge, then council leader, denounced us as Right-wing “gutter journalists” who supposedly bribed children to lie.

Now, this is where some readers will part from me because I’m going into David Icke territory – Satanism – but what the hell, in for a penny in for a pound . One of the names which keeps cropping up is that of former British Prime Minister Edward Heath and not only with reference to Jersey .

From The Biggest Secret :

One of the many unconnected people who have identified Heath as a Satanist was the lady I mentioned earlier in the book …

This lady was the wife of the Head Keeper at Burnham Beeches (in Buckinghamshire near to the British PM’s official residence ‘Chequers’) and they lived on the land. She had been brought up by a Satanic family in Scotland … Her husband was also a Satanist which is why he was given the responsibility of looking after Burnham Beeches, and area of ancient groves and forests managed by the authorities in London …

Late one night in the early 1970′s during Heath’s reign as Prime Minister … she saw some lights. Quietly she moved closer to see what was going on … it was a Satanic ritual and in the circle was the then Prime Minister, Edward Heath …

edEdward Heath on ‘Morning Cloud’

It’s not the only time, Heath has been outed as a Satanist . A self acclaimed Australian Satanist, Aloysius Fozdyke wrote a post for the Henry Makow website :

Meanwhile in Britain, Bob Boothby and Tom Driberg, apart from being homosexuals, were also active Satanists. Tom’s cover of Anglo-Catholicism kept him out of a lot of bother. Both were involved behind the scenes in organizing for Harold Wilson and Edward Heath to become Prime Ministers of Britain, as Wilson was a high initiate of the left-hand path . Heath, on the other hand, was the highest initiated Satanist in Britain to become Prime Minister.

Even occultists know little, if anything, about Bob or Ted’s visits to the ancient sacrificial Wood in Clapham, Sussex and their association with certain people in the surrounding areas. The Wood holds some serious secrets stretching back in time to before Roman Britain and indeed it still does. From what I’ve been told, one day some of these hidden horrors will be found, but by then those involved will be long dead.

“The association with certain people in the surrounding areas” is a reference to a group who have become known as ‘The Friends of Hecate’ . I would be surprised if this was a real title but became public after a local man, Charles Walker was threatened by a man who claimed to be part of this group and practised their activities in Clapham Woods near Worthing . Charles Walker had researched the disappearance of dogs in the vicinity and after posting an ad in a local paper was contacted by The Friends of Hecate . Click Charles Walker Interviewto read more .

On 1/7/2000 a beautiful 8 year old girl, Sarah Payne was abducted and murdered by a very dark individual, Roy Whiting who lived in Littlehampton, West Sussex . I won’t go into the full details in this post but I believe Whiting was connected to this group and the murder was an occult ritual – see a previous post Sarah Payne – Suffer The Little Children . The British public may forgive Jimmy Savile and his attempts at getting underage girls into bed, but they won’t forgive Whiting .

I could go on ad nauseam but hope this indicates the dysfunction within the British establishment . Unfortunately, the full stories very rarely becomes public and as soon as an investigation is started, either pressure from on high disrupts the investigation or a few individuals are thrown to the lions to show justice is being done, but nobody looks any further .

I would hesitate to call it a paedophile ring, as there are too many people involved and it is over a large area but there seems to be some form of psychic force which links it all together . People know people, who know people and those in authority can carry out their deeds with very little fear of being caught . Of course, it helps if you are friends with the Chief Constable or a Cabinet Minister !

Whatever you do, don’t skip the comments which followed the article above,

‘Not many make it out of Hollywood alive or sane’: why child stars ‘go crazy’

Interesting that the article (above) skips lightly over item 5 on the list, when this is the most likely cause of trauma to the young starlets.

Five Hollywood Movies That Exposed Illuminati

June 3, 2013

international_ver2.jpgBankrolling wars is not about the outcome of wars, but generating debt from wars, and that “this is the very essence of the banking industry, to make us all — whether we be nations or individuals — slaves to debt.” (From “The International”

Conspiracy pioneer Jim Perloff reviews
a handful of movies that tell the truth
about world power.

by James Perloff

Hollywood is no place to find political truth.  Although it has produced–with increasing rarity–some uplifting films, and even anti-Communist ones during the Cold War, movies exposing the Illuminati and how they operate are almost nonexistent.

However, an occasional film has slipped through — or was permitted to. (I don’t refer to Illuminati films with sly Illuminati references, but movies genuinely opposing them.)

One was 1970′s made-for-TV The Brotherhood of the Bell, reviewed by Dr. Makow and viewable on YouTube.


Also on this site, John Hamer unveiled the truth about the Jack the Ripper slayings.  The victims were a group of prostitutes who attempted to blackmail the royal family.  Prince Albert Victor had impregnated and secretly married one of their number.  The royal family entrusted the girls’ elimination to high-ranking Masons, who slew them in Masonic ritual style.  The last girl’s death reveals why the murders suddenly halted, as did police investigation.  The compromise of Charles Warren, metropolitan police commissioner — and 33rd degree mason — largely explains why the crimes went “unsolved.”

Many of Hamer’s revelations were dramatized in the 1979 film Murder by Decree.  Although the plot set fictitious Sherlock Holmes (Christopher Plummer, with James Mason as Dr. Watson) after the Ripper, it captured much of the reality.  In a memorable scene, Holmes throws Charles Warren off guard by greeting him with an upper-level Masonic handshake. See this very anti-Masonic scene here. 

wildgeeseRG1105_468x379.jpg3) ‘THE WILD GEESE’

Truths must usually take a back seat to plot, because preachiness undermines a film’s appeal.  The Wild Geese (1978), about mercenaries rescuing an African leader, was generally considered a simple action flick.  But the leader was modeled on Moise Tshombe, the Christian who attempted to secede his province, Katanga, after the Congo came under Soviet-backed Patrice Lumumba.  Tshombe’s forces battled UN (world government) troops imported to force his hand, and after exile he died under questionable circumstances.

In the film, the mercenaries are hired to rescue the leader by a treacherous merchant banker whose interest is copper concessions, and who is so powerful that he intimidates London’s mafia. While the mercenaries are in Africa, in London the banker negotiates a new copper deal with the country’s dictator, leaving the betrayed mercenaries to fight their way out against Simbas and their Cuban and Soviet advisers. Politically incorrect to the hilt, one of The Wild Geese’s heroes is a white South African.

The banker, Sir Edward Matherson, seems modeled on the Rothschilds, long invested in African mining, and long partnered with Jardine Matheson.  When the mercenaries’ leader, Colonel Faulkner (Richard Burton) first meets Matherson, there is immediate mutual dislike.  Faulkner asks brusquely, “What do I call you? Sir Edward?” Matherson haughtily replies, “You do.”– possibly a veiled reference to the Rothschilds acquiring titles via wealth (Nathan Rothschild was Britain’s first Jewish peer).

Superbly scripted 4) Chinatown (1974) underscored the near-futility of battling the conspiratorial schemes of the super-rich — and the frustrations of persuading people that such conspiracies exist.  There is a memorable confrontation between the hero, private detective Jake Gittes (Jack Nicholson) and the villain — ruthless , depraved multimillionaire Noah Cross (John Huston), whose daughter bewails that he “owns the police.” Gittes asks him a question many have wanted to ask banksters: “Why are you doing it?  How much better can you eat?  What can you buy that you can’t already afford?”  Cross replies: “The future!”


The International  (2009) pits Interpol agent Louis Salinger (Clive Owen) and New York assistant DA Eleanor Whitman (Naomi Watts) against a multinational bank, the IBBC.  Besides realistically portraying the banksters, and their infrastructure of lawyers and compromised police, many interesting revelations are woven in.

Salinger and Whitman approach an Italian arms magnate who has just aborted a deal with the bank.  From him, they learn that the IBBC is brokering arms to Third World nations.  They discover that bankrolling wars is not about the outcome of wars, but generating debt from wars, and that “this is the very essence of the banking industry, to make us all — whether we be nations or individuals — slaves to debt.”

Later in the film, Salinger captures Wilhelm Wexler, who runs the bank’s security.  Asked how the bank can be brought down, Wexler replies:
“Your idea of justice is an illusion.  Don’t you know that the very system you serve and protect will never allow anything to happen to the bank? On the contrary, the system guarantees the IBBC’s safety because everyone is involved.”

Salinger asks who “everyone” is; it includes the CIA, his own government, and multinational corporations.  Says Wexler: “This is why your investigative efforts have been undermined and why you and I will be quietly disposed of before any case against the bank ever reaches a court of law… If you really want to stop the IBBC, you won’t be able to do it within the boundaries of your system of justice — you will have to go outside.”  Salinger does. See this superb scene that explains more than I can here.

FINALLY, I can’t overlook two non-Hollywood movies - the must-see Occult Forces a 1943 French film that brilliantly exposed Freemasonry –probably made possible by the brief advent of Vichy France — and whose director and producer were both executed after the war; and the movie, “1984″ , which so prophetically portrayed today’s age of increasing surveillance and totalitarian control, filmed several times, but none better than the Hurt-Burton version.  I’m sure this website’s readers know other examples.

James Perloff is author of The Shadows of Power and Tornado in a Junkyard. His newest book, Truth Is a Lonely Warrior, available in Kindle format, is a comprehensive look at the satanic drive for world government. 

Sex Pistols star Johnny Rotten warning about Jimmy Savile was cut by BBC

21st Century Wire1-Johnny-Rotten-Lydon-According to a rare audio clip just released (see video below), John Lydon, aka Johnny Rotten, then of Sex Pistols and PIL fame, conducted an interview circa late 1978, where he joked about people he’d like to kill’ and interestingly he quipped, “I’d like to kill Jimmy Savile”.He went on to comment about the late DJ and serial sex criminal’s ’seediness’, and also that he (Savile) ‘was into all sorts’.
The admission took place during what appears to be an actual BBC radio interview, but Lydon’s damning inferences about the BBC’s golden child Jimmy Savile seem to have been removed from the interview at the time, so the excerpt was not broadcast, but has just been made available as part of the reissue of the first PIL album.Long before Lydon’s comments were made, the BBC were officially warned in 1972 that they were in fact putting young girls at risk with their Top of the Pops Show, which was detailed in theTelegraph recently:1-Jimmy-Savile-victim“The emergence of the 64-page report – which was circulated to the then director general and chairman – will further fuel allegations that the BBC failed to protect teenage girls from Jimmy Savile, the corporation’s then most feted star who was unmasked last year as Britain’s most prolific sex offender.”It seems that everyone knew about at least some of the sordid practices of the late Sir Jimmy Savile OBE, but few dared speak it in public. Of course, this cover-up within the entertainment and media industry was led by the BBC itself, as it would be incredibly naive to think that no one working in the BBC knew of Savile’s propensity for sexual deviances (rape, pedophilia and other disturbing pastimes too dark to mention here). By all accounts, it was an open secret within “The Industry”.Listen to the excerpt of Lydon – then known as Johnny Rotten, as he issues a subtle warning about the true nature of the BBC’s monster-in-residence…

‘Call in Jimmy Savile. You can’t afford to fuck about – bring in an expert. He may have fooled you, not fucking me.’ Comedian Jerry Sadowitz back in 1988!!…

The Frontman: Bono (In The Name of Power) by Harry Browne – review

Bono the philanthropist is nothing but a crony of bankers and neocons, argues Terry Eagleton

Irish musician Bono arrives at 10 Downin

Bono arriving for a visit to 10 Downing Street in March 2013. Photograph: Ben Stansall/AFP/Getty Images

It is no surprise that Bono and Bob Geldof, the two leading celebrityphilanthropists of our time, are both Irish. The Ireland into which they were born in the 1960s was caught between third and first worlds, and so was more likely to sympathise with the wretched of the earth than were the natives of Hampstead. As a devoutly Christian nation, it also had a long missionary tradition. Black babies were a familiar object of charity in Ireland long before Hollywood movie stars began snapping them up.Bono himself was a member of a prayer group in the 1970s, before he stumbled on leather trousers and wrap-around shades. Scattered across the globe by hunger and turmoil at home, the Irish have long been a cosmopolitan people, far less parochial than their former proprietors. Small nations cannot afford the insularity of the great.

  1. The Frontman: Bono (In the Name of Power) (Counterblasts)
  2. by Harry Browne

Besides, if you were born into this remote margin of Europe and yearned for the limelight, it helped to have an eye-catching cause and a mania for self-promotion. Rather as the Irish in general were forced by internal circumstance to become an international people, so men like Bono and Geldof could use their nationality to leap on to the world stage.


Bono belongs to the new, cool, post-political Ireland; but by turning back to the old, hungry, strife-torn nation, now rebaptised as Africa, he could bridge the gap between the two. Even so, he has not been greatly honoured in his own notoriously begrudging country, or elsewhere. Harry Browne recounts the (perhaps apocryphal) tale of the singer standing on stage clapping while declaring: “Every time I clap my hands, a child dies.” “Then stop fucking doing it!” yelled a voice from the crowd.

Paul David Hewson’s rise to fame also coincides with the postmodern decline ofpolitics into spectacle. What more suitable politician than a rock star in an age of manufactured sentiments and manipulated images? Having strayed in from showbusiness, Bono can present himself as outside the political arena, speaking simply from the heart; but his fame as a musician also means that he has a constituency of millions, which means in turn that the political establishment are eager to have him on the inside. For all his carefully crafted self-irony (how ridiculous for me, an overpaid rock star from working-class Dublin, to be saving the world!), the inside is a place he has never betrayed any great reluctance to occupy. Since an outsider is unlikely to know much about global economics, he is likely to take his cue from the conventional wisdom of the insiders, which is why Bono is both maverick and conservative.

One result of his campaigning has been a kind of starvation chic. In this impressively well-researched polemic, Browne recounts how Ali Hewson, Bono’s wife, praised the work of her company’s Paris-based clothes designer for being influenced by dusty African landscapes. She admired “the way some of the clothes look like they’ve been worn before and sort of restitched … to incorporate the continent, in a sense”. Hewson’s Messianic husband, or “the little twat with the big heart”, as Viz magazine once dubbed him, has been trying to incorporate Africa into his image for a good few decades now. Like Geldof, he inherited the social conscience of the 1960s without its political radicalism, which is why he has proved so convenient a front man for the neo-liberals.

In fact, as Browne points out, he has cosied up to racists such as Jesse Helms, whitewashed architects of the Iraqi adventure such as Tony Blair and Paul Wolfowitz, and discovered a soulmate in the shock-doctrine economist Jeffrey Sachs. He has also brownnosed the Queen, sucked up to the Israelis, grovelled at the feet of corporate bullies and allied himself with rightwing anti-condom US evangelicals in Africa. The man who seems to flash a peace sign every four seconds apparently has no problem with the sponsorship of the arms corporation BAE. His consistent mistake has been to regard these powers as essentially benign, and to see no fundamental conflict of interests between their own priorities and the needs of the poor. They just need to be sweet-talked by a charmingly bestubbled Celt. Though he has undoubtedly done some good in the world, as this book readily acknowledges, a fair bit of it has been as much pro-Bono as pro bono republico.

If Bono really knew the history of his own people, he would be aware that the Great Irish Famine of the 1840s was not the result of a food shortage. Famines rarely are. There were plenty of crops in the country, but they had to be exported to pay the landlords’ rents. There was also enough food in Britain at the time to feed Ireland several times over. What turned a crisis into a catastrophe was the free market doctrine for which the U2 front man is so ardent an apologist. Widespread hunger is the result of predatory social systems, a fact that Bono’s depoliticising language of humanitarianism serves to conceal.

Browne’s case is simple but devastating. As a multimillionaire investor, world-class tax avoider, pal of Bush and Blair and crony of the bankers and neo-cons, Bono has lent credence to the global forces that wreak much of the havoc he is eager to mop up. His technocratic, west-centred, corporation-friendly campaigns have driven him into one false solution, unsavoury alliance and embarrassing debacle after another. The poor for him, Browne claims, exist largely as objects of the west’s charity. They are not seen as capable of the kind of militant mobilisation that might threaten western interests.

Bertolt Brecht tells the tale of a king in the East who was pained by all the suffering in the world. So he called his wise men together and asked them to inquire into its cause. The wise men duly looked into the matter, and returned with the news that the cause of the world’s suffering was the king.

Bono of U2 new world order puppet

‘Bono’s positioning of the west as the saviour of Africa while failing to ­discuss the harm the G8 nations are doing has undermined campaigns for justice and accountability.’

It was bad enough in 2005. Then, at the G8 summit in Scotland, Bono and Bob Geldof heaped praise on Tony Blair and George Bush, who were still mired in the butchery they had initiated in Iraq. At one point Geldof appeared, literally and figuratively, to be sitting in Tony Blair’s lap. African activists accused them of drowning out a campaign for global justice with a campaign for charity.

But this is worse. As the UK chairs the G8 summit again, a campaign that Bono founded, with which Geldof works closely, appears to be whitewashing the G8′s policies in Africa.

Last week I drew attention to the New Alliance for Food Security and Nutrition, launched in the US when it chaired the G8 meeting last year. The alliance is pushing African countries into agreements that allow foreign companies to grab their land, patent their seeds and monopolise their food markets. Ignoring the voices of their own people, six African governments have struck deals with companies such as Monsanto, Cargill, Dupont, Syngenta, Nestlé and Unilever, in return for promises of aid by the UK and other G8 nations.

A wide range of activists, both African and European, is furious about the New Alliance. But the ONE campaign, co-founded by Bonostepped up to defend it. The article it wrote last week was remarkable in several respects: in its elision of the interests of African leaders and those of their people, in its exaggeration of the role of small African companies, but above all in failing even to mention the injustice at the heart of the New Alliance – its promotion of a new wave of land grabbing. My curiosity was piqued.

The first thing I discovered is that Bono has also praised the New Alliance, in a speech just before last year’s G8 summit in the US. The second thing I discovered is that much of the ONE campaign’s primary funding was provided by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, two of whose executives sit on its board. The foundation has been working with the biotech company Monsanto and the grain trading giant Cargill, and has a large Monsanto shareholding. Bill Gates has responded to claims made about land grabbing in Africa, asserting, in the face of devastating evidence and massive resistance from African farmers, that “many of those land deals are beneficial, and it would be too bad if some were held back because of western groups’ ways of looking at things“. (Africans, you will note, keep getting written out of this story.)

The third thing I discovered is that there’s a long history here. In his brilliant and blistering book The Frontman: Bono (in the Name of Power), just released in the UK, the Irish scholar Harry Browne maintains that “for nearly three decades as a public figure, Bono has been … amplifying elite discourses, advocating ineffective solutions, patronising the poor and kissing the arses of the rich and powerful”. His approach to Africa is “a slick mix of traditional missionary and commercial colonialism, in which the poor world exists as a task for the rich world to complete”.

Bono, Browne charges, has become “the caring face of global technocracy”, who, without any kind of mandate, has assumed the role of spokesperson for Africa, then used that role to provide “humanitarian cover” for western leaders. His positioning of the west as the saviour of Africa while failing to discuss the harm the G8 nations are doing has undermined campaigns for justice and accountability, while lending legitimacy to the neoliberal project.

Bono award from Queen Elizabeth II

Bono and awards from Queen Elizabeth II

Bono claims to be “representing the poorest and most vulnerable people“. But talking to a wide range of activists from both the poor and rich worlds since ONE published its article last week, I have heard the same complaint again and again: that Bono and others like him have seized the political space which might otherwise have been occupied by the Africans about whom they are talking. Because Bono is seen by world leaders as the representative of the poor, the poor are not invited to speak. This works very well for everyone – except them.

The ONE campaign looks to me like the sort of organisation that John le Carré or Robert Harris might have invented. It claims to work on behalf of the extremely poor. But its board is largely composed of multimillionaires, corporate aristocrats and US enforcers. Here you will find Condoleezza Rice, George W Bush’s national security adviser and secretary of state, who aggressively promoted the Iraq war, instructed the CIA that it was authorised to use torture techniques and browbeat lesser nations into supporting a wide range of US aims.

Here too is Larry Summers, who was chief economist at the World Bank during the darkest days of structural adjustment and who, as US Treasury secretary, helped to deregulate Wall Street, with such happy consequences for the rest of us. Here’s Howard Buffett, who has served on the boards of the global grain giant Archer Daniels Midland as well as Coca-Cola and the food corporations ConAgra and Agro Tech. Though the main focus of ONE is Africa, there are only two African members. One is a mobile phone baron, the other is the finance minister of Nigeria, who was formerly managing director of the World Bank. What better representatives of the extremely poor could there be?

U pay tax 2

As Bono and his bandmates took to the Pyramid Stage, activists from direct action group Art Uncut inflated a 20ft balloon emblazoned with the message “U Pay Your Tax 2?” exposing U2′s offshore tax avoidance.

If, as ONE does, an organisation keeps telling you that it’s a “grassroots campaign”, it’s a fair bet that it is nothing of the kind. This collaboration of multimillionaires and technocrats looks to me more like a projection of US and corporate power.

I found the sight of Bono last week calling for “more progress on transparency” equally revolting. As Harry Browne reminds us, U2′s complex web of companies, the financial arrangements of Bono’s Product RED campaign and his investments through the private equity company he co-founded are all famously opaque. And it’s not an overwhelming shock to discover that tax justice is absent from the global issues identified by ONE.

There is a well-known if dubious story that claims that at a concert in Glasgow Bono began a slow hand-clap. He is supposed to have announced: “Every time I clap my hands, a child in Africa dies.” Whereupon someone in the audience shouted: “Well fucking stop doing it then.” It’s good advice, and I wish he’d take it.

Bono hanging out with some other NWO criminals: 

Bono with Obama

Obama…the teleprompter reading president who bombs kids for a living and gets a peace prize.

Bono and Al Gore

The inconvenient lie that is Al Gore.

Bono and Clinton

Bill Clinton…where do I even start with this guy?

George W. Bush, Bono

Wanted war criminal George W. Bush Jnr.

Bono with Lindsey Graham

War mongering senator John McCain.

Bill Gates and Bono

Mr Eugenics himself Bill Gates.

Bono and Tony Blair

Wanted war criminal Tony Blair.

Bono and the Queen

Madame evil and best friend of mass pedophile Jimmy Savile, Queen Elizabeth II.



By Gilad Atzmon

Once again a pig-shaped balloon with Star of David alongside other ‘horrid’ symbols was integrated into Roger Water’s concert.

Some Jews are very upset.

Former Pink Floyd frontman Roger Waters’ is accused of anti-Semitism following a concert in Belgium this past weekend. Waters included imagery in his show that even the staunchest Jewish critic of Israel would refrain from using.

On a black balloon, a Star of David was accompanied by Nazi symbols. Water’s Jewish detractors insist that “the Star of David is regarded as a fundamentally important symbol in the Jewish faith.” This is actually a debatable statement, some scholars argue that the Star of David is not a Judaic symbol.  However, Jews and Zionists in particular better bear in mind that the Star of David certainly decorates Israeli warplanes and tanks that carry war crimes against civilians.  As such, the Star of David deserves to be presented along other symbols of oppression and this is not going to change even when Israel disappears.

Next to the Star of David, on the wild pig balloon, there was also a sign of oil conglomerate Shell. I believe that the message is clear.  The artist is there to succeed where our politicians and media outlets are failing: While our politicians, academia and media are practically owned by the Lobby or silence by political correctness, the artist still celebrates a relative autonomy. I believe that this fact may explain my own survival through the intensive orchestrated Jewish onslaught on my work.

Trending Central reported today that many (Jewish) viewers ‘were disgusted with what they saw. “I had a lot of fun, until I noticed the Star of David on the inflatable pig.” Said Alon Onfus Asif. “And That was the only religious-national symbol which appeared among other symbols for fascism, dictatorships and oppression of people. Waters crossed the line and gave expression to an anti-Semitic message, beyond all his messages of anti-militancy.”

The Simon Wiesenthal Centre has strongly condemned the heroic singer, they described the relevant act as a “classic anti-Semitic caricature, disgusting, widely used by the Nazi and Soviet propaganda to incite hatred against the Jews.” I believe that time is ripe for The Simon Wiesenthal Centre and other Jewish organisations to critically examine the conduct of the Jewish State and its lobby.  Such an act may eventually explain why David ended up starring on a pig balloon.

The Wandering Who? A Study Of Jewish Identity Politics, available on

They’re closing libraries in London and New York

What do New York City and London have in common?

Both are eliminating their public libraries against the will of the public and replacing them with luxury housing, using secretive, deceptive tactics. Budget cuts resulting in extremely profitable deals for . . . . whom exactly?

Last night, the original 1975 version of “Rollerball” starring James Caan came on one of the cable movie channels. When it first came out, it was one of my favorite films, portraying a world run not by civil governments answerable to the people, but by large corporations answerable only to their investors. The entire society is structured to brainwash the people that individual effort is meaningless and that only mass obedience to the corporations keeps society going. The James Caan character, Jonathan E, by becoming a superstar in a game designed to kill those who stand out, undermines the authority of the corporate executives. But one of the most interesting side-plots is that in searching for more information about his world, Jonathan discovers that all real libraries have been closed down. Yes, you can get a corporate-approved summary of any corporate-approved reading material, but all the real on Earth books have been destroyed and the contents are saved on a single giant computer called “Zero”, not unlike that huge NSA data center in Utah.

Jonathan E visits this computer with all the world’s books transcribed into it to ask some basic questions of how the world came to be dominated by corporations, only to find that Zero, in trying to evaluate all of the data stored in it, has gone quite mad (and lost the entire 13th Century in the process). That may be the fate of all that data in the NSA data center as well; simply too much to derive any meaningful answers from, especially since it relies on a most unreliable source of raw material, the public’s often exaggerated self-portraits in social media!

The Jewification Process Through Arts, Films, and Movies (Part II)

“Our way must be: never knowingly support lies! having understood where the lies begin—step back from that gangrenous edge! Let us not glue back the flaking scale of the Ideology, not gather back its crumbling bones, nor patch together its decomposing garb, and we will be amazed how swiftly and helplessly the lies will fall away, and that which is destined to be naked will be exposed as such to the world.”—Alexander Solzhenitsyn[1]

…by Jonas E. Alexis

Stan Lee

Will Eisner, Jack Kirby, Bob Kane, Stan Lee, Joe Simon, Marvin A. Wolfman, and a host of other comic book writers and artists revolutionized the superhero genre. In fact, the comic book industry in America was exclusively a Jewish creation.[2]

For Abe Novick of the Jerusalem Post, that Superman “is Jewish or not shouldn’t even be questioned.”[3] For theJewish Daily Forward, “Superman is Jewish.”[4]

One can say the same thing about France as well, with Jewish artists like Joann Sfar, Lewis Trondheim (Laurent Chabosy), and others leading the comic book scene. Sfar talks about “the influences of the philosophers Nietzsche and Levinas on his work” and declares, “I’m more of a Talmudist than a kabbalist.”[5]

E. Michael Jones suggests that the Jews’ introduction of supermenin comic books is important because Jews like Jerry Siegel and Joe Schuster, who created the superman idea, “couldn’t expunge the idea of a Messiah from their consciousness.”[6]

This sentiment makes sense when you consider that Jewish director Richard Donner, who became famous for directing the first Superman movie (1978), claimed that Jesus was “the ultimate Super Jew of his day.”[7]

Jewish writers Christopher Knowles and Joseph Michael Linsner have noted that many of the superheroes—if not all—were conceived as a form of Messiah, in essence, “the new Christ.”[8]

Just like Christ’s death, burial, and resurrection are the turning point in Christian history, the superhero’s “death is the salvation of mankind.”[9] More recently, Man of Steel director Jack Snyder declares,

I think the relationship between Jesus and Superman is not a thing we invented in this film, it is a thing that has been talked about since the creation of Superman…”[10]

In Christology, Christ had to die to save humanity. Since Jews couldn’t expunge Christ from their memory, superheroes have to die to save humanity. We see this in the 2006 movie Superman Returns, where the superhero metaphorically dies and is resurrected to save humanity.

This same metaphor is used somewhat derisively in Spider-man 2 after the hero saves a passenger train. One could also argue that this theme appears in the 2011 movie ThorMan of Steel is no different.

In an article entitled “Superman as Christ-Figure: The American Pop Culture Movie Messiah,” Jewish writer Anton Karl Kozlovic declared,

“Theologically speaking, the corporeal nature of Jesus is itself a sacred sign. The need for a deliverer ‘is expressed in the biblical messianic hope that God would send his Messiah in the form of a single human being, a person just like us, who could speak to us and show us, through human words and deeds, the way to the truth and the life.’

“Superman was the fictional, secular equivalent of that sacred hope…The title-cum-name ‘Superman’ was also equivalent to Jesus’s title-cum-name ‘Christ.’” Jesus began his earthly ministry at age thirty; “at age thirty, Superman flew out with ‘a clear idea of his messianic mission to battle evil and save Earth from its own foolishness.”[11]

Throughout the article Kozlovic compares Superman to Christ, ignorant of the fact that the concept of the superhero is part of a larger ideological/Talmudic theme. But Superman or any other superhero is nothing but a cheap counterfeit of what Christ represents.

One writer goes so far as to say that “‘for good or ill, the Jewish style, with its heavy reliance upon Yiddish Yiddishisms, has emerged not only as a comic style, but as the prevailing comic style.’ The result…was ‘the new life for American culture.’”[12]

Jewish scholar Ted Merwin admits that “because Jewish producers, actors, comics, and composers dominated the field of entertainment, New York Jewish culture had a disproportionate effect on American culture.”[13] To quote Merwin’s book title, the Jews have shaped America In Their Own Image.

In other words, this “new Christ” is not the suffering Christ as portrayed in the New Testament, but the “anti-Christ” or anti-Logos. As E. Michael Jones puts it after the release of The Dark Knight Rises,

“The Jewish superhero is also the Antichrist. The Jews rejected Christ because he was not a powerful military leader who would restore the Kingdom by military might as David had done. The Jewish Messiah is, in other words, Superman, which is to say a caricature of the real Messiah that they rejected.

“The superhero is the Jewish Messiah who brings about tikkun olam, the healing of the world, at a time of economic crisis, but in a non-communist way that did not jeopardize his standing as a good American.”[14]

In a nutshell, Jewish comic book writers quickly picked up a new way to replace the suffering Christ with “the new Christ,” the Talmudic Christ.

Like Freud, who used psychoanalysis as a pretext to attack Christianity and Western values, comic book writers promote their agendas under the guise of fiction and art. This is not my words. In 1954, Jewish psychologist Frederic Wertham realized that comic books were having an enormously negative influence on the lives of young people and directed a frontal attack against the genre in his seven-year study Seduction of the Innocent.[15]

MAD magazine, created by Harvey Kurtzman, which decades later became a very popular TV show, was allegedly creating panic by “desecrating Christmas.”[16]

Now the issue is no longer limited to the desecration of Christmas, but the abolition of Logos in the culture war and in movies.

Frank Miller, a Jewish comic book writer and film director, talks about “a clash of civilizations” and how “superheroes should be front and center.” He even believes that Jewish comic book writers like himself should use their medium as “the biggest megaphone” and blatantly states, “I am out to provoke.”[17]

In other words, comic books and films, for Miller, are weapons.

Frank Miller

Peter Sanderson of Publishers Weekly writes that Miller “pointed out all the major superheroes of the 1940s were created by Jews during a time of anti-Semitic persecution: ‘Superman was golem.’ And while he said that he ‘won’t tell Jeff Smith that Bone has got to [go on a political] crusade,’ Miller nonetheless issued a call to his fellow comics pros: ‘Let’s revive our tradition and get back on the job.’”[18]

In Jewish folklore, a golem is a Frankensteinian monster brought to life to strike out at all perceived enemies of the Jewish people. The New Jewish Encyclopedia

declares that this inanimate character can be

“given artificial life with the aid of magic or the use of a Divine name…The concept of the Golem as an artificially created human being by supernatural means was widely accepted during the Middle Ages.

“According to the legend, the most famous Golem was created in the 16th century by Judah Low of Prague, one of the great rabbis. The express purpose of these living automatons was to protect the Jews from menacing dangers…Jewish folklore has numerous Golem stories, and several modern literary works have been written on that theme.”[19]

Jewish professor Alon Raab tells us that “the Golem never failed to come to the rescue of his people when danger lurked, battling everyone from Yasser Arafat to space invaders.”[20]

Eleventh-century Talmudic scholar Rashi taught that “the golem was created by combining the letters of God’s name as revealed in the Sefer Yetzira [Book of Creation] a seminal kabbalistic text written between the third and sixth centuries C.E.”[21]

The theme of the golem has been used prominently in the work of Jewish comic book writers Uri Fink and Eli Eshed. Raab continues:

“Fink recreates the newspapers and journals of Israel across the decades, each with its unique style of graphic representation—primitive designs and fonts included—while interpolating characters into actual historical photos and paintings in a way that would make the best Stalinist artists proud.”[22]

Golem is the main theme behind Superman. Let you doubt the accuracy of this statement, listen to Larry Tye of the Jewish Daily Forward: “Superman’s creator, Jerry Siegel, acknowledges in an unpublished memoir that he was strongly influenced by anti-Semitism he saw and felt, and that Samson was a role model for Superman.”[23]

Tye continues: “The explosion of Krypton conjures up images from the mystical Kabbalah where the divine vessel was shattered and Jews were called on to perform tikkun olam, repairing the vessel and the world. No one did more of that than the Man From Metropolis.”[24]

Then Tye drops the Jewish bomb: Superman is “as indestructible as The Golem — and an inspiration to every Jewish schlump who knew there was a super being inside him.”[25]
A recent incarnation of the golem theme is found in the 2008 blockbuster movie Iron Man (and its 2010 sequel), which was written in part by Stan Lee and directed and produced by Jewish filmmaker Jon Favreau. Zack Snyder reboosts this theme with the release of Man of Steel, produced by Christopher Nolan and David S. Goyer, two individuals we shall meet in the next article.

Frank Miller and Golem

This theme of the golem wreaking havoc on all enemies has emboldened Frank Miller and other comic book writers to provoke anything they perceive as a threat to the Jewish people. Journalist Geoff Boucher writes,

“Much has been made of Miller’s politics in the wake of ‘300.’ The deliriously violent and stylized sword film is based on a Spartan battle in 480 B.C., and although Miller wrote and drew the story for Dark Horse comics a decade ago, in film form it was received by many as a grotesque parody of the ancient Persians and a fetish piece for a war on Islam. Miller scoffs at these notions. ‘I think it’s ridiculous that we set aside certain groups and say that we can’t risk offending their ancestors. Please.’”[26]

Great! If Miller truly believes this, he then should help us destabilize the political power of the Jewish police state around the world. Why should decent Germans be put to prison if they just dare to raise a question about the “Holocaust”? Just a quick example here.

Germar Rudolf

Germar Rudolf was a German chemist who was working at the famous Max Plank Institute and believed in the gas chamber story until he went to examine the sites as a chemist himself. When he came out, he began to question some of the views he had previously held. His mistake was that he made his voice heard, and he not only had his Ph.D. denied, but lost his job and had to flee Germany in order to avoid prison time.

After he fled to Spain and England, he settled in the United States, where he eventually got married. During his absence, criminal charges were piled up against him in Germany for the same reason, and he was denied political asylum.

Even after he married and had a child, he was deported to Germany to be imprisoned for, among other things, “disparaging the dead”! (Germar needs to send a letter to Miller.)

Rudolf ’s documents were eventually “confiscated and ordered to be destroyed, that is to say: burned in waste incinerators under police supervision.”[27] Rudolf was released from prison in the summer of 2009.

Miller sees Islam as a threat to the West and thinks that using his graphic skills to make fun of Islam is appropriate.

But what if people treated Judaism and the Talmud the same way? Would Miller feel so cavalier then? I don’t think so; there would be a loud outcry about anti-Semitism. Can Miller explain this phenomenon?

If he does not agree with Talmudic teachings, then why doesn’t he devote equal amounts of time to ridiculing Talmudic theology which has been a central force for evil in the West and in the Middle East?

The simple fact is that Miller’s work, like that of Stan Lee, Bob Kane, Joe Shuster, and others, is indirectly Talmudic by a process of osmosis. Miller’s dedication to taking down anything he sees as a threat to Judaism is revealed throughout his work, especially in his graphic novel Sin City, which he brought to the big screen in 2005 in collaboration with Robert Rodriguez (director of El Mariachi and Desperado) and Quentin Tarantino.

Both the book and the movie are laden with nudity, pornography, and pervasive, graphic violence. Miller is right: he is out to provoke.

But Miller’s provocation in Sin City is most often aimed at the Catholic Church and Western values. Sin City depicts Christianity as synonymous with the most evil entity ever. One reviewer remarked, “Crosses and Bibles appear in numerous scenes—and without fail they’re associated with death and depravity.”[28]

The overarching message from Sin City is that using graphic violence, anti-heroes and prostitutes win their own wars against the moral order.

Yet the movie isn’t really intended to connect with its viewers. Manohla Dargis of the New York Times writes that the directors’ “commitment to absolute unreality and the absence of the human factor mean it’s hard to get pulled into the story on any level other than the visceral. When stuff goes blam, you jump like someone who’s landed on a whoopee cushion. But then you just sit there, wrap yourself in the dark and try not to fall asleep.”[29]

Producers and directors have used this approach for years. For example, Menahem Golan, an Israeli producer and director who first became famous in the 1980s, made a career writing, directing, and producing films such as The Delta Force (starring Chuck Norris), which uses heroic American soldiers saving a hijacked plane to convey to the American people how evil the Lebanese government is and how much they hate Americans and Jews.

It is no accident that Golan, who often used the pen name Joseph Goldman, was a pilot in the Israeli Air Force during the Israeli War of Independence (1948-1949).

Golan was the third owner of the now defunct Hollywood film company the Cannon Group, which he once ran with his cousin Yoram Globus.

During the 1980s, the Cannon Group produced many Soviet-style propaganda movies such as Avenging Force, starring Michael Dudikoff, in which right wingers are portrayed as neo-Nazis and racists. The leader of the gang extols Hitler as “a visionary,” and says that Darwinian principle is what keeps the gang alive: “Survival of the fittest, that’s what counts. That’s why we rule and always will.”

Some American isolationists in the 1930s argued that Jews would use the media

to portray Germany in the same light.[30] Fast-forward to 1996, when Jewish producer Joel Schumacher directed the law thriller A Time to Kill, which portrays

whites as rednecks, criminals, and looters, with blacks as their victims.

After the Bar Kochba rebellion, which ended around 135-136 A.D., the revolutionary Jew figured out that military power wasn’t a guarantee of victory. Of that event, Jewish historian Solomon Grayzel writes,

“The first choice, the way of the sword for keeping the Jews alive as a group, had failed. The second choice, the way of the spirit, was now entered upon with enthusiasm.”[31]

The way of the spirit is implanting ideology and comic books, films and blockbuster movies, which can have far more devastating consequences than the way of the sword.

On the whole, Jewish revolutionaries have found spiritual and mental warfare to be much more effective than the sword. While their strategies have been updated, “the animus against Christianity” remains the same.[32]

Whether it is in movies or comic books, through the power of the written word or the power of visual images, Jewish revolutionaries directly or indirectly attacked Logos and Western culture.

Christianity, as we shall see later, is one of the main pillars of Western Culture, and if it can be undermined, then the West will eventually crumble. The attacks against it over the past eighty years or so have been extremely powerful and effective in movies.

Miller describes his new comic book Holy Terror: Batman! as “a piece of propaganda.”[33]Revolutionary/Talmudic ideas lead to graphic novels; graphic novels lead to movies; movies lead to propaganda; and propaganda invariably leads to the change of culture and thought.

George Lucas unapologetically acknowledged this years ago at the University of Southern California. He said:

“film and visual entertainment are a pervasively important part of our culture, an extremely significant influence on the way our society operates. People in the film industry don’t want to accept the responsibility that they had a hand in the way the world is loused up. But, for better or worse, the influence of the church, which used to be all-powerful, has been usurped by film. Film and television tell us the way we conduct our lives, what is right and wrong.”[34]

As Jewish ascendency became the norm in Hollywood, the American culture had changed. Quoting Jewish scholar Murray Friedman, Jones writes:

George Lucas

“The Jews transformed American society after World War II, remaking it in their image. The older generations of Protestant novelists and poets, many of whom—e.g., T. S. Eliot and Ezra Pound—had serious reservations about modernity even though their writing was ‘modern’ in form, were replaced by almost exclusively Jewish writers.

“Ernest Hemingway, F. Scott Fitzgerald, Ezra Pound, and T. S. Eliot, who came to prominence in the ‘20s, were replaced in the ‘50s by Saul Bellow, Aaron Copland, Leonard Bernstein, Philip Roth, J. D. Salinger, Norman Mailer, Arthur Miller, German Wouk, Bernard Malamud, and Alan Ginsberg. Leslie Fiedler called it ‘the great takeover by Jewish American writers.’ Friedman says the Jews not only wrote books, they also ‘taught Americans how to dance (Arthur Murray), how to behave (Dear Abby and Ann

Landers), how to dress (Ralph Lauren), what to read (Irving Howe, Alfred Kazin and Lionel Trilling), and what to sing (Irving Berlin, Barry Manilow, Barbara Streisand).’”[35]

Scholars like David A. Hollinger saw that the same thing was happening in university departments. He writes:

“By the early 1960s the large number of Jews in sociology led to faculty-club banter to the effect that sociology had become a Jewish discipline. In the literary world the triumph of Norman Mailer, Saul Below, and J. D. Salinger led Leslie Fiedler to hail ‘the great take-over by Jewish-American writers’ of a task ‘inherited from certain Gentile predecessors, urban Anglo-Saxons and Midwestern provincials of North European origin.”[36]

Hollinger of course minimized the Jewish de-Christianization of America and their take-over of intellectual life and academics, but he could not help but note that when they took over the social sciences, “Religion was increasingly private, and public discussion was increasingly secular.”[37]

Murray Friedman

What’s more, “the open profession of Christian belief in the course of one’s professional work is uniquely discouraged.”[38]

Seen in its proper context, the de-Christianization of America was essentially a Jewish movement that had deep roots in Jewish revolutionary/Talmudic activity. Hollinger does not say this explicitly because it seems he does not like the implications of this deduction.

Instead he states, “Any account of how Jews contributed to the diminution of Christianity’s influence could be construed as a criticism of Jews, and as a grist for the mill of T. S. Eliot’s ideological descendants. But this historiographical inhibition disappears if we believe, instead, that whatever may be wrong with American universities, and with America, it is not that they are insufficiently Christian.”[39]

Yet Jewish historian Murray Friedman could have helped Hollinger here. Friedman writes in his widely read study The Neoconservative Revolution: Jewish Intellectuals and the Shaping of Public Policy:

Jewish groups had come to play a critical role in the ‘de-Christianization’ of American culture.”[40] They “had successfully challenged Bible reading in the public schools and any form of state aid to parochial schools.

“So dominant had the ‘separatist’ view become that even a nonsectarian prayer prepared by the New York Regents Board in 1962 was ruled by the Supreme Court in Engel v. Vitale to be a violation of the establishment clause of the First Amendment.”[41]

The Golem and Christian Judaizers

While Jewish writers have been telling us that the superhero industry was created as a form of “the new Christ,” although this “new Christ” has been sprinkled with the writings of occultists like Alan Moore and Grant Morrison, devout followers of Aleister Crowley, as we shall see in due time, Protestant Christian publisher Tyndale House has writers such as Paul Asay trying to turn Batman “into a Christian role model,” an issue that Asay wrestles with throughout his book.

For Asay, Batman will “teach us a bit about goodness and God and our own conflicting natures, becoming an unwitting spiritual instructor.”

Asay continues to say that in Batman, “we won’t find a substitute for Jesus, but we may find a servant—even if he doesn’t fully understand it and might not always act like it.”[42]

In other words, Jewish writers are saying that Batman is a “new Christ,” but Asay is saying that he is a servant of Christ. Who is more deceived here: Jewish writers who know the creators of the superheroes inside out, or Christian Judaizers like Asay?

[1] Alexander Solzhenitsyn, The Solzhenitsyn reader (Wilmington, DE: ISI Books, 2006), 558.

[2] See Arie Kaplan, From Krakow to Krypton: Jews and Comic Books (Philadelphia: The Jewish Publication Society, 2008); Simcha Weinstein, Up,Up, and Oy Vey: How Jewish History, Culture, and Values Shaped the Comic Book Superhero (Baltimore: Leviathan Books, 2006); Paul Buhle, Jews and American Comics (New York: The New Press, 2008); Danny Fingeroth and Stan Lee, Disguised as Clark Kent: Jews, Comics, and the Creation of the Superhero (New York: Continuum, 2007); Stephen Harlan and Eunice G. Pollack, ed.,Encyclopedia of American Jewish History (Santa Barbara: ABC-CLIO, Inc., 2008), 1:469-473; Gerard Jones, Men of Tomorrow: Geeks, Gangsters, and the Birth of the Comic Book (New York: Basic Books, 2004).

[3] Abe Novick, “Super Jew,” Jerusalem Post, June 16, 2013.

[4] Larry Tye, “10 Reasons Superman Is Really Jewish,” The Jewish Daily Forward, June 12, 2013.

[5] Lauren Elkin, “French Jewish Comic Book Writer Talks,” Jewish Telegraphic Agency, May 12, 2005.

[6] Jones, Jewish Revolutionary Spirit, 30.

[7] Anton Karl Kozlovic, “Superman as Christ-Figure: The American Pop Culture Movie Messiah,” Journal of Religion and Film, Vol. 6, No. 1, April 2002.

[8] Christopher Knowles and Joseph Michael Linsner, Our Gods Wear Spandex: The Secret History of Comic Book Heroes (San Francisco: Red Wheel/Weiser, 2007), 10.

[9] Ibid.

[10] Quoted in Abe Novick, “Super Jew,” Jerusalem Post, June 16, 2013

[11] Kozlovic, “Superman as Christ-Figure,” Journal of Religion and Film.

[12] James D. Bloom, Gravity Fails, 1.

[13] Ted Merwin, In Their Own Image: New York Jews in Jazz Age Popular Culture (Piscataway: Rutgers University Press, 2006), 10

[14] E. Michael Jones, “Wall Street Rises,” Culture Wars, October 2012.

[15] See Kaplan, From Krakow to Krypton, 74-76.

[16] Ibid., 75.

[17] Peter Sanderson, “Frank Miller Speaks,” Publishers Weekly, February 28, 2006.

[18] Ibid.

[19] Bridger, The New Jewish Encyclopedia (West Orange, NJ: Behrman House, 1976), 170.

[20] Alon Raab, “Ben Gurion’s Golem and Jewish Lesbians,” Samantha Baskind and Ranen Omer-Sherman, ed., The Jewish Graphic Novel: Critical Approaches (Piscataway, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 2008), 215.

[21] Ibid., 216.

[22] Ibid.

[23] Larry Tye, “10 Reasons Superman Is Really Jewish,” The Jewish Daily Forward, June 12, 2013.

[24] Ibid.

[25] Ibid.

[26] Geoff Boucher, “Revenge of the Dark Knight,” LA Times, April 29, 2007.

[28] Steven Isaac, “Video Review: Sin City,”

[29] Manohla Dargis, “A Savage and Sexy City of Pulp Fiction Regulars,” NY Times, April 1, 2005.

[30] Kevin MacDonald, Separation and Its Discontents (Bloomington: 1st Books Library, 2004), 63.

[31] Solomon Grayzel, A History of the Jews: From the Babylonian Exile to the Establishment of Israel(Philadelphia: The Jewish Publication Society of America, 1947), 185.

[32] Jones, Jewish Revolutionary Spirit, 72.

[33] Harry Mount, “Holy Propaganda! Batman is Tackling Osama bin Laden,” Daily Telegraph,

February 15, 2006.

[34] Aljean Harmetz, “U.S.C. Breaks Ground for a Film-TV School,” NY Times, November 25, 1981.

[35] Jones, Jewish Revolutionary Spirit, 919; see also Friedman, Neoconservative Revolution, 12.

[36] David A. Hollinger, Science, Jews, and Secular Culture: Studies in Mid-Twentieth-Century American Intellectual History (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1996), 28.

[37] Ibid.

[38] Ibid.

[39] Ibid., 29.

[40] Murray Friedman, The Neoconservative Revolution: Jewish Intellectuals and the Shaping of Public Policy(New York: Cambridge University Press, 2005), 41.

[41] Ibid.

[42]Paul Asay, God on the Street of Gotham: What the Big Screen Batman Can Teach Us About God and Ourselves (Carol Stream, IL: Tyndale, 2012), introduction.



The Daily Mailreported today:

  “Newspaper forced to apologize over anti-Semitic clue in crossword puzzle

  • Tribune Media Services newspapers printed a crossword clue where the three-letter answer for Shakespeare’s ‘Shylock’ was ‘Jew’
  • In response the Anti-Defamation League asked the paper to print an apology and refrain from using clues that perpetuate negative Jewish stereotypes
  • The paper issued an apology and promised not to print the clue again”

I would suggest to remove the word Jew from the English language in order to avoid future conflict with the powerful ADL. I would also recommend to avoid using the words:  chosen, occupier, colonialist, Zionist, oppressor, Israel, Dershowitz, Madoff, capital, money, communism, socialism, Talmud, Neocon, Palestine, moral intervention, justice, peace and Iraq.

These words are clearly offensive to some and surely we do not want to hurt anyone.

And here is Shylock in Yiddish, this is the kosher version:

Dog’s Breakfast at Tiffany’s

June 8, 2013


With a danish and coffee in hand, Holly
taught modern women to chase a chimera
and eat on the run.

Dog’s Breakfast – “a mess, a muddle, a hodgepodge – something badly done.”

“Heterosexuals are portrayed as prostitutes who must get used to selling their souls in order to survive. ” 

by Henry Makow Ph.D.

In retrospect, the movie “classic” “Breakfast at Tiffany’s” (1961) was a major salvo in the Illuminati’s war on heterosexual society. We can now clearly see their goal is not “gay rights” or “equality” but making homosexuality the societal norm. 

While passed off as a “romance,” this movie was poison to heterosexuals. It set the 1960′s template where women were allowed to lose their minds and men were forced to rescue them. From that point on, it was all about their needs.

capote1.jpgThe movie was written by Truman Capote, left, a product of a broken family who became a homosexual. Like Tennessee Williams, he was championed by our Illuminati Jewish cultural controllers. His crippled, perverted vision was held up to the goyim as the last word in sophistication.

In the movie, the heterosexual Adam and Eve are portrayed in homosexual terms. Essentially they have to traverse a gay obstacle course in order to find heterosexual love and marriage.  For 1961, this movie is sick, sick, sick. Let me count the ways:

1. Holly Golightly, played by Audrey Hepburn, is a prostitute. Her appeal is strictly based on “beauty” and occasional repartee. The prostitute part is glossed over and she is portrayed as a “party girl.” She is looking for some nebulous security represented by the store Tiffany’s.  She spends her time trolling for a rich husband. Are we supposed to believe this woman is attractive?

2. Her suitor, Paul Varjak, played by George Peppard, is a writer. He is also a prostitute, supported by a richer older woman played by Patricia Neal as though she were still in The Fountainhead.

In other words, heterosexuals are prostitutes who must get used to selling their souls in order to survive.  Holly and Paul both agree they would marry each other for money in a minute if they had any. “I need money and I’ll do whatever it takes to get it,” Holly vows.

paul5.jpg3. Everything Holly does is designed to emasculate Paul. She wants him as a “friend” only. Sleeps in his arms. Whistles down a cab when he can’t. Throws his “arrangement” in his face. She gives mixed signals and blows hot and cold. This became the typical neurotic behavior of modern women.

4. There is a sick subplot where we learn Holly is really from Texas and was married at age 14 to “Doc,” a vet played by Buddy Ebson, a man easily 40. She claims the marriage was “annulled” but obviously they had a sexual relationship.

5. In order to make this crap palatable to heterosexuals, Holly and Paul have to overcome their moral lapses and find their way to each other. But Holly is a royal pain-in-the-ass to the end.  Even after Paul dumps his gigolo gig, finds a job and declares his love, Holly is set on going to Brazil with a rich heir she has met. When he dumps her, she is still intent on going to track “the 50 richest men in South America.” She tells Paul that  she doesn’t want “to belong to anyone” or be “put in a cage.”

“I don’t know who I am.” She is a screwball to think marrying for money is not being put in cage.

7. This is the homosexual-feminist message of the movie. Get used to being a whore. Forget about marriage and family. Women “don’t know who they are” have to “find themselves.” This is the way the novel ends. But in order to sell the movie to unsuspecting goyim, they tack on a romantic finale. 110 minutes of homosexual dysfunction; five minutes of heterosexual romance. Paul tells her she is afraid of reality and walks away. She chases after him. Passionate kisses in the rain….  Not one minute of real life.

fruitcake.jpg(left. fruitcake anyone?) 


Breakfast at Tiffany’s is another reminder that Hollywood, and popular cult-ure in general, are devoted to Illuminati (satanist) social engineering. They have been subverting western Christian culture from the get-go; and the promotion of homosexuality, which is so obviously socially destructive, is a big part of it.

The reason my generation had to “search for our identity” is because our primary identity as men and women (protectors and providers, wives and mothers) was constantly being attacked and eroded by the Illuminati. [The institution of marriage was designed  to provide for women and children, so society can successfully procreate. Most gays want neither marriage nor children. Thus marriage is a distinctly heterosexual institution; it is being redefined as gay in order to destroy it. ]

In 2012, Breakfast at Tiffany’s  was deemed “culturally, historically, or aesthetically significant” by the United States Library of Congress and selected for preservation in the National Film Registry.  Considered “iconic”, it set an example for the 1960′s generation. Women wanted to be Holly Golightly just as a generation later they wanted to be Carrie Bradshaw. (Sex in the City was also written by a homosexual.)

Thanks to Illuminati feminist mind control, women exchanged socially secure and honored positions as wives and mothers to raise children alone in poverty. Truly a dog’s breakfast.

Yes Virginia, we are satanically possessed.

First Comment from Dan: The iconography of a sick society. This is what influenced 60′s women. 

“Holly Golightly”  was based on Capote’s own mother – Lillie Mae Faulk -an emotionally arrested nymphomaniac who spent a lot of time with men in hotels in New York City while Truman was a boy.  Missing from “Breakfast at Tiffany’s” was mention of a five-year-old son locked up in his mom’s hotel room while she was out with men.  Capote’s real surname was Persons.  His real father’s was Archie.  His mother gave him the Capote name through another marriage when Truman was eight.

Capote was the product of New Orleans lust between a teenage girl and a traveling salesman. Souring quickly on the marriage, she forced Truman’s father to file divorce by having sex with other men.  When Truman was four, she moved to New York in search of wealthy men to support her fantasy of being a Southern Belle.  In reality she was merely a physically beautiful orphan from an average background.  Literary historian Andreas Brown wrote of her, “…a case of arrested development in the sense that she pursued adolescent values well into her thirties. She married the first fellow who came along who had any money.”

Growing up in hotels with a loose woman as a role model of women, exposing him to a revolving door of amoral strangers is a well-known classic environmental cause of homosexuality.  She told Truman her job was “hostessing”.  Though Capote never revealed that Holly was based on his mother, he said of Holly that she “was not precisely a call girl. She had no job, but accompanied expense-account men to the best restaurants and night clubs, with the understanding that her escort was obligated to give her some sort of gift, perhaps jewelry or a check … if she felt like it, she might take her escort home for the night.”   Whatever the job description, she was very successful at it.  She became a socialite in Manhattan for her reputation with hostessing parties for the elite.
(This is Illuminati stuff – the right guests are quietly invited to the ‘real’ party in other rooms. These may have involved ‘call boys’ for homosexual politicians.  Capote knew a lot more about the ‘secret society’ of Manhattan elite than he wrote about.).

Capote never mentioned whether he was molested by any of his mother’s men, though he was so effeminate by the time he reached puberty that his mother sent him off to a military school.   Meanwhile she changed her name to ‘Nina’.

Capote’s career as a writer succeeded early.  When he got the phone call to tell him Nina had committed suicide a few weeks before her 49th birthday with a bottle of Seconal, he said, “She didn’t have to die.  I have money.”

Lillie Mae Faulk – The Real Holly Golightly

Graham Ovenden walks free after judged no longer a sexual threat

‘Soft sentence’ for artist convicted of historic sexual abuse of children, infuriates police and campaigners

Graham Ovenden arriving at Plymouth crown court

Graham Ovenden arriving at Plymouth crown court, where he received a 12-month sentence suspended for two years. Photograph: Rod Minchin/PA

A celebrated artist who had been convicted of a string of sexual offences against children has defiantly compared himself to Oscar Wilde after he has walked free after a judge concluded he was no longer a threat to youngsters.

Graham Ovenden, 70, whose explicit portraits of young naked girls have hung in galleries across the world, had been found guilty of abusing child models in the 1970s and 1980s, but to the frustration of police officers was only handed a suspended sentence.

Though the sentencing judge Graham Cottle told Ovenden he was sure had a sexual interest in children and said that if he committed the offences now he could face up to 14 years in prison on one of the charges alone, the artist was given only a suspended 12-month jail term.

Speaking to the Guardian on Monday, before he was sentenced, Ovenden said he was unrepentant and his sales had not suffered: “My reputation is impugned but in the art world fame and infamy are the same thing – look at Oscar Wilde. One of my paintings sold well at auction three weeks ago. It hasn’t buggered up my market at all. But I don’t wish to go to prison. I’m innocent at every level.

“If Christ was to walk this Earth again and utter those quite wonderful words, ‘Suffer little children to come unto me’, he would probably be arrested as a paedophile and crucified.”

Privately police, who have investigated Ovenden for years, were furious he did not receive an immediate custodial term. Detective Inspector Paul Maddocks, who led the investigation, thanked Ovenden’s victims for coming forward to give “harrowing evidence” at his trial and added: “He has been convicted of the sexual abuse of children, this trial has not been about art.”

The decision to allow Ovenden his liberty was greeted with dismay by groups who campaign for the victims of sexual abuse. Peter Saunders, chief executive of the National Association for People Abused in Childhood, said: “It’s an absolutely outrageous decision. A suspended sentence is not appropriate for such serious crimes and it doesn’t take into account the suffering inflicted on the victims.

“The issue of whether he poses a threat to society should be irrelevant. The judiciary is sending out the message that this crime is not taken seriously.”

Conservative MP Priti Patel said: “Sex offences, particularly against children, are extremely serious crimes. It is disgraceful that the severity of these offences has not been reflected in the sentence handed out. The victims have been let down and this soft sentence will send the wrong message out.”

Outside Plymouth crown court after the hearing, Ovenden refused to apologise to his victims and vowed to appeal against his conviction, continuing to insist that his work was about showing children in a “state of grace”.

Sentencing Ovenden, Judge Graham Cottle told him he cloaked his sexual interest by claiming it was an artistic one. Cottle said a “stream” of young girls had arrived at Ovenden’s home, Barley Splatt on Bodmin Moor in Cornwall, to be photographed. “The girls had no understanding at that time of the true purpose behind what you were doing, a purpose that was undoubtedly sexual,” the judge said.

Ovenden was convicted by a jury earlier this year of one indecent assault and six counts of indecency.

The judge said one of the indecency offences Ovenden was convicted of – asking a girl to touch him while they were in a bath together – could today be treated as inciting a child to engage in a sexual act, carrying a maximum jail sentence of 14 years.

But Cottle said he had to take into account the sentencing regime in place at the time of the offences, between 25 and 40 years ago, before tougher laws to protect children were brought in.

He had also considered Ovenden’s age, that he had no previous convictions, had endured a “steep fall from grace” – and said he did not consider him a danger to children now.

Defending, Christopher Quinlan QC told the court that Ovenden, a former pupil of pop artist Sir Peter Blake, had suffered a blow to his reputation. Some of his works have been removed from the Tate’s online collection.

An interesting perspective on Sir James Savile.

The website Vigilant Citizen covers Pop Culture in depth, so (apart from recommending this appraisal of I Pet Goat) I’ll leave it at that.

Why all the zombie movies?

I went to see World War Z. It was a carbon copy of the Will Smith zombie movie I am Legend. And since I am well aware of predictive programming, I beg to question WHY. I would also like to question WHY have there been so many zombie movies lately, similar or not?

In both World War Z and I am Legend, the zombies are created by a virus. Minor tweaks in plot have world war z with the zombies active during the day time as well as night time, and the disease spreading by bite and becoming fully active in 12 seconds. But let’s look at the similarities here – Both have their roots in a virus. Both have society going down to isolated pockets. Both fully justify killing of the zombies, who are actually just people with a disease. Both have full societal lock down as the solution to the problem. And both have no cures for the zombies. In fact, other zombie movies, according to my Mexican friends have the same basic theme, and this last one, World War Z was the tipping point which caused the question, WHAT DO THE ELITE HAVE PLANNED FOR US, WHY ALL THESE VIRUS BASED ZOMBIE MOVIES?

And I would also like to ask, WHY has our military trained for a “zombie apocalypse”? Very creepy stuff.

I would like to explain something here – and that is that the virus/zombie meme is an old one in biotech. Rabies is exactly that. Rabies is a viral infection that causes zombification of it’s victim, in such a way that the zombie wants to bite everything that moves, only to infect whatever gets bitten with rabies and the process repeats itself. World War Z actually cites rabies as the root for it’s own zombie apocalypse. So we already have, in nature, the zombie disease that these movies speak of. The problem with getting rabies to spread is two fold – one is that it takes a while for rabies to manifest itself, so there is plenty of warning someone is going wacky before they get so wacky they start biting, and the other is that rabies is only spread via bite. Leave it to the biotech industry to break those two barriers to the spread of rabies. I think they have.

I think these zombie movies may be preparing us for the mindset the elite want us to have before they actually try to trigger a “zombie apocalypse”. And if they do trigger this apocalypse, you can count on the military shooting anyone who does not stay in quarantine, in their own homes just like in the movies, or in whatever camps are set up for this scenario. No doubt the elite could care less if they crush the economy with their little stunt, they have their holes in the ground with unlimited food, and they want to get rid of billions of us anyway. Don’t think it is past them to pull the zombie stunt which would kill millions from starvation due to a collapsed economic system, and millions more who will be shot because they violate quarantine. The virus would not even need to be real, but to add spice, I think it would be.

I strongly suggest people pay attention to any new outbreaks in the press, and at the first sign of ANY governments taking action such as quarantine, bug out with whatever you have to wherever you have decided to bug out to, certainly you will be better off in your bug out location than in the city where it is easy picking.

Addictive digital blocks have a secret agenda

By Rhys Darby

Minecraft puts a monstrously modern twist on old-school Lego.

Minecraft zombies are capturing the world's children.

Minecraft zombies are capturing the world’s children.

Are your kids getting a little obsessed with a game called Minecraft? It feels to me like there’s a global movement being run by a secret society intent on mind-controlling our children.

If you haven’t heard of Minecraft, then you probably don’t have kids. Or you’re part of an Amish community enjoying the ignorant bliss of living off the land. Actually, Amish would be great at playing Minecraft. The entire objective of the game is to essentially live off the land.

The player must create a world of their own devoid of all technology apart from the rudimentary axe which they can use to chop down trees. Now having said that, I should probably stop right there and question that, shouldn’t I? Are we teaching our kids to chop down trees? That seems wrong in this day and age. Anyway I’ll continue …

The player or players, let’s face it there’s millions of them, must build their entire environment including buildings, paths and waterways.

I have to admit, it really does look fun and it provides the same creative buzz as Lego. The main difference of course being that individual block selection is as quick as a flick on the computer.

There’s no swishing of the hands through large buckets of Lego pieces trying to locate a tiny door frame, only to find the door part is missing. Now there’s a rather frightening aspect to the game I haven’t mentioned yet …

You see, once you’ve built your lovely house you’d better make sure you can lock yourself in it before nightfall. Why? Hmmm yeah, because that’s when the flesh-eating zombies come out!

Last week we had some friends over for dinner. (I’m talking real-life now.) We invited two couples with children of a similar age to our eldest boy. After an initial patch of shyness which consisted of my son Finn walking around with his face covered entirely by clothing so he appeared “invisible”, the kids managed to find solidarity by getting out the iPads. As we adults conversed over salad and wine the kids connected themselves to Minecraft online. All four of them were able to play the same game via separate devices. The only one missing out was my little 3-year-old who dressed up as Batman and made several attempts to wrestle everyone to the ground.

Kids all over the world are obsessed with this computer game and I think the main issue we have as parents is that we can’t understand why and that scares us.

Is there some hidden meaning behind it all? Are our children using this game as a communication device so they can plot our demise?

Or are they being secretly trained by some bloke in Sweden in anticipation for an upcoming zombie apocalypse?

I still look up at the skies in the vain hope that one day massive alien bricks will fall and only my generation will know how to save the planet … by rearranging them in the right order.

The Beatles — Illuminati Mind Controllers

August 5, 2012

Picture 245.png

(The original cover of the 1966 “Yesterday and Today” album: Beatles got a good laugh from abortion.) 

The Beatles were an Illuminati creation.
Their songs were written for them and
handlers scripted their actions and words.
They demonstrate that popular culture is really mind control.

By David Richards

In his book,  The Committee of 300, former MI6 officer John Coleman reveals the Beatles were a psychological operation run by the Tavistock Institute for Human Relations.

The Beatles were created to advance the formation of a corrupted Brave New World-style slave populace. This agenda kicked in big time during the 60s, with rock groups acting as social agitators.

Free love, drugs and rock music were promoted. To replace Christianity, the Illuminati introduced the New Age Movement: spiritual doctrines that do not require the individual to follow the Moral Law. (See this interview with John Coleman.)

The Beatles were presented as anti-establishment but received endless mainstream media attention. In 1965, they received MBEs (Members of the Most Excellent Order of the British Empire) from the Queen.

Picture 244.png


The occult references in the Beatles work prove they were Illuminati puppets.

A promotional photograph for the Yellow Submarine album shows John Lennon flashing the devil horns. Paul McCartney makes a ’666′/EYE OF HORUS hand sign.

The front cover of the With The Beatles album shows their faces half in shadow. This is the ‘One Eye of Horus’ that is epidemic in the music industry today. The black/ white duality is the Masonic doctrine to balance good and evil.

A Beatles compilation was released in 1988 titled ‘Past Masters’. Past Master is a Masonic term used to describe the former Worshipful Master of a Masonic Lodge. The album contains exactly 33 songs!

In the film, ‘The Magical Mystery Tour,’ the Beatles use a magic wand to cast spells on unsuspecting members of the public. Magic wands are made from holly trees (hence Holly-wood) and are the instrument of the occult magician who has his audience (the populace) in a trance. The film features several Masonic handshakes.

The songs also feature occult lyrics. The song ‘Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds’ refers to Lucifer in the sky with “diamonds” (aka “stars”, the Dogstar Sirius representing Lucifer).


(left. rare photo of John, Yoko & Andy Warhol having a gay time)

The track ‘Across The Universe’ is about demon possession. John Lennon sings ‘gai guru deva’ (all hail to the devas). In Theosophy, a deva is a spiritual entity, i.e. demon, which exists behind the scenes manipulating and directing human behavior. Luciferians believe they are possessed by these entities when they rape, torture and kill innocent victims.

Four working class young men could not have written these songs! The Beatles were originally a hack rock ‘n’ roll cover band playing in the red light district in Hamburg. We are supposed to believe that only a few years later they composed songs with deep occult meanings!


The Beatles behavior was scripted by handlers who knew the agenda behind the group.

The drug agenda was pushed in the infamous interview Paul McCartney gave with the BBC in 1966, when he ‘admitted’ to taking acid four times.

The interview was intended to cause controversy, which it did, and encourage young people to try LSD. If the BBC were really against drug use, they wouldn’t have broadcast the interview to millions of people.

Once we realize that the Beatles were supposed to turn young people against Christianity, their anti-Christian sound bites look scripted.

In 1963 Paul said, “Christianity doesn’t fit in with my life.” In 1966 John was more forthcoming, telling Newsweek, “Christianity will go, it will vanish and shrink. I needn’t argue about that. I’m right and will be proved right.”

In the 60s, the big record labels had total control over artists. Do we believe the Beatles could have spouted anti-Christian sentiment in opposition to their label EMI?

Their photo shoots were also clearly designed by Illuminati handlers.

A shocking example is the alternate cover to the ‘Yesterday/ Today’ album that pictures the Beatles covered in the body parts of dead babies. This was a sick laugh at abortion, the inevitable result of the free love agenda the Beatles were promoting.

pepper.jpegThe front cover of the Sgt. Pepper album features the Beatles ‘heroes.’ They include a whole host of Illuminati stooges: Aldous Huxley, Karl Marx, Aleister Crowley, Mahatma Ghandi, HG Wells and George Bernard Shaw among others. Tellingly, it includes cutouts of the Beatles from their early days. Is this an admission that they also served the Illuminati?


I bought all the Beatles albums when I was a teenager. I loved the music but felt something was wrong. The songs were melodically perfect but lacked emotional resonance. Now I know why: the group was an Illuminati creation.

After learning this information about the band, I listened to the music again. Now that I can hear the malevolent agenda behind the songs; they’re ruined for me.

The Beatles made the West more degraded, divided and weak.

Journalist David Noebel summarized it well in 1982, when he judged the impact John Lennon had on music.

“The present rock ‘n’ roll scene is one giant, multi-media portrait of degradation-a sleazy world of immorality, venereal disease, anarchy, nihilism, cocaine, heroin, marijuana, death, Satanism, perversion and orgies.”

In the style of true Satanists, the Beatles sold this sickness as “Love,” a reminder that the world is controlled by a satanic cult, the Illuminati, that hates God, and hates you and I.


David Richards is a 24-year-old British citizen who teaches English in Mongolia.

MAKOW COMMENT: We are unconscious of how popular music is used  to control our feelings and actions. Most songs make a religion out of “love” and make us seek a non-existent ideal mate instead of God, obedience to whom is the principle of our self-development, i.e. religion.


Adorno & the Radio project

Bankers Behind the Counter Culture

Tavistock Institute – Best kept Secret in America

David Livingstone - Age of Aquarius – Sex Drugs & Rock & Roll

John Lennon’s Born-Again Christian Phase

First Comment by Al Thompson:

One of the most destructive forces that was unleashed upon western civilization by the Beatles was the promotion the pagan Hindu religion.  This was primarily done by the introducing of Transendental Meditation and the practice of yoga into the mainstream public.  Of course, this is actually called for in the Protocols of Zion by the open worship of Vishnu.

“12. All our newspapers will be of all possible complexions – aristocratic, republican, revolutionary, even anarchical – for so long, of course, as the constitution exists …. Like the Indian idol “Vishnu” they will have a hundred hands, and every one of them will have a finger on any one of the public opinions as required. When a pulse quickens these hands will lead opinion in the direction of our aims, for an excited patient loses all power of judgment and easily yields to suggestion. Those fools who will think they are repeating the opinion of a newspaper of their own camp will be repeating our opinion or any opinion that seems desirable for us. In the vain belief that they are following the organ of their party they will, in fact, follow the flag which we hang out for them.” (Protocols of Zion)

7. Our kingdom will be an apologia of the divinity Vishnu, in whom is found its personification – in our hundred hands will be, one in each, the springs of the machinery of social life. We shall see everything without the aid of official police which, in that scope of its rights which we elaborated for the use of the GOYIM, hinders governments from seeing. In our programs ONE-THIRD OF OUR SUBJECTS WILL KEEP THE REST UNDER OBSERVATION from a sense of duty, on the principle of volunteer service to the State. It will then be no disgrace to be a spy and informer, but a merit: unfounded denunciations, however, will be cruelly punished that there may be development of abuses of this right.”  (Protocols of Zion)

So it is obvious to me that the so-called “Jews” have promoted the pagan beliefs of Hinduism.  One might ask: What does a Jew have to do with a Hindu?  I’m not really sure, but it seems to me that if one is a pagan, they will use anything evil to promote their agenda.  The definition of a Jew can mean almost anything just as the definition of a Christian.  Here, the so-called Protocols of Zion are intrinsically Hindu in nature and of course evil is at the core of the writing.

“Later the Beatles lead the way for many Americans into pagan religion with visits to Guru Maharishi Mahesh Yogi.”  The Beatles did indeed lead the way to promoting the gurus and the Hindu religion was thrust upon western civilization through the music of the Beatles and other various groups.  And of course, every time I point this out I get slammed for it.  So much for religious tolerance.  Today, the practice of yoga is pervasive throughout society and everyone that I know who practices it becomes completely unglued and unreasonable if I criticize it.  The problem is that the practice unites a person with some kind of “divine being” which is not God the creator, but some kind of “consciousness” by which the mind is emptied.  There’s even so-called “Christian” churches that have yoga classes.

Music has an extraordinary way of twisting the mind.  I used to listen to George Harrison’s Hare Krishna song over and over again.  I like the song but wondered about its meaning and intent.  I now realize that it was most certainly a plan to turn the young people over to paganism.  People who are critical of Zionists should be asking the question as to why Hinduism was promoted in the writing of the Protocols of Zion.  What do Jews have in common with Hindus?  Maybe the made up the story about Christ too.  Or, the Christ represented by mainstream “Christians” is really Vishnu.  There are all kinds of possibilities.  If it wasn’t for some early Christian writings that I read over the last years, I would have completely given up on Christianity.  This is why I try to stay away from governments and religions as they are too inconsistent in their doctrines to be of any value.

As a former musician, I have observed that music has the frightening power to get people to do things they wouldn’t normally do.  It is almost like a drug.  What is interesting is that there is no warning in any of the scriptures about any kind of music.  It’s probably like anything else: it’s not offensive in and of itself, but it will be the content that will determine whether it is good or bad.  In the case of the Beatles, it was all crap.

Comments for “The Beatles — Illuminati Mind Controllers “

Imani said (September 3, 2012):

The essay by David Richards strikes me as poorly researched, biased against pop music as a threat to Christianity. I have a great deal respect for the Beatles, however, my response here isn’t as a diehard fan threatened by new information. I am simply challenging the theories posited by Mr Richards.

To begin, I’d read about the ‘Tavistock theory’ before in John Coleman’s book on THE COMMITTEE OF 300. There are a couple of problems I have with it: First of all, without wanting to get to technical, Adorno’s background was apparently in 12 tone/atonal music. Music by the likes of German (Jewish) composers Schoenberg, Webern and Berg fits the bill. The Beatles music is rooted in tonality, which is the language of Western popular song, be it folk, blues, music hall and classical music – and only ever approaches the atonal sound when they got to one or two of their later period psychedelic songs. Anyone who cares to take the time to familiarise themselves with the aforementioned composers will get some idea of what I mean.

Secondly, there’s the notion that the band were a Trojan horse for, amongst other things, new words to be added to the vocabulary: Taken from a site dealing with The Aquarian Conspiracy:

New words and new phrases–prepared by Tavistock– were introduced to America along with the Beatles. Words such as “rock” in relation to music sounds, “teenager,” “cool,” “discovered” and “pop music” were a lexicon of disguised code words signifying the acceptance of drugs and arrived with and accompanied the Beatles wherever they went, to be “discovered” by “teenagers.”

‘Rock’ was a word that was in common parlance in the black American community, slang for a musical descriptive term, and in other contexts, ‘rock’ meant ‘sex’ (‘rock n roll’)…and ‘cool’ also as a terminology was commonly used in the music/hipster community, especially in jazz circles. The point is, Tavistock didn’t invent these terms and as I mentioned earlier, I’m doubtful about Adorno being behind the band’s work.

I do say that it’s highly plausible that the institute directed the 60s youth movement; I only question the actual extent of their involvement. Could it be that the Tavistock theory is just a big red herring?

Finally, the notion that Lennon’s ‘Imagine’ was some clandestine hymn and manifesto to the new world order is ridiculous. By this ‘logic’, then Bob Marley’s songs of united humanity were also doing the work of controlling elites.

Evan said (August 7, 2012):

The Beatles do seem to be the band that never dies. A year or two ago, I remember the PR campaign and television performances that occurred when the powers that be found out that too many young people didn’t know who Paul (Faul/William) McCartney was! It was a disgusting display of mind control and propaganda, and it shows that they really can’t let the influence of the Beatles naturally go the way of the dodo, there’s too much power in it.

Anyways, great article, and anyone who’s interested in the darker side of the 60s music scene should check out Dave McGowan’s Laurel Canyon articles over at

Henrik said (August 7, 2012):

Listen to the Hare Krishna mantra on My Sweet Lord, and to Here Comes The Sun which Harrison dedicated to Srila Prabhupada. Most of your articles are good, but not this one! Pls see the Beatles fans, are they demonic? Certainly not. The Beatles changed The Soviet Union and now this world needs the Beatles music more than ever. The Beatles songs remain the same, but some people’s ears and taste of music have become dull.

Bruce said (August 7, 2012):

I just want to say that any intelligent, inquiring mind, and even a blind man can sense there was something amiss about the Beatles. Not only them but the Rolling Stones as well, and the evolutionary mind set of other 6o’s radical rocks groups. Those who have responded on this article such as Brian, Justin, and Nigel are the usual knee jerk reactionaries who offer no sense pf information to the contrary of convincing rebuttals. We’re still waiting I suppose on Justin to inform us on how Mr Coleman has been discredited; plus the fact that Justin speaks in circles. It is really comical to watch people wake up out of their sense of reality they have formed in their minds; as the German philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer quoted, the truth is passed through three stages: first it is ridiculed, secondly it is violently opposed, and thirdly and last it is accepted as self evident.

Jennifer said (August 6, 2012):

I have friends in the music industry. One who wrote some of Michael Jackson’s songs but he had to sign a contract of silence.
I know other song writers and insiders who say all the recording artists use multiple sources of musical input and help.

And there is another aspect too: Group Dynamics. In Group Dynamics the sum is much greater then the individual parts.
Creativity can reach unimaginable heights in a group. The Beatles, their helpers, and muses obviously had an amazing group dynamic.

You give an artist –like a flower –sun, water –the perfect conditions and they can flourish.
The Group funding that bill also has their agenda.

Monica said (August 6, 2012):

I absolutely loved this article, although it barely scratches the surface of the depth of this psy-op thrust on society and found it amusing reading the comments.

Most comments defending Paul and John were obviously made by people who are not musicians, just sentimental culture-programmed Beatles fan-boys, as anyone who plays a guitar will tell you you can’t just “pick up a guitar and play a Beatles song by ear”.

The chording is a carefully constructed web which comes close to but doesn’t quite compromise conventional musical scales and tonal structures. This construction was absolutely deliberate for it produces in the mind a negatively excited (and depending on the tune itself, even frenzied) state, highly emotionally charged.

This construction is the fruit of many years of secret Illuminati research and well outside the intellectual reach of musical-theory-uneducated “musicians” like Paul and John. You can’t write music like that by “chance” or out of ignorance. Without a great deal of technical knowledge the construction would collapse into cacophonous musical chaos, the greatest proof that those two didn’t have the capability to create it. It is this perverse structure that gives the music it’s power to produce such intense emotional and sentimental attachment in it’s listeners.

Couple that with the tuning pitch of 440, imposed on the world by the British Royal Conservatory of Music between the wars, which is also proven to do the same thing but in a more subtle manner and you have a potent musical cocktail for changing morally correct behaviour (especially in public) to emotion-based irrational reactions and interactions ie; sensual license and moral relativism. BTW, ALL music since then, classical, and otherwise, both live and recorded, is contaminated with the 440 tuning pitch universally, the Royal Conservatory saw to that!

I feel sorry for everyone caught in this carefully crafted emotional trap. Too many people too sentimentally attached to a deliberately destructive part of their youth! Wake up people! You’ve been had – again! Stop believing the scripted Paul & John fairy tales about where “their” music came from! Oh, I should mention I turn 50 next year so I’m not a young Beatles-hater who just doesn’t understand.

Monica said (August 6, 2012):

I absolutely loved this article, although it barely scratches the surface of the depth of this psy-op thrust on society and found it amusing reading the comments.

Most comments defending Paul and John were obviously made by people who are not musicians, just sentimental culture-programmed Beatles fan-boys, as anyone who plays a guitar will tell you you can’t just “pick up a guitar and play a Beatles song by ear”.

The chording is a carefully constructed web which comes close to but doesn’t quite compromise conventional musical scales and tonal structures. This construction was absolutely deliberate for it produces in the mind a negatively excited (and depending on the tune itself, even frenzied) state, highly emotionally charged.

This construction is the fruit of many years of secret Illuminati research and well outside the intellectual reach of musical-theory-uneducated “musicians” like Paul and John. You can’t write music like that by “chance” or out of ignorance. Without a great deal of technical knowledge the construction would collapse into cacophonous musical chaos, the greatest proof that those two didn’t have the capability to create it. It is this perverse structure that gives the music it’s power to produce such intense emotional and sentimental attachment in it’s listeners.

Couple that with the tuning pitch of 440, imposed on the world by the British Royal Conservatory of Music between the wars, which is also proven to do the same thing but in a more subtle manner and you have a potent musical cocktail for changing morally correct behaviour (especially in public) to emotion-based irrational reactions and interactions ie; sensual license and moral relativism. BTW, ALL music since then, classical, and otherwise, both live and recorded, is contaminated with the 440 tuning pitch universally, the Royal Conservatory saw to that!

I feel sorry for everyone caught in this carefully crafted emotional trap. Too many people too sentimentally attached to a deliberately destructive part of their youth! Wake up people! You’ve been had – again! Stop believing the scripted Paul & John fairy tales about where “their” music came from! Oh, I should mention I turn 50 next year so I’m not a young Beatles-hater who just doesn’t understand.

Stephen Coleman said (August 6, 2012):

I come from a long line of professional musicians and myself was classically trained. My eldest brother got into the rock scene in the early 60′s. He is very well aware that you have to sell your soul to get anywhere in music and has refused to do so. He has performed on national TV a few times, but never was able to make enough money except to eat and pay rent in dumps. He has been told if you don’t play their game, you won’t get anywhere.

Modern rock and worse are by design to dumb down the masses. Classical music has the opposite effects, just look at the great scientists through history, most were also classical musicians.

Heavy metal, rap and other forms of “popular” music also have negative spiritual effects on us. This ugliness attracts demons into our homes and can agitate family members against each other. Ironically even alleged “Christian” rock has the same deleterious effects.

Something is amiss if you prefer ugliness to beauty and somethings is still wrong if you buy into Emanuel Kant’s “beauty is in the eye of the beholder” idiocy. Any 4 year old that has not been contaminated can clearly tell adults what is ugly and what is beautiful.

Keat’s poem “Ode to a Grecian Urn” is a wonderful argument against the pervasive effects of Kantian philosophies have on our culture today.

Willem said (August 6, 2012):

There many more levels and layers concerning the question who wrote the Beatle songs. Sure some mentioned George Martin but there is yet another very important person to be mentioned in this context: Theodor Adorno.

The Jew Adorno was a student of the important twenty century composer Arnold Schönbeg (also a Jew). Coleman, whose material lacks documentation and copied most of his stuff from Lyndon Larousse (says so the late Eustace Mullins), is responsible of yet another rumour: Adorno wrote most of the Beatle songs (and his spouse held the rights of those that were sold later to Michael Jackson: wow!). Until now I could not find any prove of this bold Coleman statement, expressed in his book The Committee of 300,

Henry, it is of great interest to look into this Adorno person because he was a mayor figure of the Frankfurter School and author and co author of many books and texts about music, popular music and esthetics. He also collaborated in the important research project concerning the Authoritarian Personality, obviously another Zionist mind control project.

Could Adorno have written most of the Beatle songs (in collaboration with others) I believe so yes because besides being a theorist Adorno was a fine pianist. A famous German Avant Garde composer told me, some several years ago, when you play Yesterday backwards you will hear a Bach Choral (I still have to try that out)!

In conclusion, I believe we should change our concept of art dramatically. Art is basically a rite of idolatry and mind control of the Global Elite and its originality is not of any importance (look e.g. in to the song writing of yet another Zionist, Bob Dylan….. it is all a big fraud). I am eager to hear any statement concerning Adorno writing most Beatles songs.

Nigel said (August 6, 2012):

Anyone can cherry pick information and present a case for a position. The lack of truth and sense in this is enormous and it discredits most or all of your other articles and I wonder if I can be bothered to take anything this site says seriously ever again.

Not impressed.


I guess you haven’t noticed that usually people are not always right or always wrong. They are right sometimes and wrong sometimes.

Your reaction is typical of many instances when my site has challenged cherished beliefs. People prefer to be duped. It’s become their identity.


Bill said (August 6, 2012):

Rather than their having been pawns, told what to do and how to do it, Lennon and McCartney were genius level creative innovators, showing the rest of the world what could be accomplished with the simplest equipment in the realm of popular music and recording. From 1964 on, their albums (and singles) were years ahead of everything around them in creative recording technology (i.e., “sound”). In partnership with Norman Smith and later, Geoff Emerick, they left everyone around them bewildered and struggling to catch up. Having the luxury of not being charged for studio time, they could, and did, take months to craft songs, with Geoff and Paul (in particular) working far into the wee hours of the morning.

In conjunction with this, the evolving quality of their music and lyrics propelled them into all-time status. In both sound and substance, they’ve never been equalled. The very fact that there’s never been another “Beatles” or even anything close to them should tell you something. Any force or individual who could “manufacture” them could (and would) have manufactured more like them.

Their association with the degeneracy and decline of that era is inarguable. But to imagine that they somehow created it is about on a par with imagining that a surfer is responsible for the existence of the wave he’s riding the crest of. Insistence to the contrary is a blatant example of the post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy.

David Richards said (August 6, 2012):

Reply to Matt–
The big groups have teams of song writers behind them. Former Clash guitarist Vince White said the band didn’t write their own songs. The song writing process was led by their manager.

This doesn’t mean The Beatles weren’t involved in the creative process at all, they could have been, but they certainly weren’t the ones calling the shots.

What happened to the Beatles after they broke up? They still had handlers and songwriters. The lyrics to john Lennon’s ‘Imagine’ are the blueprint for the NWO:

Imagine there’s no heaven…
Imagine there’s no countries
It isn’t hard to do
Nothing to kill or die for
And no religion too
Imagine all the people living life in peace
Could this really be a coincidence? Also a lot of Lennon’s behaviour looks staged. When he married Yoko Ono, he took her name, making him John Ono Lennon, instead of her taking his. This is typical Illuminati subversion. Yoko Ono herself also has ties to the occult. She released an album titled ‘I’m a Witch’ & recently came out in support of the Georgia Guidestones!

Matt said (August 6, 2012):

‘m sorry, but I can only agree with this article in-so-far as the Beatles were not squeeky clean, and certainly had a dark influence and were part of society’s downward spiral, but the idea of them not writing their own songs is ridiculous.

It is very well documented by the Beatles and others that they (mainly Lennon-McCartney) wrote their own material, with some help by their producer George Martin, who was classically trained. You can hear their music develop, and the musical directions of the different Beatles split off in different directions. Who wrote all the ex-Beatles music after they split up if it wasn’t them? Did the Institute decide not to write so much music for George and Ringo, and of different levels of quality for the different Beatles? The Tavistock Institute surely wasn’t standing there the whole time (if at all)?

Joe said (August 5, 2012):

Reply to Al Thompson: The protocols of zion were written to divide and conquer different people following different religions. They simply had to involve Hinduism to deflect the true enemies.Conversion is not allowed in Hinduism and the practice of Yoga has many health benefits. If you want, you can change the chantings to say Jesus. I wanted to know what you have to say about Jesus actually being a Hindu yogi There is also a film about this called the Man from Earth

Brian said (August 5, 2012):

OK, yeah, the Beatles and the Illuminati connection are apparent. But the author, all of 24 years old makes it sound as though they were complete mind-controlled automatons who were virtual robots.

In spite of all the negative aspects of this Tavistock creation it’s not like their basic humanity didn’t come through in some of their songs. Even though “gai guru deva” has its demon-related overtones, “Across the Universe” is not some heavy metal crap whose demonic content is ever-so obvious. It’s really quite a sweet song if you simply listen to it and don’t put all the emphasis on some Theosophical affiliation.

Both Lennon and Harrison in particular wrote some lovely music whose content shouldn’t be simply dismissed out of hand. And Lennon himself came to denounce “The Beatles”. Kind of like JFK, with both of them starting to see the light on alot of the Illuminati m.o.

Justin said (August 5, 2012):

David Richards, and the discredited John Coleman, don’t know what they are talking about. Richards has one source. And his own, uninformed opinion. That might fly in Elementary School, but it stinks, and sinks like a stone, in the real world.

“Four working class young men could not have written these songs”: They didn’t; two did, and frequently one.

And the only working class member was Ringo, who wrote very, very little. The other three members were regular Suburbanites. Any cursory research, at all, would have revealed same. They were Intelligent, and Educated.

Early British Invasion bands were only “rock groups acting as social agitators”?

The Stones, The Dave Clark Five, The Animals, Tom Jones, Petula Clark, Cilla Black, Dusty Springfield, The Kinks, Freddy and The Dreamers, The Searchers, Wayne Fontana and The ‘Mindbenders’, The Honeycombs, Peter and Gordon, Status Quo, Herman’s Hermits and Gerry and The Pacemakers were surely ‘Agents Of Destruction’, yes?

We have all the misinformed goofballs on the Internet that we can use at this time. Applications are now closed. Thanks.

Since the mass, general social rejection of “organized” religion had already occurred, The Beatles led a continuing search for the truth, and stumbled frequently, as they candidly admitted, at that time. The Beatles were very Human, and the last horse-to-escape-the-barn before “the hammer came down”, in fact. They snuck- through as an oddity, but grew rapidly to try to fulfill the Leadership Role to which WE had elected them. They still stand, Today, as the Ultimate Art Group.

Every few years we are subjected to some self-appointed “Genius”, like these “scribes”, who wants to advance himself/themselves, by trying to “expose” The Beatles. The Beatles were Real. They stand alone. Amazingly.


How has Coleman been discredited? He revealed the truth.


Matt said (August 5, 2012):

The Beatles may have been the biggest experiment ever thrust-ed upon us, by the Travistock Institute in the means of social deception. Apparently Paul McCartney died in a car accident in 1966, after leaving the studio and picking up a woman (possible agent?) in the rain on his way home. That night the Beatles were told of this news by an MI5 agent and future handler MAXWELL.

From this point on the Illuminati/Travistock Institute owned the Beatles. They held an obscure Paul McCartney look a like contest in England but never aired the winner. The winner went on to undergo plastic surgery and become Faul McCartney.

John Lennon agreed to finish the huge backlog of songs he and Paul had written. He left the band when all the original material ran out, then was shot for threatening to “go public”. The Illuminati wants to physically shape reality, and make lies/deception seem real and true.
modus operandi of the illuminati

public figures (& doubles) used as puppets to manipulate the masses;(i.e.- Pope Paul VI -imposter pope and destruction of the catholic church from within)
elimination of opposition to this elite by horizontalization (the likely assassination of James Paul McCartney with impunity);
deception of the public by a cartel of media groups controlled by a governing Luciferian elite (Illuminati);
social control through Psychological Operations (PsyOps);

Paul McCartney Really is Dead- a documentary on the audio tapes made by George Harrison on his death bed.-worth watching


Rating: 4.9/5 (15 votes cast)

A look at Zionist influence, through the Hollywood establishment, on American perceptions of Arabs.

The ████████ Conspiracy

Satanism in the 21st Century: Source Code

Rixon Stewart — April 10, 2013

 Satanism is still very much alive in the 21st century. While some manifestations are simply a throwback to more ancient forms, complete with salutes to a horned god and even human sacrifices, others are in a more contemporary guise and consequently far less easy to spot.

Source Code’s Chicago bound train that gets hit by a terror blast.

Source Code, a 2011 movie starring Jake Gyllenhaal and Michelle Monaghan, is a prime example of this. Devoid of any of the usual trappings of Satanism, it’s an intelligent and well-crafted thriller with references to “Out of Body” and “Near Death” experiences.
At least that’s how it seems on the surface. In reality, Source Code is based on a Satanic premise that’s made all the more convincing because it makes no obvious references to the occult. None whatsoever. So in the place of ghouls, demons and blood sacrifices we get a storyline that revolves around scientific research, Near Death Experiences and the War on Terror.
The fact that it is directed by David Bowie’s son and up and coming Hollywood director Duncan Jones makes it all the more intriguing. All the more so as Source Code is his first major feature.
The film begins when decorated Special Forces Captain Colter Stevens (Jake Gyllenhaal) wakes up on a train on route to Chicago with no recollection of how he got there. The last thing he recalls is fighting in Afghanistan. Nor does he know his attractive travelling companion, Christina (Michelle Monahan), although she seems to know him. Maybe intimately.
Stevens is alarmed and doesn’t know what is going on. He goes to the bathroom to regain his bearings only to look in a mirror to see he’s not staring back at himself – he is in another man’s body. Moments later a bomb explodes, ripping through the train and killing everyone on board.
Stevens isn’t killed though. Instead he wakes up to find himself strapped in a harness in a cold chamber he knows not where. In the darkness he can see a computer screen where a uniformed operative (Vera Farmiga) asks if he was able to find the bomb. He wasn’t and she tells him that time is running out and he should focus on locating the bomb when he returns.
Whereupon Captain Colter Stevens finds himself back in the train with Christina again. Only now he knows that a bomb is going to rip through the train carriage — and he has minutes to find it before it does.
That’s Source Code’s opening premise and from there Captain Stevens begins looking for the bomb. Getting closer to it and the bomber each time, before it detonates and he finds himself back in the chamber being debriefed and getting more instructions before being sent back to the train carriage again.
Nothing Satanic about that you might think. But that’s the whole point: there are no obvious references to archaic Satanism and Source Code’s all the more convincing without them. After all this is the 21st century, Satanism has moved on and Source Code presents us with a new, updated version.
After repeatedly being sent from the cold dark chamber to the Chicago bound train prior to the bomb blasts two things begin to dawn on Captain Stevens. First he may just be able to prevent the terrorist bombing. Secondly and perhaps more significantly, this cold dark chamber he returns to each time the bomb detonates is not a very nice place. Apart from being cold, dark and uncomfortable he has little real human contact with anyone beyond debriefings via his computer.
It becomes obvious why things are this way at the movie’s end; when Captain Stevens stops the terror bombing and the cold dark chamber he keeps returning to turns out to be a life-support system sustaining his severely injured body. Or at least his impression of it in his Near Death state.
Not only does Captain Stevens prevent the terror bombing but he escapes the cold dark chamber when he assumes permanent residence in the body he found himself in on the train. In effect he takes possession of it and, to cap it all he gets the girl too.
A happy ending, on the surface at least, but an ending that conceals the movie’s dark Satanic subtext.
The fact that Source Code goes along with the “War on Terror” narrative should make us suspicious from the outset. After all, there’s strong evidence that 9/11, 7/7 and numerous other “terror attacks” were carried out in collusion with Western intelligence.
However in Source Code the “terrorist” turns out to be a single white male, the inference being he’s some sort of “lone-nut, white extremist”.
Beyond abiding with the offical version of the “War on Terror”, Source Code’s sinister subtext becomes more obvious on a deeper level.
The white lights, angels and reunions with deceased loved ones often reported by those who’ve undergone Near Death Experiences are entirely absent from Captain Steven’s experience. Instead we get the Military-Banking-Industrial complex’s version of a Near Death Experience; where Captain Stevens is kept alive by a machine to fight the “War on Terror” and his experiences are otherwise limited to a cold dark chamber.

Captain Steven’s badly mangled body remains in a Near Death state on life support.

The implication being that life and consciousness are rooted entirely in the physical world.
This is further reinforced by the fact that Captain Steven’s escape from this oppressive cycle, and into the arms of an attractive woman, is facilitated through another man’s body. Furthermore he escapes not through the spiritual realm but back into the physical world.
In other words: life begins and ends in the physical world, the inference being that there is nothing more. Unless, of course, it’s controlled and supervised by the Military-Industrial-Banking complex.
Here it is worth recalling what esoteric researcher Rudolph Steiner had to say about Satan. Originally known by the ancient Persians as Ahriman, he strove to limit man’s higher evolution by keeping mankind limited to the physical world. He succeeded insofar as the elements in which he thrived were also resident in men. In their most extreme forms like greed, acquisitiveness and rampant overweening materialism, Ahriman is able to contain or at least deplete men’s enthusiasm for spiritual attainment.
Apart from being active in the world of banking, Ahriman is also very much at home in the realm of scientific materialism, where nothing is considered real unless it can be physically quantified. Ahriman is in his element here where natural remedies are anathema and where countless animals are routinely sacrificed in the name of scientific research and the pursuit of corporate profit.

Captain Coulter gets more instructions from the technocrats in control

A world where drugs and machines are able to support a life of sorts. Exactly the sort of environment where Captain Colter Stevens broken body is sustained in Source Code.

This is Ahriman’s realm and it’s also a vital part of the world we inhabit too. However, it needs to be seen in perspective and balanced with a deeper spiritual perception.
That viewpoint is entirely absent from Source Code however. Instead, we get an afterlife overseen by technocrats waging a “War on Terror”. While Captain Stevens only escapes the war and an oppressive Near Death state after one of the technocrats relents and makes a deal with him.
Again the inference being that there is no God, there are no higher powers, the Military-Industrial-Banking complex’s technocrats are the ones in charge. While those who may oppose them are no more than “terrorists”.
Or as President George Bush once remarked on the eve of the Iraq War: “Either you’re with us … or you are with the enemy”.
So where do you think your loyalty resides?

Heart of Hollywood 2012

Origin of Palestine – Remastered

ISRAHELL ON EARTH [A New Must Watch Documentary]

The Whole Story Of Zionist Conspiracy

Rating: 4.2/5 (30 votes cast)

The Last Days of the Big Lie is a documentary which debunks the disgusting liars glorified as heroes and victims in the Steven Spielberg produced, Academy Award winning “Holocaust” documentary The Last Days.

The Last Days of the Big Lie uses Spielberg’s Oscar winning hoax as a jumping off point to debunk Spielberg’s USC Survivors of the Shoah Visual History Foundation as well as the greater Holocaust Hoax.

Zombie Hasbara: ‘World War Z’ and Hollywood’s Zionist embrace

guerra mundial z estreno junio 2013
Zombies rush the wall in World War Z.

I went to the Drive-In in Atlanta Friday night, to celebrate a friend’s birthday, a beautiful night under an almost full moon. We watched This is The End and Fast and Furious 6, and two of us stayed for the 2:00 am screening of World War Z. I’m not a zombie fanatic, so other than watching the Walking Dead, I had few expectations beyond the trailers that have been on TV since the Super Bowl. So I was surprised, jarred out of the movie really, when right in the middle of the narrative, Brad Pitt’s character, Gerry Lane, travels to Israel and spends more than 10 minutes in a full-on pro-Israel propaganda piece that was as corny as it was crazy.

The Times of Israel may be only slightly exaggerating when it calls this “the greatest piece of cinematic propaganda for Israel since Otto Preminger’s “Exodus.”Not only is Israel’s fanatical Wall Building proven to be justified, against the hordes of undead invaders, and not only are Jewish victimizations paraded to justify the aggrandizement of Israeli military prowess, but it’s Israel’s supposed humanism, and multicultural inclusiveness, which in the end weakens the fragile post-apocalyptic state and allows the zombies to overrun everything. Its pretty heady stuff.

The film

Spoiler Alert: In order to deconstruct this bizarre interlude into politics at the movies, I will need to reveal most of the plot points, so read on at your own risk. Apparently, WWZ is based on the book of the same name, by Max Brooks, Mel’s son. It took many years to produce, cost about 200 million to make, and has a respectable 67% rating on Rotten Tomatoes, which ensures a wide audience and broad cultural impact for this summer blockbuster. The story centers on an unexplained global zombie pandemic that starts suddenly and engulfs the world rapidly with an onslaught of sprint-inclined zombies that rush toward their prey in huge mindless swarms. What people seem to like about the book is that it engages the global geo-politics of the zombie fall out, but it quickly reverts to neo-conservative assumptions that are played out with far less scope in the film. While the film sticks with the super fast zombies, and the compelling immersion narrative technique, its international scope is greatly curtailed, with Israel the only country besides the US that is featured in any substantive way, beyond very brief forays into Korea, Wales, and at the very end, Canada.

Pitt plays Gerry Lane, a semi-retired UN worker who reluctantly is drawn back into the field to save his family and all of humanity. His zombie-readiness credentials are listed by his agency head as field experience in the conflict zones of Kosovo, Chechnya, and especially Liberia; and with this, the racialized naturalizing of interpersonal human violence begins. After zombies suddenly swarm through New Jersey, Gerry gets his family to the safety of offshore naval vessels and then embarks on a search for patient zero, in hopes of finding a cure. In the book, this would be the outbreak of disease in China, but in the film this is South Korea, which we never really see, beyond a mostly white military unit on a US base besieged by walkers. Gerry immediately loses his South Asian medical investigator to a panic-induced, self inflicted gunshot to the head, runs several harrowing zombie gauntlets, and picks up vital intel from a deranged CIA officer who suggest that answers lie in Israel, which has somehow managed to wall itself off from the plague, and also mysteriously seems to have known in advance that it was coming. Gerry says something about “they’ve been building wall for two millennia,” and then he’s off.

Before the viewer can process whether the film is about to go down some post-9/11 Jewish conspiracy path, Gerry is landing in the Holy Land fortress-state to the site of slowly fluttering Israeli flag close-ups, triumphant marshal music, and confident IDF soldiers speaking in Hebrew, rushing around, smiling in soft filtered light close-ups. It’s the first glimpse of order, military control, and calm since the disaster has started, and its so overtly pro-military that its reminiscent of the armed forces segments in Transformers, looking almost like a commercial shot by the media wing of the armed services. [1] Filmed in Malta, the aerial and long distance wide shots do a passable job of conveying Jerusalem to an unfamiliar audience, and Gerry is soon talking to the Mossad chief, Jurgen Warmbrunn, played by a somewhat Tevya [2]-like caricature that really is redolent of Exodus.

Gerry’s already informed the audience that wall building is natural to Israel, so the reinforcement of ancient and Separation Walls is plausible, and comes as not at all veiled justification of Israel’s current and widely condemned Apartheid Wall. He questions the Mossad chief on how he knew the threat was coming, and gets a lesson in revisionist Zionist history, starting with the legitimate failure to take the threat in 30s Germany seriously, and then the same failure from similar or greater threat in 1973, when “we were almost washed into the sea,” and at the 1978 Olympics, both of which “we did not see coming.” It’s the classic, and academically disproven myth that Israel was always on the defense in its wars, and also the conflation of Palestinians and Arabs with Nazis, as ever-present existential threats to peace-loving Jews. Then we are treated to a quasi-mystical “10th Man” theorem, in which any time there is too much consensus, a 10th man in the hierarchy must consider the impossible, as a form of protection from this repeated failure to see the inevitable next assault on the Jewish people. This throw-away theory is never returned to in the film, but briefly justifies Israel’s aggressive military posture, and suggests that others in the world must follow suit to survive the coming Armageddon.

In the book, unlike the film, Cuba is portrayed as ascendant during the disaster, due to its supposedly fascist state military control of the society. Worse, South Africa rehabilitates apartheid era tactics and leaders, at the request of Nelson Mandela himself, in an effort to stave off the zombies. It creates survivalist Bantustans for the privileged, and fake safe zones where lesser humans are fed to biters/zombies to buy time for the others to regroup. So the defense-of-apartheid trope is neither accidental nor limited to Israel. While the fate of North Korea is a mystery in the book, in the film we are told it survived by the largest feat of social engineering ever: it knocked the teeth of all 13 million inhabitants out in one day, thereby preventing zombies from biting and spreading their virus after they’ve shifted. Viva totalitarianism.

In Israel, Gerry’s Mossad tour continues, showing a society safely protected by its paranoia and militarism from the outside threat, the only known safe haven as the world crumbles. At a clearing in front of the large barrier wall, near a refugee processing military checkpoint, is a spectacle of pure multicultural fantasy, in which Hassidic and secular Jews, and Palestinians sing and dance in praise of the savior state. I think I caught a Palestinian woman singing a patriotic song in Hebrew, after she grabs the mike in the celebratory frenzy. It’s a very brazen rewrite of the violence and exclusion of Israel’s hundreds of check-points, which are turned completely on their head in the film. Talking over the din of this utopian spectacle, Jurgen explains that they are letting in every human being, in a kind of equalized Right of Return for all, because every living human is one less undead to deal with later. This is the high point of the Zionist propaganda, after which things quickly fall apart. But by now Israel’s aggression and militarism have been fully justified, and it is the only safe harbor in the apocalypse. Its apartheid walls are what save it, and others wishing to survive must copy their example (as the US is doing on its southern border in real life). And we have received heavy-handed doses of Israel’s democratic, multicultural, inclusive nature, all in defiance of any basic facts, human rights reports, or even middle of the road media coverage.

Then it comes unglued. Israel’s supposed openness and multiculturalism are what does it in! Jews and Palestinians singing together in a circle get too loud, and the zombies create zombie pyramids to overrun the walls and invade the sanctuary-state. Chaos ensues and Gerry, with his IDF escort, makes his way to the airport to try to escape alive. It’s such a straight shot at the weakness of inclusion and a (fantasy) post-racial Jewish state, that the Times of Israel, again, says: “Basically, if it weren’t for those damn peaceniks, Israel would have survived. Hey, who the hell wrote this movie, Meir Kahane?”5 And below an accompanying photo of the zombie pile breaching the Security Wall, their caption: “World War Z’s zombie pyramid. Damn peace camp.” Message received.

But as the Times also states, “Okay, so Israel falls to the zombie plague, too. But… at least it lasted longer than everybody else. That has to stand for something, right?” And from here on out, Gerry has acquired an Israeli sidekick, young badass IDF soldier Segen, played by Daniella Kertesz, one of at least three credited Israeli actors in the film. As Jerusalem/Israel falls, Jewish soldiers fight valiantly with guns, grenades and hand-to-hand combat to stem the tide, and Gerry rushes to the airport. On the way, Segen is bitten and Gerry performs a quick amputation of her hand, saving her from becoming undead. They escape together, and travel to the film’s 3rd act, in the WHO offices in Wales. Segen’s now dis-abled body does not prevent her from continuing to fight on the way, but it is also used to symbolize her and the Israeli/Jewish state’s lesser status in the ranks of humanity, coming in second to the fully humanized and whole body of Brad Pitt’s Gerry Lane, whose full, passive, hetero-normative family awaits him in Nova Scotia, and gives him a reason to keep on fighting to save us all.

The final sequences, in the WHO offices in Wales, are much less broad in scope, as Gerry uses his cunning and superior intelligence to figure out that zombies only feed on healthy humans, and avoid those who they sense are sick, weak, or terminal, apparently following a precedent found amongst predators in nature. “Mother” nature is literally called a ruthless bitch by the Harvard doctor earlier in the film, but luckily (super) man [3] will overcome her with reason, so not to worry. And while I suspect my biologist colleagues will tell me this is not a very accurate depiction of predators and nature, it is a zombie film after all, and the pretense to realism and intellectual accuracy is just that, a pretense. But this analytic allows for a bizarre anti-environmentalism to cohabitate with the neo-conservative, macho geopolitics of the global narrative. [4]

So Gerry risks all to acquire the zombie-surrounded pathogen samples to test his hypothesis, purposely infects himself, and then powerfully is able to walk undetected through the undead, thus finding the cure to the global crisis. But remember, his fully able body is not actually sick, its just temporarily infected, before receiving the antidote to whatever typhus or dengue fever he selected for himself, and he will live on in full health after this mission.

World War Z’s racial hierarchy

Gerry’s method of survival is important because it confirms the total racial hierarchy of value established in the film’s narrative structure. While Segen fights valiantly on the plane and in the Welsh research facility, she and the Israeli social body are clearly secondary, tools to achieve a final solution and goal, but little more. Mystical, paranoid Jews developed a survival instinct and a vicious apartheid separation system, which allowed Gerry a space to visit and make observations about the undead menace that only his superior intelligence could bestow on the world. It is the US military, working with the UN, in the body of the selfless white, Aryan, Christian male, Gerry Lane, which occupies the apex of human subjectivity. This narrative is a perfect metaphor for the reality of the Jewish/Christian Zionist political relationship that it is based on. The Times of Israel misses this entirely, of course, as their celebration of the film’s Zionism culminates in a critique of the sub-titling in Turkey, where apparently references to Israel and Jews are replaced with the generic phrase Middle East, much to their displeasure. But in the real world, Christian Zionists mainly in the US and also scattered throughout the settler-colonies of the West, contribute more than 10 times the funding to Israel than the much vaunted Jewish communal support machine does. And it does so in the service of Israel’s Jewish defeat of unnamed Arab armies, to prepare the way for Christian rapture, during which Jews and other infidels will be converted or eliminated to create the (alarmingly mono-cultural or mono-theocratic) Kingdom of Heaven here on Earth, or in the sky somewhere.

In concluding, let’s look at the racial hierarchy of World War Z’s narrative. Gerry is the superman, for sure, who saves us all. Segen, minus her hand, is a worthy sidekick, useful like the Jews in general, in getting to the End of Times, or at least the end of the story. Almost all the others in the film are explicitly lesser in one way or another. Before being rescued by the UN helicopter after New Jersey is overrun, Gerry and his family are taken in by a kind Latino family, whose assimilated son translates their unexpected hospitality. But when Gerry tells them that he has experienced things like this before and learned that “movement is survival,” their lesser racial/rational status prevents them from leaving their home and being saved with Gerry and his family. Only the son, who has converted to the “American” way, and learned English, survives, and gets unofficially adopted by the Lanes. This liberal act of compassion is compelling, but reinforces the necessity of assimilation to the dominant culture to ensure acceptance and survival. The unassimilated parents are left in the dust.

Thierry Umutoni, Gerry’s presumptively African boss at the UN is competent, but unable to do more than recognize and deploy Gerry’s greater intelligence and skills. He also can’t adequately protect Gerry’s family, who are immediately shipped off to the Nova Scotia refugee camp when they think Gerry is dead. Gerry’s wife and kids are important, and worth saving (given their apex whiteness), but still lesser due to gender and age — passive, needing protection, unable to fend for themselves, and in the case of the children, annoyingly and dangerously irrational in the face of the threat of death. It’s a racial hierarchy that is explicitly gendered, with the patriarchal leader unequivocally at the head throughout the film, especially in the predictable Hollywood moment conclusion when the family is reunited.

Thierry assigns Gerry to guide Harvard educated Dr. Andrew Fassbach through the Korean hotzone, in search of patient zero. Fassbach, played by actor Elyes Gabel, is not white, has a British accent, and is presumptively of South Asian or Arab heritage. Gerry instructs him in what to do and expect, but on first sight of zombies as they deplane in the darkness and fog of Korea, he breaks ranks, panics, runs, maladroitly falls, and accidentally shoots himself dead. Potentially useful intelligence wasted on a lesser person, to be sure, who lacked the hetero-manly fortitude to face down the threat, thus confirming his lesser racial status, almost straight out of 19th century colonial tropes of the lesser manhood of colonized men. Korea itself is never seen, beyond the literal shadows at the edge of the US military base there. As to North Korea, all we hear is a deranged whisper of its ultra-fascist response.

In the end we are left with a prototypical kind of liberal multiculturalism that reinforces rather than challenges the hierarchies of modern white supremacy. The rational, Aryan, Christian male is at the very top, with his appended family next in line. Jews are provisionally white, therefore useful in Empire’s need to fend off the hordes of undead walkers and others at the periphery. But ultimately even the mystical Jews are expendable, en route to the final salvation. All the other Others in the narrative are even further behind in the ranks of worthy survivors. While the film definitely provides a bizarrely crude Zionist redemption narrative, and even a Kahane-esque rebuke of liberal Zionist tendencies toward peace and coexistence, the ultimate Subject of value is the Christian Zionist of US Empire, so powerful that it goes unnamed, largely unseen, even though He is always, irrevocably at the center of the story.

Its fun to speculate about what motivates the heightened zombie vogue, what psychological and social angst it reveals. On the one hand, there is the fear of declining Empire, the fear of anarchy and chaos should the bottom fall any further out of our privileged economy. This makes perfect sense, and seems to have a lot of merit. On the other hand, the zombie meme may be less about looming Armageddon, and more about a nagging subconscious awareness that the extreme inequalities of our current world order are in fact already a kind of zombie-scape, in which almost 3 billion people live in such extreme poverty, largely removed from the view of Westerners, malnourished and off the grid, that they are real life living dead in a way, and they have lots of reason to come for us, looking to eat us, or at least consume our ill-gotten wealth. Maybe it’s a little of both.

When WWZ (both the book and the film) strides into Israel, the slippage between zombie and racial-Other comes clearly into view. During an interview about his book, Max Brooks is asked by a caller in Alexandria, VA if he “compare(s) the zombies to today’s fundamentalist Islamists? i.e., unthinking, uncaring, irrational villains who kill for the sake of killing?” He replies: “The lack of rational thought has always scared me when it came to zombies, the idea that there is no middle ground, no room for negotiation. That has always terrified me. Of course that applies to terrorists, but it can also apply to a hurricane, or flu pandemic, or the potential earthquake that I grew up with living in L.A. Any kind of mindless extremism scares me, and we’re living in some pretty extreme times.” Brooks seems moored in the state of our current world, and its (political or force of nature) “zombies,” more than fear of any impending melt-down. While his work is noted for its breadth of global politics, it’s also clear that it lacks structural analysis about the causes of violence and injustice, because the privileged prefer to construct those coming for them as mindless and irrational. Maybe what we need is a narrative from the perspective of the zombie, a subaltern zombie tale in which the myth of irrationality is finally rebuked.


[1] In this case, it’s the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF), and not the US army, marines, navy and airforce shilled for in Transformers. But at least one of the people behind WWZ was also on board for Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen, and that’s Ben Seresin Director of Photography, and this may explain some of the similarity of sympathetic flag close-ups and reverential pro-military stylings.

[2] The main character in Fiddler on the Roof.

[3] I mean this more in the Nietzsche superman sense than in the comic book superman sense. Nietzsche’s superman is Man with a capital M, the rational conqueror of nature, physics, and lesser humans that also features centrally, although inverted, in the critical theories of Sylvia Wynter.

[4] Apparently the book is more ambivalent on the environmental front, with this same meta-explanation more or less in place, but balanced to some extent by the despoliation of the Canadian arctic by uninfected humans amassing there due to zombies discomfort with the cold. Somehow readers seem to take this as an admonition that humans are too hard on their environment and need to rethink this.

About Jesse Benjamin

Jesse Benjamin, an associate professor of sociology at Kennesaw State University, is a US and an Israeli citizen.

Hollywood’s Creepy Love Affair With Adolf Hitler, in Explosive New Detail

Uncovered: new evidence of Jewish movie moguls’ extensive collaboration with Nazis in the 1930s

By David Mikics|June 10, 2013 4:33 PM|86comments

Hitler and Goebbels at the UFA studios in Berlin in 1935. (Deutsches Bundesarchiv)

In fact, the Nazis liked The House of Rothschild so well that a scene from the movie was actually incorporated into the most notorious Nazi anti-Semitic film, Der Ewige Jude. The ADL was so disturbed by the film that it convinced the studios to avoid all mention of Jews in their future productions. And so Jewish characters, who had been featured in hundreds of movies in the 1920s, all but disappeared from the American screen after Hitler’s rise to power. Hitler’s government couldn’t have been happier: There would be no reference to the ever-more desperate plight of the Jews under the Nazi rule in any Hollywood film of the ’30s.

Incredibly, the creative collaboration between the Nazis and Hollywood only deepened throughout the 1930s as exclusionary violence against Jews increased and Hitler tightened his grip on power. In the late 1930s, Urwand claims, Paramount and 20th Century Fox produced newsreels in Germany depicting major Nazi events. Most shocking of all, Urwand maintains, in 1938 MGM invested in factories making German weapons in Austria and the Sudetenland. As Urwand put it in a recent YouTube interview, “The biggest movie studio in America was actually financing the production of German armaments immediately before World War II.” After Germany invaded Poland, MGM further consolidated its alliance with the Nazis by donating eleven of its most popular movies to the cause of German war relief.


In 1937, Urwand discovers, Jack Warner seems to have agreed to Gyssling’s demand that the word “Jew” not be spoken in The Life of Emile Zola, which depicted the Dreyfus case; Warner Bros. reassured the German consul that Dreyfus was not a major figure in the movie. The studios even sometimes signed their communiqués to Berlin “Heil Hitler!”: They were loyal to the Führer, even when he didn’t want their movies and in fact wanted to see them dead. Eventually, in 1939, Warner Brothers produced a B movie titled Confessions of a Nazi Spy—the first and only Hollywood criticism of Hitler Germany to be released in the six years since the Nazis took power. But the damage had already been done; the cravenness of the American film industry had made them de facto allies of the Nazis.

Hollywood’s repression of the facts about Jewish persecution continued even during the war years, after all the studios had finally been driven from Germany (MGM and Paramount remained there well into 1940) and America was at war with the Nazis. Despite the courageous efforts of screenwriter Ben Hecht to raise public awareness of the Holocaust while it was happening, there was only one reference to what was being done to the Jews in any Hollywood movie made during the war: a 5-minute sequence of a minor courtroom drama called None Shall Escape (1944), in which Nazis shoot a group of Jewish prisoners who fight back while they are being loaded onto a train. Five minutes was all the studio heads could give to the mass murder of their people, which by then had become common knowledge—in part as a result of Hecht’s full-page newspaper ads and his 1943 Madison Square Garden pageant, We Will Never Die.

Hitler saw himself as a cinematic hero, a matinee idol who overwhelmed the adoring crowds awestruck by his power. He stepped in on occasion and edited the Nazi newsreels himself; he realized that film swayed the masses. Hitler knew he had to feed people fantasy in order to get them to follow his evil vision, and he knew that the movies had taught him how to exploit fantasy’s power: how to seduce on the grandest possible scale. The movies he found most inspiring, most magical in the spell they cast on an audience, were made in America. As Neal Gabler argued in An Empire of Their Own, the Hollywood Jews invented the America of our dreams, a place of high excitement, courage, laughs, compassion, family feeling, and true love. Hitler’s dream was different, and it found a terrible fulfillment in mass murder and war. Hollywood could have helped awaken the world to the looming danger of Nazism, but instead the Jewish dream-makers cast their lot with the world’s—and the Jews’—greatest enemy.

How Jewish is Hollywood?

A poll finds more Americans disagree with the statement that ‘Jews control Hollywood.’ But here’s one Jew who doesn’t.

By Joel SteinI have never been so upset by a poll in my life. Only 22% of Americans now believe “the movie and television industries are pretty much run by Jews,” down from nearly 50% in 1964. The Anti-Defamation League, which released the poll results last month, sees in these numbers a victory against stereotyping. Actually, it just shows how dumb America has gotten. Jews totally run Hollywood.
How deeply Jewish is Hollywood? When the studio chiefs took out a full-page ad in the Los Angeles Times a few weeks ago to demand that the Screen Actors Guild settle its contract, the open letter was signed by:
News Corp. President Peter Chernin (Jewish),
Paramount Pictures Chairman Brad Grey (Jewish),
Walt Disney Co. Chief Executive Robert Iger (Jewish),
Sony Pictures Chairman Michael Lynton (surprise, Dutch Jew),
Warner Bros. Chairman Barry Meyer (Jewish),
CBS Corp. Chief Executive Leslie Moonves (so Jewish his great uncle was the first prime minister of Israel),
MGM Chairman Harry Sloan (Jewish) and
NBC Universal Chief Executive Jeff Zucker (mega-Jewish).
If either of the Weinstein brothers had signed, this group would have not only the power to shut down all film production but to form a minyan with enough Fiji water on hand to fill a mikvah.
Joel Stein

The person they were yelling at in that ad was SAG President Alan Rosenberg (take a guess). The scathing rebuttal to the ad was written by entertainment super-agent Ari Emanuel (Jew with Israeli parents) on the Huffington Post, which is owned by Arianna Huffington (not Jewish and has never worked in Hollywood.)

The Jews are so dominant, I had to scour the trades to come up with six Gentiles in high positions at entertainment companies. When I called them to talk about their incredible advancement, five of them refused to talk to me, apparently out of fear of insulting Jews. The sixth, AMC President Charlie Collier, turned out to be Jewish.

As a proud Jew, I want America to know about our accomplishment. Yes, we control Hollywood. Without us, you’d be flipping between “The 700 Club” and “Davey and Goliath” on TV all day.

So I’ve taken it upon myself to re-convince America that Jews run Hollywood by launching a public relations campaign, because that’s what we do best. I’m weighing several slogans, including: “Hollywood: More Jewish than ever!”; “Hollywood: From the people who brought you the Bible”; and “Hollywood: If you enjoy TV and movies, then you probably like Jews after all.”

I called ADL Chairman Abe Foxman, who was in Santiago, Chile, where, he told me to my dismay, he was not hunting Nazis. He dismissed my whole proposition, saying that the number of people who think Jews run Hollywood is still too high. The ADL poll, he pointed out, showed that 59% of Americans think Hollywood execs “do not share the religious and moral values of most Americans,” and 43% think the entertainment industry is waging an organized campaign to “weaken the influence of religious values in this country.”

That’s a sinister canard, Foxman said. “It means they think Jews meet at Canter’s Deli on Friday mornings to decide what’s best for the Jews.” Foxman’s argument made me rethink: I have to eat at Canter’s more often.

“That’s a very dangerous phrase, ‘Jews control Hollywood.’ What is true is that there are a lot of Jews in Hollywood,” he said. Instead of “control,” Foxman would prefer people say that many executives in the industry “happen to be Jewish,” as in “all eight major film studios are run by men who happen to be Jewish.”

But Foxman said he is proud of the accomplishments of American Jews. “I think Jews are disproportionately represented in the creative industry. They’re disproportionate as lawyers and probably medicine here as well,” he said. He argues that this does not mean that Jews make pro-Jewish movies any more than they do pro-Jewish surgery. Though other countries, I’ve noticed, aren’t so big on circumcision.

I appreciate Foxman’s concerns. And maybe my life spent in a New Jersey-New York/Bay Area-L.A. pro-Semitic cocoon has left me naive. But I don’t care if Americans think we’re running the news media, Hollywood, Wall Street or the government. I just care that we get to keep running them.

Hollywood’s Agenda, and the Power Behind It by Mark Weber

Text of address given at the “Hollywoodism” conference in Tehran, Iran, on Feb. 6, 2013 Last September, during my first visit to Iran, an incident occurred that underscores the importance of our meeting here this week.Perhaps eight of us — men and women from several different countries who were attending the “New Horizon” conference — were sitting together for a meal at a large, round table at the top of the Milad Tower, high above central Tehran. As the conversation turned to customs and lifestyles in our different countries, a younger Iranian in his 20s remarked, almost in passing, that Americans are slender and thin. I was surprised by this, and responded by saying that, by all accounts, Americans are the most overweight people in the world. I asked him why he thought Americans are slender and thin. Well, he replied, that’s how they look in American movies.Now, this young man was not stupid or foolish. And what people think about the average weight of Americans is not a critically important matter. But his remark was another reminder of Hollywood’s tremendous, global influence, and of how misleading its imagery can be.During one-on-one talks with Iranians, I’ve been surprised by how many have a strangely idealized impression of the US and American society that’s based on their viewing of American movies and television. This is especially remarkable given that, in the United States at least, we’re told that Iranians hate America. Actually, it seems that often the most hostile view of the US and Americans is by people in countries that are supposed “friends” of the US, and that a much more positive view of the United States can sometimes be found in countries that are supposed enemies of America.If even many Iranians, whom one might suppose would be particularly skeptical of Hollywood imagery and propaganda, can be so readily swayed or misled by it, how much more easily influenced and misled might people be in countries that are under the direct shadow of Washington, New York and Hollywood.Well, we certainly have our work cut out for us!Everyone understands that American motion pictures and television, and, more broadly, the US mass media, play an important role in shaping the outlook, values and behavior, of many millions of people around the world, especially, of course, in my homeland, the United States. But even many of those who readily acknowledge this influence seem not to fully comprehend the formidable power behind Hollywood, or the outlook and agenda of those who wield that power.Last September, during my first visit to Iran, I was a bit surprised that at one session of the “New Horizon” conference, a few of the participants objected to describing Hollywood as “Zionist controlled” or “Zionist dominated.” The discussion became so heated that a special session was scheduled to further debate this issue and, hopefully, to reach a consensus on it. This question is not a peripheral or academic one. An awareness of who holds power in Hollywood is essential for an understanding of the outlook, ideology and agenda of those who wield such great influence.During a television interview in 1996, actor Marlon Brando spoke bluntly on this subject. He said: “I am very angry with some of the Jews … They know perfectly well what their responsibilities are … Hollywood is run by Jews. It’s owned by Jews, and they should have a greater sensitivity about the issue of people who are suffering.” / 1For making those remarks, Zionist voices in the US quickly and severely denounced the veteran actor. He was sternly rebuked, for example, by the “Anti-Defamation League,” one of the most powerful and influential Jewish-Zionist groups in the US. The ADL called Brando’s remarks a “slur.” In fact, statements, at least by non-Jews, that affirm Zionist or Jewish domination of Hollywood are routinely denounced by the ADL and similar groups as groundless, “anti-Semitic,” and intolerably offensive “hate” speech. / 2But what’s the reality of the matter? Was Marlon Brando telling the truth? How accurate is it to describe Hollywood — and, more generally, the US mass media — as Jewish or Zionist controlled?One of the most knowledgeable and seasoned observers of Hollywood is Michael Medved, a well-known Jewish author and political commentator who is also a prominent film critic. On this subject, he has written: “It makes no sense at all to try to deny the reality of Jewish power and prominence in popular culture. Any list of the most influential production executives at each of the major movie studios will produce a heavy majority of recognizably Jewish names.” / 3One person who has carefully studied this subject is Jonathan J. Goldberg, editor of the influential Jewish community weekly Forward. In his 1996 book, entitled Jewish Power, he wrote: / 4“In a few key sectors of the media, notably among Hollywood studio executives, Jews are so numerically dominant that calling these businesses Jewish-controlled is little more than a statistical observation …“Hollywood at the end of the twentieth century is still an industry with a pronounced ethnic tinge. Virtually all the senior executives at the major studios are Jews. Writers, producers, and to a lesser degree directors are disproportionately Jewish — one recent study showed the figure as high as 59 percent among top-grossing films.

“The combined weight of so many Jews in one of America’s most lucrative and important industries gives the Jews of Hollywood a great deal of political power.”

Another person who has commented with some authority on this matter is Joel Stein, a Jewish Hollywood producer, and a writer for Time magazine and other periodicals. In a column that appeared in December 2008 in the Los Angeles Times, he wrote: “As a proud Jew, I want America to know about our accomplishment. Yes, we control Hollywood … I don’t care if Americans think we’re running the news media, Hollywood, Wall Street or the government. I just care that we get to keep running them.” / 5

Several years ago, Bishop Desmond Tutu of South Africa, who was awarded the 1984 Nobel Peace Prize, told an audience in Boston: “… You know as well as I do that, somehow, the Israeli government is placed on a pedestal [in the US], and to criticize it is to be immediately dubbed anti-Semitic … People are scared in this country, to say wrong is wrong because the Jewish lobby is powerful — very powerful.” / 6

Bishop Tutu spoke the truth. Although Jews make up only about two or three percent of the US population, they wield immense power and influence — vastly more than any other ethnic or religious group.

As Jewish author and political science professor Benjamin Ginsberg has pointed out: / 7

“Since the 1960s, Jews have come to wield considerable influence in American economic, cultural, intellectual and political life. Jews played a central role in American finance during the 1980s, and they were among the chief beneficiaries of that decade’s corporate mergers and reorganizations. Today, though barely two percent of the nation’s population is Jewish, close to half its billionaires are Jews. The chief executive officers of the three major television networks and the four largest film studios are Jews, as are the owners of the nation’s largest newspaper chain and the most influential single newspaper, The New York Times … The role and influence of Jews in American politics is equally marked …

“Jews are only three percent of the nation’s population and comprise eleven percent of what this study defines as the nation’s elite. However, Jews constitute more than 25 percent of the elite journalists and publishers, more than 17 percent of the leaders of important voluntary and public interest organizations, and more than 15 percent of the top ranking civil servants.”

Two well-known Jewish writers, Seymour Lipset and Earl Raab, went into this in their 1995 book, Jews and the New American Scene. They wrote: / 8

“During the last three decades Jews [in the United States] have made up 50 percent of the top two hundred intellectuals … 20 percent of professors at the leading universities … 40 percent of partners in the leading law firms in New York and Washington … 59 percent of the directors, writers, and producers of the 50 top-grossing motion pictures from 1965 to 1982, and 58 percent of directors, writers, and producers in two or more primetime television series.”

This intimidating power is not a new or recent phenomenon. Thirty years ago, the anti-Zionist Jewish American scholar Alfred M. Lilienthal — whom I knew well, and for whom I once worked — dealt with this in his detailed study, titled The Zionist Connection. He wrote: / 9

“The extent and depth to which organized Jewry reached — and reaches — in the U.S. is indeed awesome … The most effective component of the Jewish connection is probably that of media control … Jews, toughened by centuries of persecution, have risen to places of prime importance in the business and financial world… Jewish wealth and acumen wields unprecedented power in the area of finance and investment banking, playing an important role in influencing U.S. policy toward the Middle East … In the larger metropolitan areas, the Jewish-Zionist connection thoroughly pervades affluent financial, commercial, social, entertainment, and art circles.”

In 1972, during a private White House meeting, President Richard Nixon and the Rev. Billy Graham, the nation’s best-known Christian evangelist, spoke together frankly about the Jewish grip on the media. Their secretly recorded one-on-one conversation was not made public until 30 years later. During their talk, Graham said: “This stranglehold has got to be broken or the country’s going down the drain.” The President responded by saying: “You believe that?” Graham replied: “Yes, sir.” And Nixon said: “Oh, boy. So do I. I can’t ever say that, but I believe it.” / 10

Even though President Nixon, supposedly the most powerful man in the world, believed that America was, as he put it, “going down the drain” unless what he regarded as the Jewish “stranglehold” on the US media is broken, he was afraid to speak publicly about this matter. As powerful as he was, President Nixon feared a power greater than his own.

A characteristic feature of unethical or illegitimate power is a pattern of lies and deceit. For more than 70 years one of the main pillars of Jewish Hollywood has been Metro Goldwyn Mayer. The familiar roaring lion trademark of this great motion picture and television production company appears at the beginning of MGM films. Around the roaring lion of the trademark are the words, in Latin, of the MGM motto, “Ars Gratia Artis,” which means “Art for the sake of art.” This motto is supposed to suggest that, at least for Hollywood and MGM, film and television productions are made, or should be made, only to promote art or culture for its own sake.

In fact, this MGM motto — this liberal watchword — is a lie. For MGM, as for all of Hollywood, “art”, or, more precisely, motion pictures and television shows, are produced and marketed not for the sake of “art” or “culture,” but rather, above all, for the sake of money, for profits — but also to promote the interests, ideology and goals of those who control and run Hollywood. An important and socially harmful consequence of Hollywood’s furious scramble for dollars is the production of motion pictures and television shows aimed at the largest possible markets, and which, therefore, often pander to a base cultural level. That’s bad enough. But in addition, Hollywood has a long record of turning out films that are made to further ideological, ethnic or political goals.

A good example is “Exodus,” a 1960 epic about the founding of the State of Israel. It’s based on a best-selling novel of the same name, written by Leon Uris, an ardent Jewish Zionist. The film’s producer and director was the Jewish immigrant, Otto Preminger. With a memorable, soaring musical score, and starring such prominent actors as Paul Newman and Eva Marie Saint, the film was enormously successful.

In the film, and in the book on which it was based, Jews are portrayed as high-minded, sensitive, idealistic, resourceful and courageous. The British are shown as cynical and rather ignorant. And the Palestinian Arabs, insofar as they are depicted at all, are portrayed as treacherous, cruel and murderous. For an entire generation of Americans, including myself as a youth, along with millions in other countries, the “Exodus” film was perhaps the single most important factor in shaping our view of Zionism and the Palestine-Israel conflict.

During the second half of the last century, one of America’s most popular entertainers was Steve Allen. He was also a gifted and noted musician, composer and writer. In 1992 — some twenty years ago — he said: “Everyone — left, right and middle — is perfectly aware that we are in a period of cultural and moral collapse. But some people don’t want to concede that the popular media bear part of the responsibility.” / 11 Allen was right. Few people, I think, will dispute that Hollywood has played a major role in lowering, even debasing, the cultural level of the United States, and, to a certain extent, of much of the rest of the world.

Michael Medved, the Jewish American author and film critic I mentioned earlier, took a critical look at this issue in a widely-discussed 1992 book titled Hollywood vs. America. While Hollywood continues to produce works of technical brilliance, dazzling camera work, stunning special effects, impressive sets, skilled editing, and creative writing, the great problem of America’s cultural-entertainment center is what Medved calls a “sickness of the soul.” Hollywood today, he says, is a “poison factory,” where what he calls a “pattern of honoring ugliness “ has become “pervasive.” “The most influential leaders of the entertainment industry,” Medved goes on, demonstrate what he describes as a “preference for the perverse.” “One of the symptoms of the corruption and collapse of our popular culture,” he wrote, “is the insistence that we examine only the surface of any piece of art or entertainment. The politically correct, properly liberal notion is that we should never dig deeper — to consider whether a given work is true, or good, or spiritually nourishing — or to evaluate its impact on society at large.” / 12

Those who defend Hollywood, and the “American way of life,” will sometimes argue that — however base or perverse some Hollywood productions may be — they do not represent “official” or institutional Hollywood. A distinction, they say, should be made between the few admittedly deplorable productions — a small number of “rotten apples” — on the one hand, and “official” or institutional Hollywood, on the other. However valid this argument may be, there’s also no question but that Hollywood, as an institution, all too often sanctions and promotes a cultural ethos that is debased, degenerate, and inhuman.

There is no more prestigious or universally acknowledged expression of “official” Hollywood than the Academy Awards ceremony, a highly publicized annual event at which the elite of Hollywood honors itself, and gives recognition to what it regards as the outstanding productions and personalities of the preceding year. At the Academy Award ceremony of early 2006, institutional Hollywood bestowed its highest honor for the best original song in a motion picture on a rap song — if such sound even deserves to be called music — entitled “It’s Hard Out Here for a Pimp,” about the laments and travails of a man who makes a living on the money brought in by his whores.

Here is a portion of the lyrics of this rap song — these are the least offensive lines — which I’ll try to give in English that is more understandable than the original:

  • “It’s blood sweat and tears when it come down to a lick. I’m tryin’ to get rich ‘fore I leave up out it. I’m tryin’ to have thangs but it’s hard for a pimp. So I’m prayin’ and I’m hopin’ to God I don’t slip, yeah.
  • “Man, it seems like I’m duckin’ dodgin’ bullets everyday. Niggaz hatin’ on me cause I got, girls on the tray. But I gotta stay paid, gotta stay above water. Couldn’t keep up with my girls, that’s when things got harder
  • “North Memphis where I’m from, I’m 7th street bound. Where people all the time end up lost and never found. Man, these girls think we prove thangs, leave a big head. They come hopin’ every night, they don’t end up bein’ dead.
  • “Wait I got a snow bunny, and a black girl too. You pay the right price, and they’ll both do you. That’s the way the game goes, gotta keep it strictly pimpin’. Gotta keep my hustle tight, makin’ change off these women, yeah”

Is this what Hollywood means by “Art for the sake of art”? Is this really an exemplary product of American culture? Is this the music of a healthy society? What does this tell us about Hollywood? And what does it say about America?

In the aftermath of Hollywood’s prestigious honor for “It’s Hard Out Here for a Pimp,” no major political figure or leading newspaper raised a voice of protest or shame. That’s because in today’s America, this rap song is regarded not as outrageous or perverse, but instead is embraced as an acceptable, praiseworthy expression of US culture.

Another example of Hollywood’s notion of cultural distinction is a very profitable and widely acclaimed 2009 motion picture entitled “Inglorious Basterds.” In this absurdly fanciful production, actor Brad Pitt plays a Jewish US Army lieutenant during World War II who leads a team of eight Jewish American Army men whose mission behind enemy lines is to kill as many Germans as possible, and to kill them in the most cruel, painful and hideous way possible. Each team member, he says with joyful pride, must collect 100 “Nazi” scalps, and he tells them that no prisoners will be taken — that is, every captured German soldier must be murdered. In one dramatic scene, a US Army sergeant, who calls himself the “Bear Jew,” kills a prisoner of war by bashing in his head with a baseball bat.

This vile glorification of a band of vengeful Jewish sadists was honored by institutional Hollywood with multiple awards, including an Academy Award and eight Academy Award nominations. Years of conditioning by Hollywood filmmakers and American educators had primed audiences to approve and even applaud the sadistic violence of these criminals in US military uniform, because the victims are, after all, evil “Nazis” who deserve to be killed in the most hideous and cruel way possible. Over the years, Hollywood and American public officials have worked together to stigmatize Japanese, Germans, Arabs and others as expendable, evil sub-humans who deserve to be eradicated as vermin.

Hollywood and Washington seem always to be on the lookout for new nations and nationalities for targeting as “evil,” and therefore worthy of eradication. Not long ago, you’ll recall, an American president proclaimed Iran to be an “axis of evil” country, and his successor, the current US president, tells the world that in dealing with Iran, “all options are on the table” — which is an indirect way of threatening Iran with bombing, invasion, war and even nuclear obliteration.

American motion pictures and television, along with the rest of the US mass media, play an important role in shaping people’s basic assumptions about life and the world, in setting social-ethical standards, and in delineating the boundaries of what’s politically possible. Together with America’s still very formidable financial, economic and military power, Hollywood and its products have real impact on the lives of millions, not only in the US, but around the globe.

Along with the rest of the Jewish-Zionist dominated media, Hollywood sensationalizes and distorts current events, systematically falsifies history, promotes debased “entertainment” and perverse cultural standards, and makes possible the Jewish-Zionist hold on American political life, thereby enabling Israel’s wars and decades-long oppression of Palestinians.

Today there is no more important or urgent task than to clearly identify and effectively counter this Jewish-Zionist power.

I want to emphasize here that to deal candidly with this reality is not, as some claim, “anti-Semitism” or “hate.” We should not, and we do not, wish harm to anyone because of his or her ancestry, ethnic background, religion or privately held beliefs. At the same time, we should not — we must not — let smears or malicious name-calling keep us from affirming the truth, and doing what is right.

We are meeting here this week at a conference that brings together men and women of diverse nationalities, races and cultures, and with a broad range of political and religious views. But regardless of our background, nationality or worldview, and regardless of the particular passion or cause that most moves each of us, we share a sense of responsibility for the future of our own nations, and of the world.

We are engaged in a great, global struggle — one in which two distinct and irreconcilable sides confront each other — a world struggle that pits an arrogant and malevolent power that feels ordained to rule over others, on one side, and all other nations on the other. It is a struggle not merely for justice or the well-being of the peoples of this or that nation or region, but a great historical battle for the soul and future of humanity itself.

End Notes

1. Interview with Larry King, CNN network, April 5, 1996. “Brando Remarks,” Los Angeles Times, April 8, 1996, p. F4 (OC). A short time later Brando was obliged to apologize for his remarks.

2. Abraham H. Foxman, Never Again?: The Threat of the New Anti-Semitism (Harper San Francisco, 2003), p. 251.

3. M. Medved, “Is Hollywood Too Jewish?,” Moment, Vol. 21, No. 4 (1996), p. 37.

4. Jonathan Jeremy Goldberg, Jewish Power: Inside the American Jewish Establishment (Addison-Wesley, 1996), pp. 280, 287-288. See also pp. 39-40, 290-291.

5. J. Stein, “How Jewish Is Hollywood?,” Los Angeles Times, Dec. 19, 2008.,0… )

6. D. Tutu, “Apartheid in the Holy Land,” The Guardian (Britain), April 29, 2002.,10551,706911,00.html )

7. Benjamin Ginsberg, The Fatal Embrace: Jews and the State (University of Chicago, 1993), pp. 1, 103.

8. Seymour Martin Lipset and Earl Raab, Jews and the New American Scene (Harvard Univ. Press, 1995), pp. 26-27.

9. A. Lilienthal, The Zionist Connection (New York: Dodd, Mead, 1978), pp. 206, 209, 212, 218, 228, 229. See also: M. Weber, “A Straight Look at the Jewish Lobby.”
( )

10. “Nixon, Billy Graham Make Derogatory Comments About Jews on Tapes,” Chicago Tribune, March 1, 2002 (or Feb. 28, 2002) );
“Billy Graham Apologizes for ’72 Remarks,” Associated Press, Los Angeles Times, March 2, 2002. “Graham Regrets Jewish Slur,” BBC News, March 2, 2002. The conversation apparently took place on Feb. 1, 1972.

11. Michael Medved, Hollywood vs. America (Harper Collins, 1992), back cover dust jacket.

12. M. Medved, Hollywood vs. America (1992), pp. 11, 25, 26, 21.

“House of Cards”: Media Mask Masonic Control

March 6, 2014


(House of Card’s Francis Underwood, Kevin Spacey, and his Lady MacBeth, played by Robin Wright) In western society, personal success depends
on your complicity in a diabolical conspiracy and
your willingness to betray your fellow citizens.  
But the mass media doesn’t want you to know this.

“We have already contrived to possess the minds of the goy communities…[they are] looking through the spectacles we are setting astride their noses.” (Protocols of Zion, 12)

by Henry Makow Ph.D. 

cardslogo.jpgI devoured the second season of House of Cards like a box of chocolates. I was surprised to learn that the main character, Francis Underwood, played by Kevin Spacey, is a Freemason. What? You didn’t see that?

Neither did I. That’s my point. Most congress critters belong to this satanic secret society, but you can watch a series pretending to unveil Washington politics, and not hear the word “Freemason” mentioned once. (The second season also avoids any mention of Jews and Zionist influence.) Actually there is one Masonic reference, the upside down flag in the series logo is a Masonic sign of distress, perhaps a wink to people in the know.

Search “How Many congressmen are Freemasons?” on Google and you’ll find practically no information.  Just a story about the Congressional stenographer who broke down last October blurted about  Freemasons and the devil controlling Congress  There’s no reminder of the 2004 Bush-Kerry election where both men confessed to being members of the Masonic Skull and Bones, but couldn’t talk about it because “it’s a secret.”

How gullible can people get? Both Presidential candidates belong to a secret society. Nothing happening here. Move along folks. The watchdogs of freedom, the mass media, didn’t even pull on their leash. (Another deception in House of Cards is the idea that the msm actually pursues the truth.)

drjameswardner1.jpg(Wardner, left, is a dentist in Florida)  

The pioneer on the subject of Masonic control is James Wardner in a 1996 book entitled Unholy Alliances. Here are 10 facts about their control of Congress and the Judiciary in the recent past. You can be sure that things have only gotten worse.

1.  Wardner lists names of 75 congressmen who were Freemasons in the 1980′s but there were probably many more. These included both liberals and rednecks: Bob Dole, Jesse Helms, Mark Hatfield, Lloyd Bentsen, Robert Byrd and Arlen Specter. Presidents who were Freemasons: George Washington. James Monroe. Andrew Jackson, James Polk. James Buchanan. Andrew Johnson, James Garfield, William McKinley. Theodore Roosevelt, Howard Taft, Warren Harding, Franklin Roosevelt, Harry Truman, LBJ, Gerald Ford, G.H.W. Bush, Bill Clinton, George W. Bush and Barack Obama.

simpson.jpg2.  In 1987, Freemason and Senator Alan Simpson (left) bragged that “Forty one members of the Federal Judiciary are presently Masons.” (67)

3.  Masonic authority Henry Clausen boasted in the early 90′s that Masons include “14 Presidents and 18 Vice-Presidents of the United States, a majority of the justices of the United States Supreme Court, of the Governors of the States, of the members of the Senate, and a large percentage of Congressmen. Five Chief Justices of the United States were Masons  and two were Grand Masters.” (67) Wardner adds that these two Grand Masters were John Marshall and Earl Warren who effectively ended prayer in schools.

4. This is nothing new since Thaddeus Stevens, Pennsylvania’s  delegate to the 1830 Anti Masonic Convention noted that “though but one hundred thousand of these people of the United States are Freemasons, yet almost all the office of high profit and high honor are filled with gentlemen of that institution.”

5. Freemasons in Dwight Eisenhower’s Cabinet included the Secretary of State, the Secretary of Defense,  Secretary of the Interior, Secretary of Commerce and Ike’s Chief of Staff, Sherman Adams.

MaTruman.jpg6. Apart from President Truman himself,left, Masons include the Secretary of State, Commerce, Defense, Attorney General and his four Supreme Court appointments. Truman said, “Although I hold the highest civil honor in the world, I have always regarded my rank and title as a past grand Master (of the Grand Lodge of Missouri) as the highest honor that has ever comes to me.” (61-63)

7.   FDR was an ardent Scottish Rite Mason. Masons in his Cabinet included the Vice President, the Secretary of the Treasury, War, Commerce, Attorney General and six of his eight Supreme Court appointments. No surprise that Empire State Mason boasted in Feb 1953 that if “World Masonry ever comes into being, historians will give much credit to when FDR was President.”

8. President Warren Harding (1921-1923) was a Mason and by 1923, 300 of the 435 members of the US House of Representatives (69%)  and 30 of the 48 Senators (63%) were Freemasons. In 1929, 67% of Congress were Masons.  (p. 56)

TR33.jpg9. Leon de Poncins wrote that the First World War was contrived to create a Masonic Super State in the form of the League of Nations. The Treaty of Versailles deliberately led to revolutionary unrest in Germany, the Civil War in Spain and finally to the Second World War. “It is a frightening thought that an occult organization …can direct the course of European politics, without anyone being aware of the fact.” (p.55)

10. In 1834, a report to the Massachusetts Legislature concluded that Freemasonry was “a distinct independent government within our own government, and beyond the control of the laws of the land by means of its secrecy and the oaths and regulations which its subjects are bound to obey.” (p.54)

Wardner concludes that the tentacles of the Masonic lodge pervade society. There are at least 160 different organizations that require its members to be Masons, including higher ranks of the US military.(p.70)  In 1950, Masons estimated that nearly 10 million adults were directly linked to Freemasonry  through the nation’s three million Master Masons.


mcconnell.jpg(left, Mitch McConnell, GOB leader in the Senate)

Clearly, Freemasonry (Cabalism, Satanism) is the secret religion of the West. This is the real party and we’re not invited. We have to make do with an ersatz version of democracy, freedom and culture.  No wonder vapid white men with pinched pussy faces run the country; no wonder people are so artificial and false and we have constant scandal, corruption and war.

Clearly, the whole Gentile establishment is complicit in the subversion of humanity. Anti-Semitism is a diversion. How many of the Internet anti-Semites ever mention Freemasonry? Of course the Jewish leadership is also guilty. Almost all leadership is. How much easier for Freemasons to slough off the blame on ordinary Jews who are just as clueless as ordinary Gentiles.

Clueless because they watch House of Cards and think it actually depicts political reality.


Must see- the whole story - Three lectures by Dr. James Wardner on Freemasonry in America 

spacey.jpg(left, Marcos writes that Spacey is a well known Satanist. See handsigns)

Related- My Review of the First Season of House of Cards
———- Freemasonry-Mankind’s Deathwish
———-Obama’s Masonic Ring and and Handshake
———  Brotherhood of the Bell Exposed Masonic Control
———- House of Cards- At Least it’s Not Liberal Left Bullshit


Peaches Post-Mortem Inconclusive


Rixon Stewart — April 9, 2014

Did Peaches Gedolf reveal too much? She was after all instrumental in putting Lost Prophets lead singer Ian Watkins behind bars, after police seemed unable or unwilling to take action him. Despite eyewitnesses with photographic evidence that clearly indicated his involvement in serious crimes against children.
Like Jimmy Savile, Watkins seemed to think he was invulnerable and it was only after Peaches took to Twitter that he was finally brought to justice.
Now the otherwise healthy 25-year-old who helped put Watkins behind bars is dead. Did her involvement in putting him in jail play a part in her unexpected demise? Or was it her alleged involvement with O.T.O., as Vigilant Citizen hasmooted.
If that is the case, and we won’t dismiss Vigilant Citizen suggestion, it may have been decided that Peaches had revealed too much in helping expose Watkins.

Lost Prophets frontman and convicted paedophile Ian Watkins. Click to enlarge

Sure Watkins may have been one of their lesser underlings but there’s a price to be paid for betraying fellow members of a black occult order. And if you want to know what the face of intrinsic evil looks like, the sort of person who would rape babies or join a black occult order, just check out Watkins face, (pictured right).
We may never know the exact cause of Peaches’ death. Just as we never know the exact circumstances behind those of Princess Diana and Dr David Kelly. Both these latter deaths helped the elite protect their interests and further their plans.
Nonetheless, it’s noteworthy that “unexplained” deaths are common among those who could embarrass Britain’s ruling class or derail their plans. Like George Smith, the former Royal footman who claimed he was raped by one of Prince Charles’ favoured servants and who alleged moreover that he found Prince Charles in bed with another male servant.
For a while those allegations made headlines around the world but we may never know if they were true because the 44-year-old never got round to substantiating them. He died in 2005, following an “unknown illness”.
Was Peaches Gedolf viewed in a similar light as George Smith? Did she pose a similar threat in what she could have revealed? Even if only inadvertently or unintentionally?
Did she know of others, higher in the occult hierarchy who were involved with Watkins? Was she seen as a liability for her role in having helped expose him and a threat in that she could have exposed others?
Although the results of the toxicology report is still pending don’t be surprised if that too proves to be inconclusive. Leaving Peaches’ death to disappear down the memory hole, along with whatever incriminating testimony she may have provided.

Peaches post-mortem inconclusive

Press Association — April 9, 2014

A post-mortem examination into the death of Peaches Geldof has proved inconclusive pending the results of toxicology tests.

Kent Police said officers are continuing to investigate the circumstances around the 25-year-old’s death and a toxicology report could take several weeks.

The body of the mother-of-two was found at her home in Wrotham, Kent, on April 9 and police have said her death is being treated as a “non-suspicious, unexplained sudden death”.

Peaches’ body was found on April 7 after officers were called “following a report of concern for the welfare of a woman”.

Her body was transferred to Darent Valley Hospital in Dartford for a post-mortem examination to take place.

In a statement, Kent Police said: “A post-mortem examination held on Wednesday April 9 following the death of Peaches Geldof has proved inconclusive pending the result of toxicology analysis.

“Officers were called to the 25-year-old’s home in Wrotham, at 1.35pm on Monday April 7 2014. Peaches was pronounced dead at the scene.

“This is being treated as a non-suspicious, unexplained sudden death.

“Officers continue to investigate the circumstances surrounding the death in order to compile a report for the coroner.

“The result of a toxicology report can take several weeks.”

A coroner is expected to open an inquest into Peaches’ death following the results of the initial post-mortem examination.

Her father, Bob Geldof, and other members of the family led the tributes which flooded in after the death.

In a touching tribute signed by the Live Aid organiser, his partner Jeanne Marine, and her sisters Fifi Trixibelle, Pixie and Tiger, they said the family was “beyond pain”, writing: “She was the wildest, funniest, cleverest, wittiest and the most bonkers of all of us.”

Peaches’ husband, musician Tom Cohen, with whom she had two young sons, said his wife was adored by him and their two sons Astala, 23 months, and 11-month-old Phaedra, who he would bring up “with their mother in their hearts every day”.

Elder sister Fifi posted a picture on Instagram of the two of them together when they were children, writing: ”My beautiful baby sister… Gone but never forgotten. I love you Peaches x.”

Peaches was just 11 when her mother, TV presenter Paula Yates, died from an accidental heroin overdose in 2000, aged 41.

She married US musician Max Drummey in Las Vegas in 2008, when she was 19, but the couple split amicably in February 2009 before divorcing in 2011.

She married Tom, lead singer of south-east London band Scum, in September 2012 at the church in Davington, Kent, where her parents married 26 years earlier. It was also where her mother’s funeral was held.

A prolific tweeter, the final message she sent on April 6 was a picture of herself as a child with her mother, with the message “Me and my mum”.

In a column for Mother & Baby magazine, she wrote how she was now “happier than ever” after becoming a mother.

How Elites and Media Minimize Dissent and Bury Truth


Ignorance is Strength

Ignorance is Strength

Beyond a Doubt: Our Media War Propaganda and The Film You Almost Didn’t See

The western mainstream media’s role in a promoting any war or conflict can never be underestimated – as history has demonstrated time and time again, with their willingness to blindly promote the international corporate and shadow government’s foreign policy objectives – which always result in the death of countless innocents. It must stop.

This is the story about a film which none of were supposed to see. Not because the film wasn’t up to professional journalistic standards, or that it was of poor quality. It was neither of those. Against the odds and the establishment-owned international media syndicate, award-winning filmmaker and journalist John Pilger reveals one of the most damning indictments of American and British mainstream media. The content of this timeless film is stunning, and show beyond any reasonable doubt, that our media are not only complicit in advancing conflict around the globe, but are actively engaged in pushing it on behalf of those who seek to profit from international conflagrations.

Note also the text of the letter between Pilger and Noam Chomsky, revealing how even at the highest levels of the ‘liberal left’ there are financiers who act as information controllers and gatekeepers

Brasscheck TV

John Pilger has made twenty five documentaries, but this one did not receive a warm reception in Barrack Obama’s America.

The makers were dis-invited from the US premiere just 48 hours before they got on a plane to Santa Fe, New Mexico. The sponsor, uber-liberal multi-millionaire, Patrick Lannan, had a flunky send them at ‘sorry for the inconvenience’ e-mail. The reason for the ban? No explanation. Here’s the letter written by John Pilger about what happened…

June 10 2011

An open letter to Noam Chomsky and the general public.

Dear Noam,

I am writing to you and a number of other friends mostly in the US to alert you to the extraordinary banning of my film on war and media, ‘The War You Don’t See’, and the abrupt cancellation of a major event at the Lannan Foundation in Santa Fe, in which David Barsamian and I were to discuss free speech, US foreign policy and censorship in the media.

Lannan invited me and David over a year ago and welcomed my proposal that they also host the US premiere of ‘The War You Don’t See’, in which US and British broadcasters describe the often hidden part played by the media in the promotion of war, notably in Iraq and Afghanistan. The film has been widely acclaimed in the UK and Australia; the trailer and reviews are on my website

The banning and cancellation, which have shocked David and me, are on the personal orders of Patrick Lannan, whose wealth funds the Lannan Foundation as a liberal centre of discussion of politics and the arts. Some of you will have been there and will know the Lannan Foundation as a valuable supporter of liberal causes. Indeed, I was invited in 2002 to present a Lannan award to the broadcaster Amy Goodman.

What is deeply disturbing about the ban is that it happened so suddenly and inexplicably: 48 hours before David Barsamian and I were both due to depart for Santa Fe I received a brief email with a ‘sorry for the inconvenience’ from a Lannan official who had been telling me just a few days earlier what a ‘great honour’ it was to have the US premiere of my film at Lannan, with myself in attendance.

I urge you to visit the Lannan website . Good people like Michael Ratner, Jeremy Scahill and Glenn Greenwald are shown as participants in discussion about freedom of speech. I am there, too, but my name is the only one with a line through it and the word, ‘Cancelled’.

Neither David Barsamian, nor I, have been given a word of explanation. All my messages to Lannan have gone unanswered; my calls calls are not returned; my flights were cancelled summarily. At the urging of the New Mexican newspaper, Patrick Lannan has issued a one-sentence statement offering his regrets to the Lannan-supporting ‘community’ in Santa Fe. Again, he gives no reason for the ban. I have spoken to the manager of the Santa Fe cinema where ‘The War You Don’t See’ was to be screened. He received a late-night call. Again, no reason for the ban was forthcoming, giving him barely time to cancel advertising in The New Mexican, which was forced to drop a major feature.

There is a compelling symbol of our extraordinary times in all of this. A rich and powerful individual and organisation, espousing freedom of speech, has moved ruthlessly and unaccountably to crush it.

With warm regards,

John Pilger

Watch this incredible piece of film making that totally exposes the culture of lies and deception in US and British media:

Beyond a Doubt: Our Media War Propaganda and The Film You Almost Didn’t See

21st Century Wire says…

The western mainstream media’s role in a promoting any war or conflict can never be underestimated – as history has demonstrated time and time again, with their willingness to blindly promote the international corporate and shadow government’s foreign policy objectives – which always result in the death of countless innocents. It must stop.

This is the story about a film which none of were supposed to see. Not because the film wasn’t up to professional journalistic standards, or that it was of poor quality. It was neither of those. Against the odds and the establishment-owned international media syndicate, award-winning filmmaker and journalist John Pilger reveals one of the most damning indictments of American and British mainstream media. The content of this timeless film is stunning, and show beyond any reasonable doubt, that our media are not only complicit in advancing conflict around the globe, but are actively engaged in pushing it on behalf of those who seek to profit from international conflagrations.

Note also the text of the letter between Pilger and Noam Chomsky, revealing how even at the highest levels of the ‘liberal left’ there are financiers who act as information controllers and gatekeepers

Brasscheck TV

John Pilger has made twenty five documentaries, but this one did not receive a warm reception in Barrack Obama’s America.

The makers were dis-invited from the US premiere just 48 hours before they got on a plane to Santa Fe, New Mexico. The sponsor, uber-liberal multi-millionaire, Patrick Lannan, had a flunky send them at ‘sorry for the inconvenience’ e-mail. The reason for the ban? No explanation. Here’s the letter written by John Pilger about what happened…

June 10 2011

An open letter to Noam Chomsky and the general public.

Dear Noam,

I am writing to you and a number of other friends mostly in the US to alert you to the extraordinary banning of my film on war and media, ‘The War You Don’t See’, and the abrupt cancellation of a major event at the Lannan Foundation in Santa Fe, in which David Barsamian and I were to discuss free speech, US foreign policy and censorship in the media.

Lannan invited me and David over a year ago and welcomed my proposal that they also host the US premiere of ‘The War You Don’t See’, in which US and British broadcasters describe the often hidden part played by the media in the promotion of war, notably in Iraq and Afghanistan. The film has been widely acclaimed in the UK and Australia; the trailer and reviews are on my website

The banning and cancellation, which have shocked David and me, are on the personal orders of Patrick Lannan, whose wealth funds the Lannan Foundation as a liberal centre of discussion of politics and the arts. Some of you will have been there and will know the Lannan Foundation as a valuable supporter of liberal causes. Indeed, I was invited in 2002 to present a Lannan award to the broadcaster Amy Goodman.

What is deeply disturbing about the ban is that it happened so suddenly and inexplicably: 48 hours before David Barsamian and I were both due to depart for Santa Fe I received a brief email with a ‘sorry for the inconvenience’ from a Lannan official who had been telling me just a few days earlier what a ‘great honour’ it was to have the US premiere of my film at Lannan, with myself in attendance.

I urge you to visit the Lannan website . Good people like Michael Ratner, Jeremy Scahill and Glenn Greenwald are shown as participants in discussion about freedom of speech. I am there, too, but my name is the only one with a line through it and the word, ‘Cancelled’.

Neither David Barsamian, nor I, have been given a word of explanation. All my messages to Lannan have gone unanswered; my calls calls are not returned; my flights were cancelled summarily. At the urging of the New Mexican newspaper, Patrick Lannan has issued a one-sentence statement offering his regrets to the Lannan-supporting ‘community’ in Santa Fe. Again, he gives no reason for the ban. I have spoken to the manager of the Santa Fe cinema where ‘The War You Don’t See’ was to be screened. He received a late-night call. Again, no reason for the ban was forthcoming, giving him barely time to cancel advertising in The New Mexican, which was forced to drop a major feature.

There is a compelling symbol of our extraordinary times in all of this. A rich and powerful individual and organisation, espousing freedom of speech, has moved ruthlessly and unaccountably to crush it.

With warm regards,

John Pilger

Watch this incredible piece of film making that totally exposes the culture of lies and deception in US and British media:

ignorance…I would do whatever it took, pay whatever price was required, to allow this story this small but essential piece of history—to see the light of day.” (391)

No matter how depressing, the Truth is always inspiring and so are people like Janney who risk their lives to tell it.

Hersh Says bin Laden Death Story “One Big Lie”

Sherwood Ross — Rebel News Oct 18, 2013

If Seymour Hersh says in a forthcoming book the tale of the death of Osama bin Laden at the hands of U.S. SEALS is “one big lie” and “not one word of it is true,” President Obama may be hard pressed to avoid impeachment.
Over a lifetime of journalism, investigative reporter Hersh has acquired a deserved reputation for honesty, accuracy, reliability, and integrity that is unmatched in his profession and if he says the bin Laden account is a fake, you can take it to the bank.
Hersh told “The Guardian,” Britain’s investigative daily, “Nothing’s been done about that story.” A Pakistani report on the killing of bin Laden, Hersh says, was published with considerable U.S. input and is “a bullshit report.” bin Laden allegedly was killed by a U.S. SEAL team in Abbottabad, Pakistan, May 1, 2011.
Hersh is writing a book about national security, “The Guardian” says, and he’s hinted it will include a chapter on the Seals raid in Pakistan that allegedly bumped off bin Laden.

Proving themselves consumate actors/con-artists: Obama, Biden and Hilary Clinton watch the raid on bin Laden’s compound via satelitte, allegedly. Click to enlarge

President Obama’s administration lies systematically, Hersh asserts, yet is never challenged by America’s supine media. “It’s pathetic, they are more than obsequious, they are afraid to pick on this guy (Obama),” Hersh said.

Hersh claims President Obama is worse than Bush, “Guardian” writer Lisa O’Carroll, who interviewed Hersh, reports.”Do you think Obama’s been judged by any rational standards?” Hersh asks.”Has Guantanamo closed? Is a war over? Is anyone paying attention to Iraq? Is he seriously talking about going into Syria?…How does Obama get away with the drone program?… How does he justify it? What’s the intelligence?…Why don’t we find out how good or bad this policy is?”
Hersh concludes, “The republic’s in trouble, we lie about everything, lying has become the staple.”
In his bid for re-election in 2012, the Obama campaign milked the bin Laden slaying for all it was worth, making a video narrated by actor Tom Hanks about it. The “Huffington Post’s” Ben Feller at the time wrote an article headlined, “Obama Campaign Using Osama Bin Laden Killing As 2012 Campaign Tool.”
Obama earlier had trumpeted the killing as “the most significant achievement in our fight against Al Quida.”
Yet Hersh says today the “gotcha” story is all “One Big Lie.” Sounds like an investigation may be in order.

Why General Patton Was Murdered

Eustice Mullins — The CDL Report, Issue 69 (Nov-Dec 1984)

In December of 1984, it will be forty years since one of America’s greatest heroes, General George S. Patton, was executed by his Communist foes. General Patton was struck down the day before he was scheduled to make a triumphant return to the United States. He had just been removed from his command of the Third Army, which was in charge of governing the American sector of Germany. Because he not only opposed the dismemberment of Germany, but also because he favored military action against the Communists. As the most popular hero of the Second World War, Patton would have been unbeatable in a Presidential race. This was the reason his skulking enemies ordered his execution before he could leave Germany.

The Patton Papers, 1940-45 recently published by Houghton Mifflin Company in Boston, gives ample reasons for the murder of General Patton. A few months before he was killed, his driver for five years, Master Sergeant John L. Mims, was replaced. Patton was asked by Major General Gay to accompany him on an excursion for a few hours the day before he was to return to America. At 11:45 A.M. in clear weather and on a straight stretch of road, the driver of a GMC military truck turned his vehicle directly into the side of the 1938 Cadillac 75 Special limousine in which Patton was the only person injured. He suffered some internal injuries but did not seem to be seriously hurt. On Dec. 21, 1945, it was announced that he had died of an “embolism”, that is a bubble of the blood which is fatal when it reaches a vital organ. It can be introduced into the bloodstream with a syringe by anyone with brief medical training.

Patton was a vigorous sixty years old with enormous reserves of energy, who seldom needed more than a couple of hours sleep a night. Not only did the U.S. Army make no investigation into the “accident” which had put him into the hospital, but no questions were raised about his “embolism”. On previous occasions when attempts were made to kill him investigations were made, despite the fact that he was one of the most popular and most powerful figures in America’s history. He recorded in his diary that on April 20, 1945, while observing the front in his personal plane, which was clearly marked, an RAF Spitfire made three passes at his plane, which attempting to shoot it down, then went out of control and crashed. The story was later put out that a Polish flyer had been piloting the Spitfire. Patton was not injured.

Patton’s military exploits were such that he was the only American general whom the Germans feared. They transferred entire divisions as soon as rumors were spread that he was on a given front. The Germans’ contempt for Patton’s fellow generals was shared by himself, as he proves on many pages of his diary. During much of World War II, Patton survived repeated efforts of his fellow generals, as well as the British leaders, to get rid of him. In 1943, when he had turned the tide in Africa with his brilliant victories at Gafsa and Gela, Patton was removed from command after Drew Pearson printed a story that Patton had slapped a malingerer at a field hospital and called him a “yellow-bellied Jew.” Eisenhower used this incident as an excuse to refuse Patton command of American ground troops in England, giving the command instead to Omar Bradley, whom Patton exposed as a cowardly dullard. We will never know how many casualties Bradleys’ cowardice and incompetence cost us, but it must have been many thousands.

Patton wrote in his Diary Jan. 18, 1944, “Bradley is a man of great mediocrity. At Benning in command he failed to get discipline. At Gafsa when it looked as though the Germans might turn our right flank, he suggested we withdraw corps headquarters to Feriana. I refused to move.”

Patton cited numerous other examples of Bradley’s cowardice. As for Eisenhower, his references to him are always contemptuous. Patton refers to Ike as “Divine Destiny” but more customarily as “fool”. On March 1, 1944 Patton noted in his Diary, “Ike and I dined alone and had a very pleasant time. He is drinking too much.”

Patton was extremely disgusted with Eisenhower’s infatuation with his “chauffeur”, Kay Summersby, and he persuaded Ike not to divorce Mamie in order to marry her. Kay Summersby was a British Intelligence Officer who had been ordered to prostitute herself to Ike so that he would send American troops into the line instead of the British. England had experienced such a terrible bloodletting at the hands of the German armies in World War I that Churchill and the other British leaders determined to sacrifice Americans wherever possible on the Western front. Although Kay Summersby secretly despised Eisenhower, she was a loyal British subject, and she successfully carried off the affair. It is estimated that she cost the United States 100,000 casualties which otherwise would have been borne by the British.

Patton had noted in his Diary, July 5, 1943 before his successful African campaign, “At no time did Ike wish us luck and say he was back of us—fool.”

On July 12, 1944, Patton wrote in his Diary, “Neither Ike nor Bradley has the stuff. Ike is bound hand and foot by the British and doesn’t know it. Poor fool.”

As a result of Patton’s bold advances in France, Field Marshall Montgomery persuaded Eisenhower to issue one of the most amazing military orders in history. All of the Allied Armies must advance exactly abreast, so that no one (meaning Patton) would receive “undue credit.” Throughout the war, Patton achieved his amazing victories by being in the field, whereas the other generals remained far behind the front in their dugout “headquarters” or in luxurious villas far from the sound of gunfire.

During a press conference on May 8, 1945, Patton was asked, “Would you explain why we (the Americans) didn’t go into Prague.” “I can tell you, exactly,” Patton replied. “We were ordered not to.” Patton wrote to his wife on July 21, 1945. “I could have taken it (referring to Berlin) had I been allowed.”

Eisenhower’s refusal to allow Patton to take Prague and Berlin, holding him back while the Russians occupied these critical capitals, remains one of the greatest performances of treason since Benedict Arnold, like Eisenhower, sold out to the British.

Wreckage of the vehicle Patton had been travelling in. Click to enlarge

Patton apparently was writing his own death warrant when he entered his frequently voiced opinion in his Diary on May 18, 1945, concerning the advisability of fighting Russians: “In my opinion the American Army as it now exists could beat the Russians with the greatest ease, because while the Russians have good infantry, they are lacking in artillery, air, tanks, and in the knowledge of the use of these combined arms; whereas we excel in all three of these. If it should be necessary to fight the Russians, the sooner we do it the better.”

The danger which Patton presented to his enemies was not merely that he was a great American patriot; he also was impervious to any sort of undue influence. He had married Beatrice Ayer, one of the wealthiest women in America. This made him financially invulnerable, and he was happily married, which made it impossible for him to succumb to the blandishments of foreign agents such as Kay Summersby. He opposed Jews and Communists, not only because they were enemies of America, but, because they were a lower order of human beings. He refers to the fact that the Jew is an Asiatic, devoid of feeling for human life. Shortly before he was killed he wrote in his Diary Oct. 1, 1945, “THE JEWISH TYPE OF DISPLACED PERSON IS, IN THE MAJORITY OF CASES, A SUBHUMAN SPECIES WITHOUT ANY OF THE CULTURAL OR SOCIAL REFINEMENTS OF OUR TIME.”

Patton was removed from command in Germany because he actively opposed the swarm of locusts, such as the recently recruited Soviet agent Henry Kissinger, who fought Patton to win control of the Military Government in Germany.

In his Diary, August 29, 1945, Patton wrote, “Today we received a letter in which we were told to give the Jews special accommodations. If for Jews, why not Catholics, Mormons, etc.


Patton noted in his Diary on August 31, 1946, “I also wrote a letter to the Secretary of War, Mr. Stimson on the questions of pro-Jewish influence in the Military Government of Germany.”

As a result of Patton’s opposition to the Kissingers, who believed they had won the war and should rule Europe, a furious press campaign again was launched against him. A pro-Patton observer named Mason wrote, “The Daniell-Bevin-Morgan plot to destroy Patton was successful because Bernstein of PM was the most powerful force in Germany in 1945 because he had the support of Harry Dexter White, and Henry Morgenthau, Laughlin Curry, David K. Nile and Alger Hiss.”

On Sept. 29, 1945, Patton wrote to his wife, “The noise against me is only the means by which the Jews and Communists are attempting and with good success to implement a further dismemberment of Germany.”

Removed from command by the Jewish plot against him, General George S. Patton would have to return to the United States to work for the good of his country. It was to prevent this that a truck smashed in the side of his car in one of the strangest and most-ignored event in America’s military history. Those who fight for America are always in danger, always thwarted by the plotting and the treachery of the subhumans whom Patton recognized and battled to the end of his life. His story is one which enlightens and inspires us all, and this is why we must, after forty years, remind the American people of the cowards who murdered him.

Illuminati Playbook: The Phony Opposition

November 28, 2013

happy-canadian-beaver.jpgThe Illuminati often achieve their goals
by pretending to support the opposite.
It’s counter-intuitive but they advanced
world government by supporting nationalism
in Canada. It boils down to, if you wish to control
the opposition, you have to lead it. 
At a meeting in Copenhagen June 10, 1931: Arnold Toynbee, “Director of Studies” at Chatham House, London, said: 

“It is just because we are really attacking the principle of local sovereignty that we keep on protesting our loyalty to it so loudly.
The harder we press our attack upon the idol, the more pains we take to keep its priests and devotees in a fool’s paradise – lapped in a false sense of security which will inhibit them from taking up arms in their idol’s defense….
We are at present working, discreetly with all our might, to wrest this mysterious political force called sovereignty out of the clutches of the local national states of the world. And all the time, we are denying with our lips what we are doing with our hands.” 

By Henry Makow Ph.D.
(from April 22, 2010)

My original title was “Confessions of a Dupe.” From the age of 18 to 40, I was an ardent Canadian nationalist and member of various “nationalist” groups, including Mel Hurtig’s “Committee for an Independent Canada.”  In Mel_Hurtig.jpg1968, I organized a speech for Hurtig (left) at Carleton University.  In 1988, when I was rich from Scruples, I contributed about $20,000 to opposing the free trade agreement because of the loss of Canadian sovereignty.

It’s counter-intuitive but the leftist nationalist groups I supported were a front for the New World Order. Their leaders were actually internationalists. Mel Hurtig belonged to the Canadian branch of Arnold Toynbee’s “Royal Institute of International Affairs.” Abe Rotstein, Hurtig’s co-chairman,  attended the 1971 Bilderberg Conference. Other so-called nationalists like Mel Watkins, Eric Kierans and Maud Barlow were left wingers. The Left is a front for the Communist New World Order, i.e. big government in the service of big business. The masses are bribed with “social services” and fooled by the “Left – Right” conflict. Both Left and Right serve monopoly capital.

fistandrose.jpgCanada’s socialist party, the New Democrats, is a member of the Socialist International, a Masonic Banker outfit. Their logo is a fist and red roses, Communist and Masonic symbols.

“Nationalism” in Canada blossomed in the wake of the 1968 Bilderberg Conference at Mount Tremblant. A leaked document outlined a plan where Canadian financiers would appear to own Canadian business, but in reality it would be controlled by international lenders, i.e. Illuminati bankers. Canadian nationalism was another psy op.


I was 18 in 1968 and “looking for my identity.” I was looking for it because they had taken away God and religion. They had taken away gender (masculinity) and family. Naively, I sought my identity in “community.”  First, I investigated Israel but sensed something wrong with Zionism. Then I devoted myself to Canadian nationalism, majoring in Canadian literature. Little did I suspect i was joining a phony opposition.

In the wake of the 1988 election over North American free trade, I attended a conference of Left-leaning nationalist groups in Ottawa. We had lost. The purpose was to decide on the strategy going forward.

Three things struck me as odd.

1) Fellow organizers here in Winnipeg, who were actually Communists who infiltrated the labor movement, didn’t want me to go. I was puzzled that sincere activists wouldn’t want to include all the talent (or even money) they could find.

2) I was struck by the demeanor of  the leftist professors and activists at the Conference. They didn’t seem angry or disappointed by our loss. Quite the opposite. There was a palpable sense of smug satisfaction. They liked their “performance” and were content to return to misleading naive students. These pious people make over $100K “championing the poor” and “fighting the establishment.”

barlow.jpgFinally, 3) During the meeting I suggested some militant actions to continue the fight against free trade. The chair of the meeting, Maude Barlow, (left) who is still the chair of the “Council of Canadians” verbally sidelined me by promising to discuss the matter personally later. She never sought me out.

When I approached her, she said she was busy. l had been “finessed” by a pro.


Clearly the liberal and socialist “left” is part of the phony opposition. They don’t represent the people. They are Masons and part of the Masonic two-step leading to banker world government.  The “establishment” is complicit in the enslavement of society.

                                                      Similarly in the US and Europe, all political parties are run by Masons and ruled by the Rothschild cartel. I doubt if any individual or group gains visibility Truman Show SE.jpgunless they are puppets.

Our political and cultural life can be compared to the movie “The Truman Show.” (left) We are the Jim Carrey character. Everything is orchestrated and “under control.”

Certainly Ron Paul fits the category of phony opposition. He is a Mason. His wife is a Mason, Eastern Star. His daughters are Masons, Rainbow girls.

The John Birch Society does great research but apparently they were started by the Rockefellers who gave the founder a sweet deal for his grape juice company.

The purpose of the phony opposition is to co-opt the opposition and discourage any genuine grass roots political movement from starting. Their mission also is to fight trivial battles and distract us from the stealth establishment of world government. Remember the year the Republicans  spent trying to impeach Bill Clinton over Monica Lewinski? Government ground to a halt.

Do we have any real leaders? You can recognize them if they are marginalized and anathema to the mass media. Our real leaders are the people they slander, bankrupt and imprison or kill.

My source on Canadian Nationalism: “Rockefeller, Rothschild and Mel Hurtig: An Examination of the Committee for an Independent Canada”
a 1972 article by “The Canadian League of Rights.”

Maude Barlow’s UN Agenda

paulreagan.jpeg(left, Ron Paul in the checkered pants, in the 1980′s.)

First Comment from Dan:

They’ve reduced nationalist consciousness to the level of sports.  Franklin Roosevelt liked to refer to himself as ‘the quarterback’.

What a joke – to learn that Ron Paul’s wife and daughters are Eastern Star.  I remember an internet radio host asked him point blank, “have  you ever been a member of a secret society?”  That was 2007.  Ron gave a little laugh and said, “I was a member of a fraternity in college, but that was just more like playing pranks on each other and horsing around”.   That’s not exactly an honest answer, but it sounds like one.
Now I see that the talk show host was in on it, because the way he asked the question left room to dodge giving an answer.  I really don’t think Ron or any politicians goes on cold interviews.  Their handlers will require a list of the questions so they can prepare answers.  A media entertainer is in the position of weakness because they want to get hot or controversial names on their show.

Later I saw a video of Ron Paul on Morton Downey Jr’s TV show back in 1988 when he was that year’s Libertarian candidate.   Aside from being two decades younger, he displayed a completely different personality.  He was aggressive and hostile.  Too much contrast with the Ron Paul RELOVELUTION of the recent past.  He definitely playing a character, just like an actor. [1]

Ron was a pied piper who made people think he was a nationalist Constitutionalist when he’s really a disciple of Ayn Rand.  Rand was Rothschild propagandist.  Next time you see a bumper sticker that says “WHO IS JOHN GALT?”  you’ll know it was Philip Rothschild.  Rand was groomed by him before she was sent to America to preach the Rothschild evangel, with The Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged. 

I was always the skeptical devil’s advocate about so many conspiracy theories about the Rothschilds,  But when it was revealed that Ron Paul named his son after Ayn Rand, that was the straw that broke the camel’s back.

A citizens guide to understanding corporate media propaganda techniques

By George Orwell |  | 01.09.2010

A few decades ago, there were thousands of independent media outlets in the US. Today in America, six multinational global media mega corporations run by six individuals control 96% of the content Americans see on TV and watch at the movies; read in books, magazines and newspapers, and hear on the radio.

  • Time Warner
  • CBS
  • Walt Disney
  • News Corp
  • General Electric

Click the link below to see the details of who owns what.

Media Ownership Chart: The Big Six

These 6 corporations own the major entertainment theme parks, movie studios, television and radio broadcast networks, cable and satellite channels, video news, magazines, book publishers, sports entertainment, integrated telecommunications and the communications satellites themselves, wireless phones, video games software, electronic media, internet, record labels and the music industry, and more.

Everything you believe, more or less, is delivered to you by a monolithic six individuals running these corporations. They play golf together. They plot and scheme together. They are members of the same clubs and organizations.  These cretins see the people, the citizens… as donkeys or Muppets who will believe anything. These demi-gods decide in advance what the donkeys should believe and what attitudes they should have about everything.

“Our job is to give people not what they want, but what we decide they ought to have.”- Richard Salent, Former President CBS News.
12,700,000 Google References

“News is what someone wants to suppress. Everything else is advertising” – former NBC news President Rubin Frank147,000 Google References

“For better or worse, my company is a reflection of my character, my thinking, my values” – Rupert Murdoch297,000,000 Google References

“We are here to serve advertisers. That is our raison d’etre”  – CBS C.E.O. Michael Jordan  308,000 Google References

“We have no obligation to make history. We have no obligation to make art. We have no obligation to make a statement. To make money is our only objective” – Michael Eisner, CEO, The Walt Disney Co 364,000 Google References

“We are going to impose our agenda on the coverage by dealing with issues and subjects that we choose to deal with.” – Richard M. Cohen, Senior Producer of CBS political news. 1,360 Google references

“We live in a dirty and dangerous world. There are some things the general public does not need to know and shouldn’t. I believe democracy flourishes when the government can take legitimate steps to keep its secrets, and when the press can decide whether to print what it knows.” – Katherine Meyer Graham, Washington Post publisher41,500 Google References

“People shouldn’t expect the mass media to do investigative stories. That job belongs to the ‘fringe’ media.” – Ted Koppel – (American broadcast journalist, best known as the anchor for Nightline) 2770 Google References

“The Central Intelligence Agency owns everyone of any  significance  in the major  media.”–William Colby, former CIA Director, quoted by Dave Mcgowan, Derailing Democracy 167,000 Google References

Following this brief introduction is an attempt to enumerate powerful propaganda techniques being used on the American public and the world population by the corporate or so called “mainstream” (MSM) or mass media.

Having familiarized yourself with these techniques, you will be able to spot them as they are being deployed against you. The best way to counter propaganda is to understand the techniques and how they are used.

Framing [or re-framing] the debate

Debate a legitimate issue, and ostensibly have both sides represented, but instead on the continuum of opinion, have one from the middle and one from an extreme view and thus contain the debate to meet your ideological framing and goals. Alternatively, have a strong debater for one side, and a weak debater for the point of view you would like to suppress.

Framing (social sciences)

From Wikipedia:

A frame in social theory consists of a schema of interpretation — that is, a collection of anecdotes and stereotypes—that individuals rely on to understand and respond to events. In simpler terms, a person has, through their lifetime, built a series of mental emotional filters. They use these filters to make sense of the world. The choices they then make are influenced by their frame or emotional filters.

Alternatively, the power of the media can re frame the entire context of a debate if desired.

Example:  a nuclear accident has occurred.

Instead of debating the effects of radiation release, float the idea using one of your “experts” or shills that radiation is good for you. Thus re frame the debate to whether or not radiation is good for you instead of how much it will take to cause cancer and disease.

Example:  re frame a debate about torture by instead of debating the legality or morality of torture, debate the effectiveness of torture techniques.

Programming the viewers attitudes

This has become a very widely used propaganda technique.  Cover a story, complete with your ideological spin, and then follow up with interviews of  “ordinary people” who support your point of view but frame it as the popular point of view or the only point of view. If you have to do 1000 interviews to pick 2, the viewer never knows. The viewer walks away with a powerful form of sub conscious attitude programming as they hear the propaganda point regurgitated by someone “just like them”. This same technique can be used on letters to the editor, emails to TV news hosts, or wherever else cherry picking of public opinion can be conducted without tipping off the viewer, reader or listener. This powerful technique which is basically fraud, if deployed for long enough with consistent messages, can change an entire culture over time.


Instead of covering stories that matter, cover irrelevant, trivial stories about entertainers or celebrities and blow them up into grand productions so you don’t have to discuss anything that really matters, or when something happens that you don’t want to discuss but ordinarily would be forced by popular opinion to discuss, generate a distraction of your own sensational making which you discuss instead. By using the volume and coordination technique, the media monopolists can entirely obfuscate or bury important stories and issues of their choosing.

Group think

TV programs often revolve around groups of people delivering the content or opinion because people programmed not to be able to think for themselves instinctively believe groups promoting a certain opinion more than one individual. They all nod their heads in agreement with whatever propaganda is to be pushed on you, and the idea is that you also will nod your head like a brain dead zombie.

This can all be punctuated by “experts”. The group of “experts” will collectively come to the “correct” conclusions for you so you don’t have to think for yourself, even if you still can.

Guided Interpretation for the reader or viewer

In this technique, a journalist or anchorman will tell you what someone else said.

In some cases, quotes will be taken out of context, but in many cases an entirely concocted version of what was said will be passed off as the truth to an unsuspecting reader, listener or viewer.

What was actually said will not be referenced, because if the viewer or reader has access to what the actual content was, it exposes the fraud. That being the case, this technique is dangerous, because if the reader or viewer does have access to the source, the propaganda becomes apparent leaving distrust.

Fluff and ice cream cones

Everyone loves an ice cream cone. Run feel good stories about puppies and teddy bears. Regardless of what really happens or the actual state of affairs, convey the message that all is good, America is great, and things are the same as they always have been. If cities decay, just don’t shoot wide shots of those cities any more.  Always project a disneylandish, cartoonish, surreal version of reality.

Leverage what people like and what people are compassionate towards to build  trust and leave the viewer feeling happy and complacent. Most importantly, establish trust and goodwill in your enterprise. Do everything necessary to give it the appearance of legitimacy no matter how fraudulent it is.  Always.

Artificial reality

By framing the entire programming of the network, and by subtle editorializing over news stories, you can create an artificial reality, posing as the truth.

As a media mogul, you drive the programming and choose what to cover and how to cover it through your upper management, programming and editor selections. As a viewer, is is critically important to remember that every word read comes from a teleprompter, and the people who write, edit and select the copy are the ones actually delivering the content. The people who actually read the news to you are in that position because they are experts at reading propaganda and sounding convincing while doing it.

“For better or worse, my company is a reflection of my character, my thinking, my values” – Rupert Murdoch

Good looking, likable, trusted newscaster:

“here is a story about someone who did the right thing”.

According to whom? The programming director?

Ex:  xyz is a desired reality or propaganda point….

Good looking, likable, trusted newscaster says on the most widely watched news channel in America:

“I believe xyz and I think the majority of Americans are right there with me”.

Not.  This is pure propaganda in it’s most overt form.

“Never again will you be capable of ordinary human feeling. Everything will be dead inside you. Never again will you be capable of love, or friendship, or joy of living, or laughter, or curiosity, or courage, or integrity. You will be hollow. We shall squeeze you empty and then we shall fill you with ourselves” – George Orwell

Direct programming

In this method, a story is covered with the specific intent of a viewer walking away holding a desired point of view. The actual coverage of the story as compared to the truth could range from slightly true to entirely untrue. The story is merely a tool to achieve an end result.

Special interest ads posing as news stories

In this technique, a special interest advertisement will be crafted as if it is a news story and presented as such. Only the astute viewer will be able to spot the fraud.

Video news release

From Wikipedia:

A video news release (VNR) is a video segment created by a PR firm, advertising agency, marketing firm, corporation, or government agency and provided to television news stations for the purpose of informing, shaping public opinion, or to promote and publicize individuals, commercial products and services, or other interests. In this way, VNRs are video versions of press releases.

The big lie technique

Tell a lie so large that no one will question the authenticity because of the size of the lie. This is a time tested, proven propaganda technique and used by the most infamous of  media controllers and propagandists.

Big Lie

From Wikipedia:



This is a simple, straightforward and effective technique. For news that doesn’t fit your agenda, or news that might cause your advertisers or special interest supporters to withhold support, for news that might not fit with the overall story line and talking points… just don’t cover the story. Alternatively, if a high profile person carries an opinion or message you would like to suppress, don’t ever invite that person as a guest. Since you and your peers didn’t cover it, it didn’t happen.

This very powerful tool combined with the volume and coordination technique gives a media mogul the ability to decide for everyone else what is and what is not important. Omission is often combined with the distraction technique.

Volume and coordination

This is the opposite of omission. The goal of this technique is to create broad awareness of a propaganda point through a media deluge. This is often punctuated by many or all of the big six joining in unison to promote or hype the same propaganda point, idea or story. In this way, even a small or trivial item can be boosted to the forefront of collective consciousness. If desired, through TV, Magazines, movies and sitcoms, any point can be focused in the forefront of the mind of the population. This technique can be used effectively for short term or more importantly for long term results. As with many techniques in this guide, this technique becomes more effective the more consolidated the media becomes.

Humanization and de-humanization or personalization and de-personalization

If you show dead bodies it generates a reaction. If you humanize a story, you generate sympathy for the victim. Alternatively if you avoid humanization or dehumanize atrocities or awful acts, you can avoid public sympathy being created. This technique is often used to report on war and decide on behalf of the viewer or reader who are the “good guys” and who are the “bad guys”. It doesn’t have to be used in wartime however. Propaganda pieces can be run to humanize bad guys or dehumanize good guys. This technique can and often does go so far as to frame a villain(s) as a victim(s) or vice versa. This is a very powerful technique which has been used with great effectiveness. Friends of the media are good. Enemies are bad.This technique alone can accomplish that goal when used by a skilled group of propagandists.

Friendly fire

Repeatedly have as guests, people who strongly support your causes, or alternatively have weak debaters appear to represent causes you don’t support. A weak debater combined with a hostile interview can decimate a legitimate topic of debate or point of view.

Historical revision

Omit unflattering feedback and generate your own positive feedback. Dead people and historical events are a prime target for historical revision in news, movies, mini series, or any other venue where a fictionalized account of the past or a past personality can be configured as truth by the network, studio or publication.

“Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past.” - George Orwell

Winning the viewer

Attempt to foster goodwill and viewer loyalty by covering fluff stories using likable or attractive people and personalities in a way that ordinary viewers or readers can identify with. In this way, people are more likely to swallow the dope. This extends to using disaster and tragedy for shameless self promotion, ratings boosts, and leveraging of the media empire. Ideally, the consumers of your propaganda will love you as you program them.

“The ideal set up by the Party was something huge, terrible, and glittering—a world of steel and concrete, of monstrous machines and terrifying weapons—a nation of warriors and fanatics, marching forward in perfect unity, all thinking the same thoughts and shouting the same slogans, perpetually working, fighting, triumphing, persecuting—three hundred million people all with the same face.” - George Orwell

Emphasis and repetition

Cover stories which match your agenda over and over and over… and over. People will remember repetition and will come to believe anything if it is repeated often enough.


Invite often, people with so called “credentials”, who pose as “experts”, “professors” or other lofty titles who support the network point of view as if it is the truth. Often, these so called experts will have a financial or career interest, or some other political or ideological affiliation regarding their point of view that is not disclosed. The Wikipedia entry below concentrates on “selling goods or services”. It is imperative to note that the “goods and services” could include a point of  view, or an ideology, or a political, social or religious position.


From Wikipedia:

A shill is person who is paid to help another person or organization to sell goods or services.


Employ “trusted” personalities who pretend to be on the side of exposing media or government corruption and who pretend to represent the common citizen but who is in fact, dealing sophisticated propaganda.


From Wikipedia:

A gatekeeper is defined as someone who controls access to something. It also refers to individuals who decide whether a given message will be distributed by a mass medium.

Repeating a lie

George Orwell along with many infamous propagandists have said that if you repeat a lie frequently enough, people will take it to be true.

Telling the truth

If the media selectively tells the truth on points where an ideological agenda or sponsorship is not at risk, that opportunity can be used to tell the truth and gain viewer confidence. It is critically important to occasionally tell the truth in order to maintain credibility or legitimacy.

Fogging an issue

Sometimes special interest groups or sponsors will have an interest in making sure that as few people pay attention to an issue as possible, or alternatively that an issue is of little importance. A good propagandist can write a long, nonsensical article or offer a confusing video segment for the purpose of confusing the viewer or reader and obscuring any real issues through confusion or lack of interest. This technique can be used when the story is too big for the distraction or omission techniques.

Vilification and character assassination

This is an important tool that is often used to keep politicians in line by fear and intimidation of what they know has already happened to people with the “wrong” opinion. People or personalities whose opinion or positions are to be suppressed are subtly (or not so subtly) vilified and sabotaged, usually by over blowing a trivial issue relating to something people are sympathetic to. Vilification is most effective when used subtly and over a long period of time, so the audience or readership becomes slowly programmed as to who is “good” and who is “bad”.  A broad array of techniques can be used ranging from hiring investigators to “dig up dirt”, then using the volume and coordination technique. The “He Said, She Said” technique is also employed for character assassination.  Using this method, the author or newscaster can cast the backlash to someone else and say something they know isn’t true, or isn’t fair, but they want to say it anyway. As a media mogul, your enemies become the people’s enemies and your friends become the people’s friends.  You can eject a politician or shame a public personality. This is an extremely effective and important arena. See also “character assassination via the question mark” under “cooking the headlines”.

Keep only team players

If a newscaster, commentator or journalist or editor has the wrong opinion, fire them and replace them with someone who has the correct opinion. The looming threat of un-personing acts as a powerful compliance tool for field reporters and editors. During the past several years in America, there have been a lot of high profile corporate reporters, anchormen and anchorwomen who have been un-personed within 24 hours of uttering the “wrong” opinion. Media mogul pimps hastily un-person rogue reporters because it has a chilling effect on the remainder of their stable of whores.

Embedded editorial views in news stories

In Journalism, the editorial page is where opinion is supposed to be expressed, but editorial views can be subtly introduced into “news” to program the viewer or reader.

As a media consumer, look for opinions which are stated as if they are fact. Facts can be substantiated, opinions cannot.

Also, be on the lookout for subtle inaccuracies,  or  a dismissive tone. Alternatively, editorial views can be injected into news by subtly misstating a topic, often a serious one, and pretending any objecting or concerned view of the treatment of the topic is silly, unrealistic, or just not necessary. This can become related to deciding who is sane on behalf of the viewer or reader.  The more subtly these opinions and distortions can be substituted for facts, the more powerful the propaganda tool of editorialized news. This technique can be punctuated or made more potent by keeping in line with your friends in Government who echo the same views as truth.

The largest and supposedly most respected media outlets in America today routinely sell editorial views as news. Corporate media journalism in America has morphed from informing the public, into something entirely sinister. In spite of this, most Americans remain in the dark as to the fraud and advanced PR techniques being hoisted upon them.

Lies as truth

Run  a story or headline that you know isn’t true to support your point of view. In a subtler form, mistranslate or misquote to suit. Alternatively, publish or sponsor polls intended to give a desired result.

Deciding who is sane on behalf of the viewer or reader

Portray points of view you would like to suppress as extreme, crazy, dangerous or not legitimate. If necessary, call in one or more of your “experts” for emphasis.

This effect can be multiplied by ensuring that members of the audience, even though they may have all collectively come to the same opinion,  if it is not the desired opinion, you ensure that each viewer believes they are crazy and alone in holding that point of view.  This is a potent technique used to form “mainstream” opinion.

Furthermore, as one of the six media owners, you can leverage the “correct mainstream opinion” by “behavior placement” in your sitcoms, magazine articles, and on the radio. In behavior placement, one out of your stable of celebrity actors holds certain behaviors, ideas or attitudes that are either condoned or maligned by the rest of the cast. This could be an attitude, an opinion they hold regarding anything, a product they use,  ideas about religion or anything else.

Americans have become enamored with celebrities from decades of Hollywood propaganda. We have been conditioned to want to be like them. Celebrity behavior placement is a very, very powerful tool in the media owners arsenal.

Advertising as news

Run goodwill stories about advertisers, or for that matter about your parent company, as if you are covering news or human interest stories. Effectively as a media mogul you can have free stealth advertising throughout your enterprise. If you own a theme park, have your news division do a “story’ about how great the theme park is. Punctuate that by cherry picking interviews and broadcasting them in the segment so viewers can hear it from others who are “just like themselves”.

The hostile or friendly interview

Interview people whose views you support in a friendly manner. Interview people whose views you would like to suppress in a hostile manner. This technique is most effective when kept low key. A variation of this technique is to invite a guest for an “interview”, then have an aggressive personality talk over them the whole time and repeat as truth things they never said or things they said out of context.

A more advanced variation of this propaganda technique is to invite someone and label them as an “expert” or “professor” or any favorable handle for a “friendly” interview who does not well represent a cause or issue. The important distinction here is that the viewer sees a friendly interview and yet walks away unimpressed by the point of view.

Humor as a propaganda tool

Feature comedians who support your point of view, ideological or religious agenda.  As a media mogul, it’s easy to get the Muppets to laugh as you deride and attack your enemies with so called humor from your stable of “comedians”.  Use this “humor” for character assassination, vilification or to punctuate your propaganda regarding who is sane and who isn’t. If you tightly control your stable of prime time comedians,  people will only laugh at what you want them to laugh at. If a comedian in your A list isn’t with the program, then they disappear forever into obscurity.

Unflattering (or flattering) handles

Corral an entire group of people into a pigeon hole, by crafting handles that carry positive or negative connotations.


He is a “conspiracy theorist” (negative connotation) used to tar anyone who contradicts or attempts to expose the propaganda of the party line.

He is a “goldbug” (negative connotation) used to subliminally encourage the idea that someone favorable to owning gold is a kook or single minded extremist.

A “truther” – negative connotation label applied to any person who questions the government version of 911.

A “right wing (left wing) extremist” – to portray a given point of view as extreme, whether it is or not.

Use the power of words to emphasize or de-emphasize acts or information

The crowd was “peppered” with hellfire missiles.

Trusted anchorman – “They criticize us for using enhanced interrogation techniques like waterboarding” *. MSNBC 2/22/2010

*Please note that waterboarding is currently defined in international law not as an “enhanced interrogation technique” but as torture. The United States put to death Japanese commanders accused of waterboarding. The public is not OK with torture, so you just re-define it as an “enhanced interrogation technique”, and it’s fine.

Collateral damage – when innocent people are killed in wartime, a suitable, soft term is needed. If an army accidentally inflicts collateral damage, even if that means killing scores, hundreds or thousands of innocent people, a simple two word term called “collateral damage” makes it OK.

Divide and conquer

Create simple minded divisions between groups of people to keep them distracted and arguing among themselves over mostly trivial issues. Use black and white, good and evil, and particularly the faux left and right divide. Leave no room in the middle for discussion as if all opinions and issues are binary. When events happen, don’t ever discuss actual causes. As a media owner, you have your employees discuss the event, and make up the cause in your programming department.

Using anonymous sources

Generate “news” using anonymous sources. This technique could range from mis-quoting, to outright fabrication and lying such as an anonymous source that is entirely fictional and created to generate a certain reaction or artificial reality. Anonymous sources are used heavily in the US media to lay the propaganda groundwork and to manufacture the popular consent for wars of conquest and aggression.

Using guided imagery

This is an advanced technique which is now pervasive in all PR, advertising and corporate programming as well as central banking.  The idea is a takeoff on the idea popularized by George Soros which is that “markets influence events they anticipate.” By the same token, there is an assumption that if the people are told something as if it is true, then it will in fact become true. You could call this molding public opinion. An example of this would be saying as if it is fact, “70 percent of the country is in favor of xyz”. The idea is that this repeated, will have the effect of causing the public opinion to actually be that. Another would be “we have green shoots” or “the country is out of the recession”, with the idea being that if you state this as fact, then people will have more confidence and spend and it will become true.

Using music, lighting and effects

Music and lighting effects can be powerful promoters of feelings and emotion. Both are heavily employed, and deployed against the public. For example, when promoting the party line, be sure to have the music set to create all the right feelings and emotions. Wave the flag. Set your color scheme to red, white and blue. Create emphasis by dramatic lighting or by talking loud and fast or soft and somber.

The privilege of being a media mogul means having your personal points of view represented and delivered by people who are “just like” the audience to be programmed.

Fabricated evidence

This technique is practiced by promoting as self sourced or repeating “evidence” that could range from non existent to fabricated. This could include doctored photographs to include, exclude or exaggerate information, audio recordings and video productions, as well as dossiers or written documents. Any or all of which are promoted as “the truth” though they may in fact have only some basis in truth or be entirely fabricated. It could in fact have been an entirely paid for promotion.

The preemptive strike

A journalist, anchor or interviewer  attacks at the very outset of the article or segment with the “acceptable” view of the topic, prior to the topic. This is a brute force technique and is easy to spot. It usually involves some sort of angry tirade.

Leveraging the media empire

The media empire can be used by the parent company for advertising, propaganda and goodwill. This is a very broad arena where subtle or overt techniques can be used.

As a multinational media mega corporation, you can use your music empire to promote your viewpoint or more importantly, eliminate alternative points of view. If the musicians on your record label step out of line, quietly retire them. Sign acts that for whatever reason, have a message which you personally like.

You can advertise your theme park in the name of news. You can interview people who wrote books you published, or interview people who produced movies for a subsidiary. You can promote your ideals with a consistent message throughout your subsidiaries and enterprises. You can promote or demote points of view you agree or disagree with. You can use behavior placement in the sitcoms, movies and other programming arenas to produce a consistent message of your choosing.  As media empires become ever fewer, ever larger, and ever more powerful, this tactic becomes more and more potent.

Serialization of a related chain of events and the memory hole

This technique works to reconcile incompatible truths by deconstructing all events to a serial chain, and discarding all past information unless not doing so proves particularly useful. This is what George Orwell referred to as the “memory hole”.

If you remember the past version of the truth, then often the current version of the truth is not compatible with that version of the truth; therefore there should be no memory of the past unless it is a reverse engineered version. Otherwise, incongruence is generated.  At least the news isn’t covering it. That’s the point.

You are supposed to forget the past and concentrate on what you are being told today. It’s all a serial chain of sound bites and propaganda intended and engineered to give desired current results. There are no causes and effects, only an unrelated serial chain of events.

Memory hole

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Cooking the headlines

Headline tickers offer endless opportunities for revisionist or deceptive news and fast, efficient propaganda programming. There are more people reading the headline tickers than are following the actual stories. For example, hundreds of people in an airport may be just following the headline ticker… People receiving a news stream on the internet may be only looking at headlines. Therefore, if you can cook the headlines you effectively get “propaganda leverage”. Furthermore, people remember the headlines without necessarily following the actual story;

technique #1. – deceptive headlines designed to convey a certain message, but based on an actual event

technique #2 – false headlines ie “WMD found in Iraq”. Over 70 percent of the US population came to believe that weapons of mass destruction were found in Iraq, and the reason is that headlines were running which repeatedly made that claim, although it was entirely untrue.

technique #3 – embedding propaganda as reasons in headlines, ie “stocks soared today because… (made up propaganda reason follows)”

technique #4 – overplay some headlines and underplay other headlines to decide on behalf of the viewer or reader what is important

Repetition and trust

There are 300 million Americans in the United States and yet spanning the entire corporate media, the people invited on as regulars by the big six could fill a gymnasium. The point is that if “trusted” sources are developed and cultivated by the corporate media, people will come to believe what they say, regardless of what they say or how wrong they have been in the past.

Propagandists are held out by the corporate media to the public as “experts” who do not represent the centrist views of the majority of Americans, have been wrong about nearly everything they have ever said, and these people are never held to account. At the same time, people who have been correct or people who have views that represent mainstream America remain off the people’s radar, never or rarely invited as guests except maybe for a hostile interview.

In sum total this technique can be used to generate a heavy handed dose of artificial reality.

Subliminal messages

Anything you say while wearing an American Flag lapel pin is patriotic.

The topic of subliminal messages could probably justify a post in itself. In short, at the subliminal level, advertisers and the media like to link things together. In general, they want to link positive things, things you want to be, things you see yourself as, things you support, things you desire or desire to be, to themselves, to the dope they are pushing, or to their advertisers. Music, lighting or sounds can be employed to create subliminal hypnotic effects. Behavior placement can be used for subliminal effects. If they are doing their job well, you will never even be aware it’s happening.

Re-framing the question

By re-framing the question or subtly altering the question, or even by the possible answers offered to the question, a media enterprise can move the discussion to a different realm or even change the answer. This technique is often used for poll results to be used as propaganda. It can also be used to alter the subject of a debate.

Engineered reality

Using this brute force technique, camera angles, staged events and engineered real time and post production effects can be added to a video feed to dramatically alter the viewers perception. With the correct camera angle, a small crowd can be made to seem large or vice versa.

If your media company would like to minimize or maximize a protest to suit your ideological agenda, it can be covered using a camera angle minimizing or maximizing the crowd, along with a suitable dialogue which confirms the selected camera angle and desired viewer take away. This can be followed up using other techniques such as cherry picked interviews with participants to deliver whatever message is desired.

Using a laugh track you can program the viewers in terms of what is perceived to be funny. Other audio effects can also be added. Real time audio and video production techniques can augment or add elements to a video feed that weren’t present in the un-doctored feed.

Investigative journalism (or lack thereof) as a weapon or a tool

Using the guise of investigative journalism, corporate media can either bag a victim or let a friend off the hook. This can be used on politicians, people in the public spotlight, or anyone whose views are to be suppressed or promoted.

Of all the controversy surrounding 9/11, one of the most mysterious aspects is that there were very unusual large option bets placed prior to the incident which paid hundreds of millions, if not billions to the account holders who placed those bets. By law, every account holder who places a trade on a US exchange is known and can be easily traced by any federal law enforcement or regulatory body. To date, almost ten years after the event, these profiteers were never identified and there was never any effort by the corporate media using investigative journalism to force the disclosure to the American people, when there easily could have been. This is a glaring example of a lack of investigative journalism being used as a tool and corporate media complicity in nefarious, treasonous deeds.

“People shouldn’t expect the mass media to do investigative stories. That job belongs to the ‘fringe’ media.” – Ted Koppel – (American broadcast journalist, best known as the anchor for Nightline) 2770 Google References

Leading the viewer or reader

This is a powerful, simple technique which is used pervasively to introduce editorial content into news. This works by leading the viewer or reader in a subtle way to a pre-defined conclusion, or to make the subject look awkward for disagreeing with propaganda pre-established by the host.

From the newscaster to the interviewee:

Don’t you think that (thing to be agreed with follows).

Wouldn’t you agree with (high profile “expert” who has never been correct about anything and returns every week to spew propaganda) that (xyz propaganda point).

I know I (propaganda point), what about you?

Most Americans believe (propaganda point) what is your opinion?

Fewer and fewer people (propaganda point).

Everyone wants (propaganda point).

The best case is (propaganda point).

Planting seeds of doubt

Character assassination via the question mark. This is a very powerful technique which can be used for character assassination while avoiding lawsuits. The way it is done is to pose outrageous and libelous character assassination as a question, and thus plant seeds of doubt in the mind of the viewer or reader. This is best illustrated by example:

Ron Paul: Terrorist?

Token Equal Time

The goal of this technique is to create an appearance of fairness. It consists of an article or video segment written or broadcast with entirely one point of view, then at the end a meager statement from the opposing view is mentioned, then immediately refuted. In this way the reader absorbs the intended point of view while at the same time believing the topic has had fair treatment.

The “May Have” Technique

The words “may have” provide endless opportunities for programming a zombie audience.  This is a form of character assassination and similar to character assassination via the question mark.

“Iran may have committed a cyber-attack on the BBC”

“AP: Iran may be cleaning up nuclear traces at military site”

“BBC News – Iran ‘may boost nuclear programme’, diplomat warns”

The double-talk “may have’s” convey the LIES (but with plausible deniability):As a viewer or listener, you should be acutely aware of the use of the words “may have”  by the media propagandists.

Sex sells news

Pasty faced bimbos with silicone cleavage, bubbly personalities and enough botox to immobilize cattle… as fake as the half baked teleprompter propaganda they’re serving up to a nation of  300 million Muppets.

It doesn’t really matter what they say, and no one really cares… because the men aren’t listening.  This is why programs which cater to a male audience like financial news channels are stacked with stacked bimbos who couldn’t tell a debenture from a derivative.  Why else would anyone listen to a casino operator pimping their casino day in and day out?  Men will go so far as to watch with the sound muted. It’s a cheap trick to gain viewers who otherwise would be disinterested in the endless, incessant propaganda pitch.

Enough said.

In total, when these potent techniques are used synergistically, the entire fabric of a society can be guided, shaped and molded. Your only defenses are awareness and even better, turning it off.

IRS goes after What Really Happened

Well, I guess it was only a matter of time, but the IRS is coming after Claire and I over some back taxes which we simply do not have the money to pay. No doubt they are looking to go after everyone else trying to stop the rush to war with Syria. Our PayPal account has been seized, so don’t bother sending in any more donations; send it to RBN.

We have endured this harassment for many years, but I can no longer remain silent, nor should anyone who is dealing with these issues.

In all good conscience, I cannot pay taxes to a government that ignores the will of the people and usurps their wealth to fund wars, bail out bankers, and support foreign governments, while allowing this nation to whither away.

More than that, I have satisfied myself that the 16th Amendment did in fact fail ratification and that the income tax and the Federal reserve are unconstitutional and illegal. In this age of lies about Saddam’s nuclear weapons and Assad’s chemical weapons, Americans are probably ready to accept that the same government also lied about the 16th Amendment in order to steal their money.

I don’t know how this will end. We could wind up homeless, and certainly it may mean the end of after almost 20 years.

I have been fighting against this government ever since they wrecked my career over the Vince Foster case. It has been very hard through the years and we understood it could likely end very badly.

I did not wish to burden the readers with my personal problems, but the fact is I cannot bring myself to cooperate with this illegitimate government, even if I had the means to do so, and going public seems my only option now.

Red Beckman: The 16th Amendment was Never Ratified!

“The Law That Never Was”

16th Amendment NEVER ratified by ANY State – Joe Banister

America : Freedom to Fascism

Sullivan Vs United States – Judge ADMITS 16th Amendment failed ratification

Today, we are hearing that the Infernal Revenue Service has been targeting political dissidents to a far greater degree than was previously exposed. Going beyond merely delaying tax-exempt status for Tea-Party, Occupy, and conservatives in general, donors to GOP candidates like Mitt Romney have been hit with disproportionate numbers of audits.

All America is now aware that the IRS is acting illegally. After all, such political targeting was an article of impeachment against Richard Nixon. So the time has come to take the discussion to the next level. Is the IRS, clearly acting illegally, itself legal? and the answer is “no”, it is not. The Constitution forbids direct non-apportioned taxation of the people. An earlier version of the Income Tax was struck down by the United States Supreme Court on those grounds.

The Federal Reserve (itself a clearly unconstitutional usurpation of the money-creation authority vested in Congress by the Constitution) and the IRS claim that the passage of the 16th Amendment allows an income tax, but there are several problems with that claim. First and foremost, the 16th Amendment failed ratification! The necessary 3/4 of the states did not ratify the Amendment. Requests for proof that this Amendment was actually ratified are ignored. The IRS considers their enforcement actions the only legal reply they are required to make. And judges in tax courts (who are funded from tax revenues) inevitably refuse to examine the issue and simply declare from the bench that the Amendment was ratified, a power and authority not granted to judges under the Constitution.

There is one notable exception to this judicial legerdemain, and that is judge James C. Fox, who stated quite clearly in the court record for Sullivan Vs United States that the 16th Amendment, on examination, failed ratification. Sadly, however, that was not a tax case, and the judge mentioned the non-ratification of the 16th Amendment as justification for the enforcement of laws that may not have legally been passed, but were presumed valid through long use (i.e. we got away with it this long, so why should we change it now).

Yet another problem with the 16th Amendment is the United states Supreme Court, which ruled in Stanton vs Baltic Mining that the 16th Amendment, even if ratified, did not actually grant any new tax authority to the US Government. For one thing the original Constitutional prohibition against a direct non-apportioned tax is still in effect because it was not explicitly repealed by the hastily-contrived 16th Amendment.

So here we are, with the IRS clearly breaking the law, acting illegally, for all America to see, which is why this is a great time for activists to take the public discussion to the next level and ask if the IRS itself, and its master, the Federal Reserve, are actually legal under the Constitution.

Search Engine Manipulation. Google and YouTube Suppress Controversial 9/11 Truth? 

By Elizabeth Woodworth

Global Research, October 05, 2013

Let’s Make 9/11 Truth Go Viral

Global Research is committed to Counter-propaganda.

Forward this article far and wide.

Post it on social media, cross-post it on blog sites and independent media. (GR Editor M. Ch.).


With polls consistently showing that approximately 50% of Canadians and Americans doubt the official story of 9/11, the feat of keeping the lid on a public debate for over 12 years has been nothing short of miraculous.

This article presents a simple case study showing that this miracle is being performed with the assistance of Google and YouTube search engine interference

On September 8, 2013, the popular Russia Today “Truthseeker” program, with over a million subscribers on YouTube,[1] published a 13-minute newscast entitled “The Truthseeker: 9/11 and Operation Gladio (E23).”

Below the video frame ran the caption:

Bigger than Watergate’: US ‘regular’ meetings with Al-Qaeda’s leader; documented White House ‘false flag terrorism’ moving people ‘like sheep’; the father of Twin Towers victim tell us why he backs this month’s 9/11 campaign on Times Square and around the world; & the protests calendar for September.

This paragraph was followed by a list of interviewees, including four people representing three scholarly research organizations: Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth,[2] the 9/11 Consensus Panel,[3] and The Journal of 9/11 Studies.[4]

The “Truthseeker” video immediately started to gain popularity on YouTube, reaching 131,000 views in the first three days.[5](The history of the viewing statistics may be seen by clicking on the little graphic symbol under the video frame, and to the right)

Truthseeker posted its program to YouTube on Sept. 8. Russia Today tweeted the YouTube link to its 546,000 followers and to the interviewer, Daniel Bushell, that day:

RT ‏@RT_com 8 Sep

The Truthseeker: 9/11 and operation Gladio (E23)

A MOXNEWS copy of the same newscast was also posted September 8 under the title“Russia Today News Declares 9/11 An Inside Job False Flag Attack!” which in turn started to escalate, with over 80,000 views in the first few days.[6]

Other uploads of the program also appeared, with less traffic, bringing the early viewing total to over a quarter of a million people.

What Happened Next?

In both the RT and MOXNEWS cases, the viewer statistics on YouTube suddenly flat-lined on the morning of September 11 — like a heart monitor when a patient dies.

The YouTube search engine had suddenly failed to locate these videos.

Oddly, although the RT video may still be viewed on YouTube through its direct link (if known) from the Google URL box,[7] it cannot be accessed on YouTube by its title, or by portions of its title, or by searching “Truthseeker.”

The MOXNET version was also decoupled from the YouTube search engine for a period of time after September 11, but has since been restored to normal indexing.

Below is RT’s “Truthseeker” “9/11 and Operation Gladio” reposted on GlobalResearchTV:

How Were the Search Engine Failures Detected and Verified?

Investigations carried out independently by a US engineering colleague and myself revealed the following:

I. YouTube Search Results and Rankings:

· Searching the exact title of the original “Truthseeker” posting (“9/11 and Operation Gladio”) does not yield the original RT post. It does yield other posts with far fewer viewings, but the original, which as we have seen still exists as a URL, is evidently no longer in the YouTube index.…0.0…

Its viewings have slowly risen over several weeks from 131,000 to 136,000 through the early news reports — but with by far the most views of all the uploads, it should appear at the top of the list.

  • Searching YouTube for the URL of the original escalating RT version produces no result either, although as we have seen, the URL is still a functioning direct link. (Experiment: Take any URL from YouTube or Google, plug it into the search box and watch it come up on top of the list — because there is only one.)
  • Searching YouTube for the program’s name, “Truthseeker,” displays titles from Episodes 1-22, and also Episode 24, but it fails to show Episode 23, “9/11 and Operation Gladio” in 15 pages of search results.
  • Searching for the MOXNET post on the third day of its existence (September 11) produced a similar result. It should have appeared second from the top with its 80,000 views, but it was difficult to get it to appear at all — except through its direct link (if one had saved this earlier).
  • Oddly enough, the MOXNET post is once again normally accessible on YouTube (as it was September 8-11) through a search of either: a) its full title, or b) its first few words.

II. Google Search Results and Rankings:

An exploration of the Google Web and Google Video search results revealed the following about access to the RT “Truthseeker” Episode 23:

· Google Web Rankings: On a search of “9/11 and Operation Gladio,” Google Web first brought up several news items, followed by an array of low-volume YouTube uploads that did not include the popular original RT version.,or.r_cp.r_qf.&cad=b&bvm=pv.xjs.s.en_US.qH4g2czDPNQ.O&ech=1&psi=51dPUsRPhbrgA6-cgcgK.1380931557920.3&emsg=NCSR&noj=1&ei=51dPUsRPhbrgA6-cgcgK

· Google Video Rankings: On the same search, “9/11 and Operation Gladio,” Google Video first listed the “Truthseeker” website page from which the video may also be watched and downloaded (as discussed below). This was followed by a half dozen uploads from other sources, mostly showing 50-200 video views. The original RT video that is still available by direct link and now records 136,000 views, did not show up at all — yet it should have been on top.

· On both Google Web and Google Video, searching the original RT URL failed to bring up the early version of the program that had started to go viral[8] — although its direct link still exists and shows up on several early September news websites.

III. The Truthseeker’s Own Website:

The “Truthseeker” produces a new show every two weeks. As of this writing, the “Truthseeker” home page shows Episode 24, dated September 22, right at the top, followed by Episodes 22, 21, 20, and 19.

Our case-study Episode 23, dated September 8, was displayed at the top of the home page from September 8-11, before it disappeared.

It was then located under a different date — August 1, 2012 — buried on a back page with earlier episodes from over a year ago.

This may have been a simple mistake on the part of a large investigative news network that is attracting personnel and audiences away from Western networks, or it may be the result of hacking or political pressure. [It should be noted that when a September 8 2013 posting is given a new date namely August 1, 2012, it no longer appears on Google News in the days leading up to and following September 11, 2013, the date of commemoration of the 9/11 attacks. This redating of the September 8 also affects is ranking in the search engines].

The bottom line is that at least with regard to the Google and YouTube (which is owned by Google) search engines, something highly unusual has gone awry.[9]

Failure of Email Transmissions Describing the Above Investigation

Perhaps the most disturbing element of this case study is that for more than two weeks after September 11, 2013, it was impossible for some people to transmit by email the link to the original YouTube Episode 23 that had started to go viral.[10]

An email containing this link would at first appear to have transmitted normally, for it would show up in the sender’s Sent Mail. But it would not be received by the addressees — including the sender, if copied to self.

To my knowledge, at least six people, including three IT professionals, experienced the failure of email transmissions containing this particular link.

Of these IT professionals, one concluded, “There is no benign explanation for this.”

Impact and Significance:

1. Impact: How popular videos behave statistically

When videos start to become popular on YouTube, the statistics curve usually continues to rise over time.

Some show an initial burst of interest, with the curve rising quite steeply, then settling into an upward sloping line over time. This may be seen with the 2011 “Ultimate Dog Tease” (145 million).[11]

Others have a slower start, then catch on and build steadily, as did the 2012 “Psy-Gangnam Style” video, the first to be viewed over a billion times.[12]

The same slow-start pattern was seen with the 2007 video, “9/11 Clues EVERYONE MISSED.”[13]

Now compare these graphs with the two flat-line interruptions in the case-study videos whose progress was truncated by search engine failure.[14]

The point is that if a particular video is catching on, and people can see the excitement and enthusiasm for it right there in the viewer stats, they are apt to jump aboard and watch it. They are far less likely to watch a video with 50-200 views that has been rated “ho hum” by the viewing public.

Those who covertly study the impact of “inconvenient” political broadcasts, and who take note and interfere with them, understand these things.

2. The significance of this interference:

The suppression of free political communication in our society has grave consequences for several reasons:

  • It is clear that that there is not just spying and data collection going on. There is also electronic interference in our media, search engines, and mailboxes that is suppressing freedom of expression at various levels;
  • Media and search engine suppression can be held up for public view, while evidence of individual email tampering, probably carried out by covert state agencies, is frightening. People are naturally reluctant to report it or write about it — for there is no one to report it to;
  • In the case of 9/11, which has torn the fabric of humanity down the middle — between Muslims and Christians, and between East and West — it is essential that the evidence backing this event be absolutely correct and open to question at all times;
  • The fact that the lid on 9/11 has been nailed down so firmly for so long creates great suspicion that this case study points to possible obstruction of free information transfer by government agencies recently identified through NSA whistleblowers Edward Snowden, William Binnie, Thomas Drake, and others.

This essay is offered to all citizens who believe the government should be investigated when state crimes against democracy are suspected.

It is further offered to all who pay taxes for government care, protection, and the guarantee of constitutional freedoms — and in particular to citizens who may have encountered chilling indications of covert state interference in their lives.


[1] The number of subscribers may be seen on any episode of “Truthseeker” — by searching YouTube for “RT Truthseeker.” Russia Today’s television outlets are available globally, via cable and satellite at:

[2] Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth,

[3] The 9/11 Consensus Panel,

[4] Journal of 9/11 Studies

[5] The history of the viewing statistics may be seen by clicking on the little graphic symbol under the video frame, and to the right, at:

[6] The MOXNEWS posting and viewer history statistics are at:


[8]That the original two links were going viral may also be seen from an examination of Twitter records during the period September 8-11, 2013, This can be done by searching Twitter using: < 9/11 Operation Gladio > and scrolling down through the results.

[9] Internet users have long known that the highest-ranking results appear at the top of a search. A simple explanation of how ranking works is available at: YouTube Video Search Ranking Factors: A Closer Look





[14] and

Elizabeth Woodworth, author and former manager of library services for the British Columbia Ministry of Health, with responsibility for the oversight of library systems database management.

Author’s note: The searches discussed in this essay, unless otherwise specified, were performed October 3, 2013.

Let’s Make 9/11 Truth Go Viral

Global Research is committed to Counter-propaganda.

Forward this article far and wide.

Post it on social media, cross-post it on blog sites and independent media. (GR Editor M. Ch.)

Default? Don’t Put it Past Them!

October 5, 2013

large_george-washington.jpgUnder Presidents Bush and Obama, the US national debt has risen from six to 17 trillion dollars in just 11 years!  But debt is not the real issue. Illuminati politicians might upset the apple cart for political reasons.

“[The 1929 Crash] was not accidental. It was a carefully contrived occurrence … The international bankers sought to bring about a condition of despair here so that they might emerge as rulers of us all.”
—-Republican Congressman, Louis T. McFadden, Chairman of the House Banking & Currency Committee, 1920-1931, a staunch critic of the Federal Reserve.The article below was written in July 2011, but could have been written today. Except, in 2011, fears of a US default caused the stock market to tank and gold to reach an all-time high. The crisis was averted in the last minute by a debt reduction agreement,(which was subsequently offset by the Fed’s Program of “Quantitative Easing.”)Today when the US government has shut down, the market is sanguine that our political “leaders” will once again avert disaster by raising the debt ceiling.  I am not as confident.Debt isn’t the real issue. As the holder of the reserve currency, the United States can print as much money as it wants. It never has to be repaid. They can buy goods and services for nothing. Why not continue to enjoy this privilege?No, the debt debate is a diversion and a charade. The Tea Party is a creation of the Koch Brothers. Our “leaders” are mostly Freemasons. As in the Great Depression, catastrophe may not be averted, because of the Illuminati agenda of political and social change. Think of the psychological effect of a US default.We will never overcome our problems until we address the underlying cause: society is controlled by the Illuminati, a cabalist cult empowered by the central bankers. Put simply, Satanists don’t care if the people suffer. On the contrary…

by Henry Makow Ph.D.
( from July 24, 2011)

Until recently , the markets were trading higher on robust corporate earnings and the complacent assumption that the US couldn’t possibly default on its debt.

This is an assumption I do not share. After all, we are dealing with the same shady characters who gave us 9-11, Newtown and Boston. They gave us the 2008 credit crisisby removing all regulatory supervision.

And that’s just recent history. The Illuminati bankers are responsible for all wars and depressions. These are mechanisms by which they concentrate power and wealth in their own hands and enact “social change” leading to world government tyranny.

So why wouldn’t their puppets default? The Illuminati motto is order out of chaos, isn’t it!?

For a New World Order, they need chaos. They need to destroy the US dollar and credit worthiness in order to institute a new one-world currency.

They need to destroy Americans’ faith in democracy in order to bring in a new level of international government. They need to disrupt the economy and cause depression in order to make people so desperate they will accept any solution. And they need to make all this seem natural and inevitable.

“I think we’re going to slide into intensified social conflicts, social hostility, some forms of radicalism; there is just going to be a sense that this is not a just society,” Zbigniew Brzezinski told MSNBC July 6, adding that civil unrest would begin when the lower middle class becomes severely affected by the economic fallout and rising unemployment.

In a 1970 book Between Two Ages: America’s Role in the Technetronic Era, that seems prescient today, Brzezinski wrote: “The technetronic era involves the gradual appearance of a more controlled society. Such a society would be dominated by an elite, unrestrained by traditional values. Soon it will be possible to assert almost continuous surveillance over every citizen and maintain up-to-date complete files containing even the most personal information about the citizen. These files will be subject to instantaneous retrieval by the authorities.”


Almost six trillion is owed to the Fed.  It was created from thin air and should be repaid in kind. Just make a digital notation like they did. The same applies to the nearly$16 Trillion they gave to other banks during the 2008 crisis.

Tony Blizzard, a Patriot veteran, writes that the only way to escape enslavement is to throw them all out and create our own medium of exchange.

Blizzard: “While the federal liars play their “how to keep borrowing” game, … (borrowing the medium of exchange into existence), know that there is absolutely NO NEED for any national government to EVER borrow money, much less “credit” (debt), as national governments are the rightful agents to CREATE the nation’s money. It is not a right to be handed, free of charge, to a cartel of criminal private bankers such as the Federal Reserve.

“Moreover, government-created money is properly NOT loaned into existence at all but SPENT into circulation for legitimate government projects, there to stay and oil the economic wheels and cogs.”


It is comical to see Jesuit- educated Speaker John Boehner championing the cause of debt reduction.Like all politicians, he has advanced the Illuminati agenda- getting the country deeper into debt. As Matt Taibbi shows in  “The Crying Shame of John Boehner”   (Rolling Stone, Jan 2011)  the Speaker built his career by being a conduit for public money going to big corporations.

His major accomplishment was the (at least) $700 billion bailout of the big banks (TARP) which he helped push through, after receiving four million dollars from the financial services industry over his career.

Before that, he helped co-author the “No Child Left Behind Act,” a “grotesquely expensive expansion of federal power” which increased federal education spending by 80%. He also passed the obscene Medicare Part D, which Taibbi calls “a staggering $550 billion handout to the pharmaceutical industry.”

He helped pass the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy lowering their rate from 40% to 35%  - the lowest rate in the history of the USA.

So while pillaging the public for private interests, Boehner and his crew have tied the government’s hands in terms of revenue. Then, they have the audacity to oppose “tax hikes.”

I doubt Tea Party supporters wanted to shelter huge corporations and the wealthy when they pledged not to raise the debt ceiling.

Obama just has to sit back and let the GOP take the blame for economic chaos. But don’t kid yourself, he is Illuminati and he is playing his part in the charade.


Makow – Fiscal Cliff Increasingly Likely & Desirable?
Related- Obama the Political Equivalent of a Suicide Bomber?
Geithner – “We’re Almost Out of Runway” 

“If all bank loans were paid, no one would have a bank deposit and there would not be a dollar of currency or coin in circulation.  This is a staggering thought.  We are completely dependent on the commercial banks.  Someone has to borrow every dollar we have in circulation, cash or credit.  If the banks create ample synthetic money, we are prosperous; if not, we starve.  We are absolutely without a permanent monetary system.  When one gets a complete grasp upon the picture, the tragic absurdity of our hopeless position is almost incredible – but there it is.  It (the banking problem) is the most important subject intelligent persons can investigate and reflect upon.  It is so important that our present civilization may collapse unless it is widely understood and the defects remedied very soon.”
Robert H. Hemphill, for eight years credit manager of the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta

First Comment by Thom Beecham

This left/right budget/debt ceiling battle all seems to be very intentional and deliberate. Imagine if there are defaults, etc. The globalists can come out of this saying they had nothing to do with it.

Imagine if this goes forward. We could see interest rates rise, and asset prices fall around the world. And the US will be looked upon as the bad guy, which is the plan. Think about the implications.

As I always say, done by design….

Technically are correct but buying things for nothing. However, the debt still is there and someone owns it. I think you and I know who these people are. They are the Globalists, the Synagogue of Satan, the Illuminati, etc.

You and I also know that whoever owns this debt also controls the borrower. This is why we are seeing the United States sink into the abyss. It really has become a satanic nation, and this satanism has contaminated everyone who lives in it.  This dark force has usurped control of the US government, education system, media, etc., and I would venture to say that the US is probably now the most evil nation, and that is because the debt holders want it this way.

The debt will never have to be repaid as long as the United States continues to become more and more evil and does whatever these satanists want. If there was a national repentance on par with Jonah and Nineveh, the economy would collapse overnight and the debt would then matter.

The debt may be fraudulent, but the debt is very real to those laboring underneath it. This is why the real economy continues to falter. The cost of the debt is greater than what the economy can service, and monetizing 85 billion a month just cheapens the dollars that are already in circulation. Anyone who doesn’t have assets that can keep up with this monetization will continue to fall further and further behind.

The Hegelian Dialectic and its use in Controlling Modern Society


Problem – Reaction – Solution

By General Maddox.

What exactly is the Hegelian Dialectic? Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel was a 19th century German philosopher who devised a particular dialectic, or, method of argument for resolving disagreements. His method of arriving at the truth by the exchange of logical arguments is a system of thought process still use to this day.

To put it simply, the basis of Hegelianism dictates that the human mind can’t understand anything unless it can be split into two polar opposites. Good / Evil, Right / Wrong, Left / Right.

For example when people are talking about 2 political parties, Labor or Liberal, what they’re actually referring to, without realising it, is the thesis and the antithesis based off the Hegelian Dialectic. The only real debate that occurs is just the minor differences between those two parties. Nothing is said or done about the issues that neither left or right is discussing. This in particular will become more apparent as the election draws near.

Another form of the Hegelian Dialectic is Problem – Reaction – Solution. Most of us unwittingly fall victim to it all too often and sadly if we don’t stop, we will continue to lose our free will and liberties. It has been widely used by our governments and corporations around the world. You could say that in terms of controlling the masses, and society in general, it’s deployment has been an effective tool in keeping humanity in check.

Almost all major events in history employ the Hegelian Dialectic of:
Problem – manufacture a crisis or take advantage of one already in place in order to get the desired Reaction of public outcry whereby the public demands a Solution which as been predetermined from the beginning.

A classic example is 9/11.

Only when you break the left/right paradigm and come to the realisation that the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan and the whole fake, and not to mention contradictory, war on terror was the desired outcome for the neo-conservatives within the Bush administration and the whole military industrial complex. They in fact stated in their own white papers the need for another catastrophic and catalysing event like a “new Pearl Harbour”.

Here’s a more current example of the Hegelian Dialectic is use. In Australia at present both of the main political parties on the eve of the upcoming election on September 7 are discussing “Boat People”. A derogatory term used to describe refugees and asylum seekers displaced by war or other hardships. I don’t believe they constitute what you would call a “crisis” as the statistics clearly show they aren’t, but for the purpose of this example, our Government is telling us they are a problem. The media is used to play up this problem in order to instigate a reaction (debate) in the public domain on how to tackle it. Both the opposition and ruling party offer their solution.

Again we see that the only real debate occurring is just the minor differences between those two parties. Nothing is said or done about the many other more important issues that neither left or right is discussing.

In order to avoid falling victim to the Hegelian Dialectic from now on you must remember the process involved. Anytime a major problem or issue arises in society think about who will gain or profit from it. Then remove yourself from the equation and take a step back to look at it from a third party perspective. See the so-called “problem”, look at who is reacting, why and in what way. Then look for who is offering up the solution.

When you do this from now on you’ll quickly see the real truth instead of the false truth they wanted you to see.

Seymour Hersh on Obama, NSA and the ‘pathetic’ American media

Pulitzer Prize winner explains how to fix journalism, saying press should ‘fire 90% of editors and promote ones you can’t control’

Seymour Hersh

Seymour Hersh exposed the My Lai massacre during the Vietnam war, for which he won the Pulitzer Prize. Photograph: Wally McNamee/Corbis

Seymour Hersh has got some extreme ideas on how to fix journalism – close down the news bureaus of NBC and ABC, sack 90% of editors in publishing and get back to the fundamental job of journalists which, he says, is to be an outsider.

It doesn’t take much to fire up Hersh, the investigative journalist who has been the nemesis of US presidents since the 1960s and who was once described by the Republican party as “the closest thing American journalism has to a terrorist”.

He is angry about the timidity of journalists in America, their failure to challenge the White House and be an unpopular messenger of truth.

Don’t even get him started on the New York Times which, he says, spends “so much more time carrying water for Obama than I ever thought they would” – or the death of Osama bin Laden. “Nothing’s been done about that story, it’s one big lie, not one word of it is true,” he says of the dramatic US Navy Seals raid in 2011.

Hersh is writing a book about national security and has devoted a chapter to the bin Laden killing. He says a recent report put out by an “independent” Pakistani commission about life in the Abottabad compound in which Bin Laden was holed up would not stand up to scrutiny. “The Pakistanis put out a report, don’t get me going on it. Let’s put it this way, it was done with considerable American input. It’s a bullshit report,” he says hinting of revelations to come in his book.

The Obama administration lies systematically, he claims, yet none of the leviathans of American media, the TV networks or big print titles, challenge him.

“It’s pathetic, they are more than obsequious, they are afraid to pick on this guy [Obama],” he declares in an interview with the Guardian.

“It used to be when you were in a situation when something very dramatic happened, the president and the minions around the president had control of the narrative, you would pretty much know they would do the best they could to tell the story straight. Now that doesn’t happen any more. Now they take advantage of something like that and they work out how to re-elect the president.

He isn’t even sure if the recent revelations about the depth and breadth of surveillance by the National Security Agency will have a lasting effect.

Snowden changed the debate on surveillance

He is certain that NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden “changed the whole nature of the debate” about surveillance. Hersh says he and other journalists had written about surveillance, but Snowden was significant because he provided documentary evidence – although he is sceptical about whether the revelations will change the US government’s policy.

“Duncan Campbell [the British investigative journalist who broke the Zircon cover-up story], James Bamford [US journalist] and Julian Assange and me and the New Yorker, we’ve all written the notion there’s constant surveillance, but he [Snowden] produced a document and that changed the whole nature of the debate, it’s real now,” Hersh says.

“Editors love documents. Chicken-shit editors who wouldn’t touch stories like that, they love documents, so he changed the whole ball game,” he adds, before qualifying his remarks.

“But I don’t know if it’s going to mean anything in the long [run] because the polls I see in America – the president can still say to voters ‘al-Qaida, al-Qaida’ and the public will vote two to one for this kind of surveillance, which is so idiotic,” he says.

Holding court to a packed audience at City University in London’s summer school on investigative journalism, 76-year-old Hersh is on full throttle, a whirlwind of amazing stories of how journalism used to be; how he exposed the My Lai massacre in Vietnam, how he got the Abu Ghraib pictures of American soldiers brutalising Iraqi prisoners, and what he thinks of Edward Snowden.

Hope of redemption

Despite his concern about the timidity of journalism he believes the trade still offers hope of redemption.

“I have this sort of heuristic view that journalism, we possibly offer hope because the world is clearly run by total nincompoops more than ever … Not that journalism is always wonderful, it’s not, but at least we offer some way out, some integrity.”

His story of how he uncovered the My Lai atrocity is one of old-fashioned shoe-leather journalism and doggedness. Back in 1969, he got a tip about a 26-year-old platoon leader, William Calley, who had been charged by the army with alleged mass murder.

Instead of picking up the phone to a press officer, he got into his car and started looking for him in the army camp of Fort Benning in Georgia, where he heard he had been detained. From door to door he searched the vast compound, sometimes blagging his way, marching up to the reception, slamming his fist on the table and shouting: “Sergeant, I want Calley out now.”

Eventually his efforts paid off with his first story appearing in the St Louis Post-Despatch, which was then syndicated across America and eventually earned him the Pulitzer Prize. “I did five stories. I charged $100 for the first, by the end the [New York] Times were paying $5,000.”

He was hired by the New York Times to follow up the Watergate scandal and ended up hounding Nixon over Cambodia. Almost 30 years later, Hersh made global headlines all over again with his exposure of the abuse of Iraqi prisoners at Abu Ghraib.

Put in the hours

For students of journalism his message is put the miles and the hours in. He knew about Abu Ghraib five months before he could write about it, having been tipped off by a senior Iraqi army officer who risked his own life by coming out of Baghdad to Damascus to tell him how prisoners had been writing to their families asking them to come and kill them because they had been “despoiled”.

“I went five months looking for a document, because without a document, there’s nothing there, it doesn’t go anywhere.”

Hersh returns to US president Barack Obama. He has said before that the confidence of the US press to challenge the US government collapsed post 9/11, but he is adamant that Obama is worse than Bush.

“Do you think Obama’s been judged by any rational standards? Has Guantanamo closed? Is a war over? Is anyone paying any attention to Iraq? Is he seriously talking about going into Syria? We are not doing so well in the 80 wars we are in right now, what the hell does he want to go into another one for. What’s going on [with journalists]?” he asks.

He says investigative journalism in the US is being killed by the crisis of confidence, lack of resources and a misguided notion of what the job entails.

“Too much of it seems to me is looking for prizes. It’s journalism looking for the Pulitzer Prize,” he adds. “It’s a packaged journalism, so you pick a target like – I don’t mean to diminish because anyone who does it works hard – but are railway crossings safe and stuff like that, that’s a serious issue but there are other issues too.

“Like killing people, how does [Obama] get away with the drone programme, why aren’t we doing more? How does he justify it? What’s the intelligence? Why don’t we find out how good or bad this policy is? Why do newspapers constantly cite the two or three groups that monitor drone killings. Why don’t we do our own work?

“Our job is to find out ourselves, our job is not just to say – here’s a debate’ our job is to go beyond the debate and find out who’s right and who’s wrong about issues. That doesn’t happen enough. It costs money, it costs time, it jeopardises, it raises risks. There are some people – the New York Times still has investigative journalists but they do much more of carrying water for the president than I ever thought they would … it’s like you don’t dare be an outsider any more.”

He says in some ways President George Bush‘s administration was easier to write about. “The Bush era, I felt it was much easier to be critical than it is [of] Obama. Much more difficult in the Obama era,” he said.

Asked what the solution is Hersh warms to his theme that most editors are pusillanimous and should be fired.

“I’ll tell you the solution, get rid of 90% of the editors that now exist and start promoting editors that you can’t control,” he says. I saw it in the New York Times, I see people who get promoted are the ones on the desk who are more amenable to the publisher and what the senior editors want and the trouble makers don’t get promoted. Start promoting better people who look you in the eye and say ‘I don’t care what you say’.

Nor does he understand why the Washington Post held back on the Snowden files until it learned the Guardian was about to publish.

If Hersh was in charge of US Media Inc, his scorched earth policy wouldn’t stop with newspapers.

“I would close down the news bureaus of the networks and let’s start all over, tabula rasa. The majors, NBCs, ABCs, they won’t like this – just do something different, do something that gets people mad at you, that’s what we’re supposed to be doing,” he says.

Hersh is currently on a break from reporting, working on a book which undoubtedly will make for uncomfortable reading for both Bush and Obama.

“The republic’s in trouble, we lie about everything, lying has become the staple.” And he implores journalists to do something about it.

Syria researcher dismissed for falsifying credentials hired by Senator McCain

Russia Today — Sept 29, 2013

The Washington scholar who was cited by US leaders calling for a military strike on Syria, only to lose her job for fabricating her academic credentials, has been hired by the office of US Senator John McCain, Foreign Policy magazine reports.

Elizabeth O’Bagy was formerly employed by the Institute for the Study of War, where she quickly became a respected voice on the ongoing conflict between Syrian President Bashar Assad and opposition forces. McCain and US Secretary of State John Kerry once read from an editorial O’Bagy wrote in the Wall Street Journal when advocating for a military strike in front of Congress.

O’Bagy was fired from the Washington, DC based think-tank shortly thereafter, when it was revealed that she did not have a combined masters/PhD from Georgetown University as she had claimed.

Elizabeth is a talented researcher, and I have been very impressed by her knowledge and analysis in multiple briefings over the last year,” McCain told Foreign Policy in a statement. “I look forward to her joining my office.”

The  article McCain and Kerry referenced argued the US should send arms to Syrian rebels, claiming that “contrary to many media accounts, the war in Syria is not being waged entirely, or even predominantly, by dangerous Islamists and Al-Qaeda die-hards.”

Kerry said it was a “very interesting article” and that he was impressed by O’Bagy’s “enormous” experience.

O’Bagy, 26, also spent time as the political director of the Syrian Emergency Task Force, which she failed to disclose to the Wall Street Journal before her opinion piece was published. The Syrian Emergency Task Force is an advocacy group that lobbies on behalf of Syrian rebels in Washington. The newspaper was later criticized for what some journalists said was a delayed reaction in disclosing that affiliation alongside O’Bagy’s column.

O’Bagy has said she was not employed by the group, only working as a contractor, and was not affiliated with any lobbying efforts.  She later acknowledged facilitating a meeting between the group and with commanders from the Free Syrian Army.

While she was fired from the Institute for the Study of War for stretching her credentials, Kimberly Kagan, the group’s founder, refused to discount any of O’Bagy’s work.

Everything I’ve looked at is rock solid,” Kagan told Politico at the time. “Every thread that we have pulled upon has been verified by multiple sources.”

AIPAC Gets Ready For War With Obama


Barack Obama and Hassan Rouhani have spoken. And they are on the same page. By that I mean not they agree about the issues dividing the two countries but that they are both ready to move forward, to test each other and see if an agreement is possible.

As tentative as all this is, it is a major breakthrough – as anyone who has paid even a little attention over the past 34 years knows.

However, I do not see this process leading anywhere because the Netanyahu government and its lobby, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), are determined to end the process and they have the ability to do it.

They intend to use the United States Congress to cause Rouhani toabandon  negotiations by making clear that Congress will accept nothing short of an Iranian surrender on nuclear issues. Unlike President Obama who wants to ensure that Iran’s nuclear program is not used to produce weapons, the lobby, which writes the laws imposing sanctions on Iran, insists that Iran give up its nuclear program entirely.

AIPAC listed its demands in a statement last week.

Its bottom line is this: Congress must not consider lifting economic sanctions until the Iranians stop uranium enrichment, stop work on installing new centrifuges, allow international inspection of nuclear sites, and move out of the country its stockpile of highly enriched uranium.  In contrast to the administration which, recognizing that Iran (like every other country) has the right to nuclear power for peaceful purposes, AIPAC says that Iran has no such right. (Israel, of course, has a large stockpile of nuclear weapons but, hey, that’s different.)

Not only that, if Iran does not agree to total nuclear surrender, “The United States must support Israel’s right to act against Iran if it feels compelled—in its own legitimate self-defense—to act.”

In other words: the only way for Iran to avoid a military attack is by totally dismantling all its nuclear facilities and potential. (Actually Israel itself addresses the “potential” by repeatedly assassinating Iranian nuclear scientistson Iranian soil). This contrasts with the U.S. view that each step toward compliance by Iran would result in the lifting of some sanctions.

AIPAC is already preparing legislation that will send a clear message to Rouhani: don’t bother reaching out to the West because you will achieve nothing.

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), who with Robert Menendez (D-NJ), are two of AIPAC’s top lieutenants in the Senate, says that “if nothing changes in Iran, come September or October,“ he will introduce a bill “to authorize the use of military force to prevent Iran from developing a nuclear bomb.” He says that the “only way to convince Iran to halt their nuclear program is to make it clear that we will take it out.”

Senators Menendez, Chuck Schumer (D-NY), John McCain (R-AZ) and Graham also sent letters to President Obama urging “full compliance” by Iran before the United States offers anything. In short, led by AIPAC, the senators want “unconditional surrender” by Iran to avoid attack. This is diplomacy? It sounds more like the way the Germans and later the Russians addressed Czechoslovakia.

But why would anyone think the Senate will pass AIPAC’s war bills. The answer is simply that the midterm elections are coming up and that means Members of Congress need campaign cash. And AIPAC provides it.

Remember what AIPAC’s former #2 guy, Steve Rosen (later indicted under the Espionage Act) told New Yorker writer Jeff Goldberg in 2005. Goldberg asked Rosen just how powerful AIPAC is. Goldberg described Rosen’s response.

A half smile appeared on his face, and he pushed a napkin across the table. “You see this napkin?” he said. “In twenty-four hours, we could have the signatures of seventy senators on this napkin.”

Obama better be prepared. AIPAC has been pushing war with Iran for a decade. Its bills to achieve it won’t be written on napkins.

**Following Obama’s speech yesterday AIPAC posted a war video, on its website. The martial music is reminiscent of Radio Damascus prior to the ’67 war and succeeds in about a minute at threatening every single one of AIPAC’s, I mean Israel’s, enemies. It is utterly demented.

Israel Says “Hell, No” To Iran Breakthrough


The New York Times reports that the view in Israel is that “what the Iranians managed to do is to change the whole game.”

And Israelis are pissed. And the Saudis are too. (What a lovely alliance).

…the prospect of even a nonnuclear Iran — strengthened economically by the lifting of sanctions, and emboldened politically by renewed relations with Washington — is seen as a dire threat that could upend the dynamics in this volatile region.

One gulf academic, in a Twitter post, likened the phone call to “the fall of the Berlin Wall.” An Israeli lawmaker said in a radio interview that he hoped that Mr. Obama would not be the next Neville Chamberlain, known for appeasement of the Nazis in 1938.

“There is a lot of suspicion and even paranoia about some secret deal between Iran and America,” said Jamal Khashoggi, a prominent Saudi journalist who is close to the royal family. “My concern is that the Americans will accept Iran as it is — so that the Iranians can continue their old policies of expansionism and aggression.”

Saudi Arabia and the other Sunni-dominated gulf countries share a concern about a shift in the balance of power toward Iran’s Shiite-led government and its allies. For Israel, Iran remains the sponsor of global terrorism and of the Lebanese militia Hezbollah and the Palestinian militant group Hamas, both avowed enemies of Israel’s existence.

“They can change the regime, but one thing won’t change and that is the hostility against Israel,” warned Uzi Rabi, chairman of a Middle East studies center at Tel Aviv University. “Part of the plan is to drive a wedge between Americans and Europeans and Israel. I hate to say it, but what the Iranians managed to do is to change the whole game.”

It has barely been a day since Obama rocked their world and already the Israelis and Saudis are in agreement that the whole conflict was not about nukes at all. It is about, as the Saudi journalist said, whether we will “accept Iran as it is.”

Yes, the Saudis, like the Israelis, are falling back to hold a different line now that the nuclear line is crumbling. Maybe the Saudis will demand we attack Iran because of its reactionary policies toward women and gays. Maybe Israel will demand we attack Iran because its name, the Islamic Republic, means that Iran is essentially a state where one religion is dominant over others.

U.S. media suppressed 2009 UN report showing Israel using chemical weapons against Palestinians

Obama ignores Israel’s chemical weapons abuse while targeting Syrian government that may not be responsible for recent chemical attacks

This Palestinian teenager is one of the victims of the Israeli military's illegal white phosphorous missile attacks on unarmed civilians, including a UN relief compound set up to shelter and provide medical attention to Palestinian refugees.  Israel's military conducted its own investigation of the incidents, apologized for the attack and called it a "grave error."  A UN fact finding mission overseen by South African lawyer and former justice Richard Goldstone called the use of white phosphorous a "war crime."

This Palestinian teenager is one of the victims of the Israeli military’s illegal white phosphorous missile attacks on unarmed civilians, including a UN relief compound set up to shelter and provide medical attention to Palestinian refugees. Israel’s military conducted its own investigation of the incidents, apologized for the attack and called it a “grave error.” A UN fact finding mission overseen by South African lawyer and former justice Richard Goldstone called the use of white phosphorous a “war crime.”  [INTERNET PHOTO BY RADEN MAS SOTO]

NEW YORK, NY – Few major mainstream American news outlets exposed the sordid details of a 2009 United Nations (UN) fact finding report that revealed how Israel’s military illegally aimed chemical missiles at a United Nations Relief & Work Agency (UNRWA) for Palestinian refugees in a 22-day invasion of the Gaza strip that began in 2008 called “Operation Cast Lead.”

As the U.S. and world media watch to learn if claims that President Barack Obama will execute a military strike against Syria, without a vote of Congress or the support of the UN, the same media outlets are burying information that suggests preparation for war could be premature. Little media attention is being paid to claims from a UN commission that Syrian rebels, not government soldiers under President Bashar al-Assad’s control, were responsible for recent chemical weapons attacks that killed over 300 Syrians.

“During our investigation for crimes against humanity and war crimes, we collect some witness testimony that has made to appear that some chemical weapons were used. In particular, nerve gas,” said Carla del Ponte, a member of the U.N. Independent International Commission of Inquiry on Syria.  ”What appears to our investigation is that this was used by the opposition, by the rebels. We have no indication at all that the Syria government have used chemical weapons.”

What’s also questionable is why Obama has drawn a “line in the sand” over highly questionable allegations that Syrian soldiers used chemical weapons when the Israeli military was proven, and officials have admitted, to using chemical warfare to attack a United Nations relief compound.  The facility provided shelter and medical attention to Palestinian refugees in 2009.

Cleveland Challenger obtained a copy of the 575 page 2009 UN report that a fact finding mission headed by ex-South African Judge Richard Goldstone prepared after an investigation of the events surrounding Operation Cast Lead.

The Israeli missile and ground assault on the Gaza strip began on December 27, 2008 and ended on January 18, 2009.  The attack resulted in an estimated 1100 to 14oo Palestinian deaths.  13 Israeli soldiers were killed.  Four died from friendly fire.

The invasion was stimulated by Israel’s claims that rockets were being fired at Israeli’s by Hamas militants.  Three Israeli civilians and one soldier were killed by Hamas’ rockets in the days leading up to the assault that led to an estimated $1.3 billion in damage to Palestinian property and businesses.  Israel’s military was also accused by the UN fact finding mission of violating war protocols by using Palestinians as human shields, murdering unarmed civilians, destroying water and sewer treatment plants, and wiping out food supplies and production facilities to starve the population.

The UN commission Goldstone led met extensively with Palestinian officials, victims and survivors after the Israeli military assault.  The interviews and investigation led to the discovery of information and evidence that Israel’s military deployed missiles containing “white phosphorous” against civilians and the hospital.

White phosphorous is a highly-combustible chemical agent that burns on contact with air.  In humans it burns upon contact with skin and creates very deep tissue wounds.  It can also cause death when inhaled.  It’s customary use has been as a “smoke screen” although it is illegal to use against civilians in times of war.   The UN commission found Israel’s use of the burning agent against the hospital to be particularly deplorable.

When first questioned about the white phosphorous missile allegations that struck the UNRWA compound, the Israeli military’s first response was to issue a denial.  On January 15, 2009, three days before the attack ended, Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak called the chemical weapon attack a “grave error” and allegedly apologized to UN Secretary General Ban Ki Moon.  On the same day, Israeli President Shimon Peres apologized for the attack, but added the false claim that Israeli troops were being fired upon from inside the facility.

South African attorney and former justice Richard Goldstone was blacklisted by Israel after he headed a fact finding mission to investigate war crimes committed against both Israeli's and Palestinians after Isreal's military invaded Palestine in a campaign called Operation Cast Lead.  Israeli media reported, falsely, that Goldstone promised to "revoke" the report's findings against Israel.  Goldstone, who is also Jewish, was one of South Africa's liberal justices and credited with working inside the system to undermine apartheid.

South African attorney and former justice Richard Goldstone was blacklisted by Israel after he headed a fact finding mission to investigate war crimes committed against both Israeli’s and Palestinians after Isreal’s military invaded Palestine in a campaign called Operation Cast Lead. Israeli media reported, falsely, that Goldstone promised to “revoke” the report’s findings against Israel. Goldstone, who is also Jewish, was one of South Africa’s liberal justices and credited with working inside the system to undermine apartheid.

In a July 2009 report of its own findings, the Israeli government now led by President Benjamin Netanyahu, claimed the white phosphorous was supposed to have only been used as a smokescreen to protect soldiers from Hamas anti-tank crews that were claimed to have been operating adjacent to the compound.  Israeli officials falsely claimed that only missile “fragments” entered the compound.

The UN fact finding group challenged the claims made by Israeli officials and accused them of understating the nature and extent of the chemical missile strikes.  They identified 10 strikes inside the UNRWA compound, with seven white phosphorous container shells discharging completely or very substantially in the confines of a very limited space.

“This is not a matter of a limited number of wedges falling inside the compound or shrapnel or parts of shells landing in the compound as the shells exploded elsewhere. It is important to emphasize that we are dealing with shells exploding or discharging inside the compound in areas where hazardous material was stored.”

“Secondly, the claim that this result was neither intended nor anticipated has to be reviewed carefully. In the first place the Mission affirms the result to be reviewed is not fragments and wedges landing in the compound but ten shells landing and exploding inside the compound. It is difficult to accept that the consequences were not appreciated and foreseen by the Israeli armed forces.”

“Those in the Israeli army who deploy white phosphorous, or indeed any artillery shells, expertly trained to factor in the relevant complexities of targeting, including wind force and the earth’s curvature. They have to know the area they are firing at, possible obstacles in hitting the target and the other environmental factors necessary to ensure an effective strike. It is also clear that, having determined that it was necessary to establish a safety distance, the presence of the UNRWA installations was a factor present in the minds of those carrying out the shelling.”

“The question then becomes how specialists expertly trained in the complex issue of artillery deployment and aware of the presence of an extremely sensitive site can strike that site ten times while apparently trying to avoid it.”

Israeli government and military officials took issue with the report, but mainly focused effort at discrediting claims that they “randomly” and “intentionally” targeted and slaughtered Palestinian civilians.  UN interviews revealed that Israeli soldiers herded an unarmed family of 29 into a home and bombed it.

Instead of sharing any of the details of the 575 page report with newspaper and magazine readers, and television viewers, the U.S. media concentrated all its attention on Israeli claims that denied the allegations.

Carla del Ponte is a UN fact finder who's continued to raise doubt that the Syrian military used chemical weapons containing "sarin" gas against the nation's war weary people. What her commission did find was evidence that Syrian rebels used the illegal gas. So why is the Secretary of State John Kerry and U.S. defense Secretary Chuck Hagel pushing to attack the government for a crime a top UN official doesn't believe they committed?

Carla del Ponte is a UN fact finder who’s continued to raise doubt that the Syrian military used chemical weapons containing “sarin” gas against the nation’s war weary people. What her commission did find was evidence that Syrian rebels used the illegal gas. So why is the Secretary of State John Kerry and U.S. defense Secretary Chuck Hagel pushing to attack the government for a crime a top UN official doesn’t believe they committed?

When Goldstone authored an opinion piece two years later, he said the report would have been different if Israel had cooperated and his fact finding mission had access to its officials and more information.  U.S. reporters and columnists with the New York Times, Washington Post and Huffington Post used the statement to discredit the report in its 575 page entirety.

Goldstone’s opinion reflected that he’d only changed his mind about whether or not Israel “intentionally” targeted civilians in the 22 day military invasion of Palestine.

“The allegations of intentionality by Israel were based on the deaths of and injuries to civilians in situations where our fact-finding mission had no evidence on which to draw any other reasonable conclusion. While the investigations published by the Israeli military and recognized in the U.N. committee’s report have established the validity of some incidents that we investigated in cases involving individual soldiers, they also indicate that civilians were not intentionally targeted as a matter of policy.”

Goldstone also took the opportunity to balance a legitimate Israeli government complaint that his 2009 report concentrated the majority of its criticism on Israel and made little or no reference to Hamas’ attacks on innocent Israeli citizens.

Nothing, however, in Goldstone’s opinion two years later, denounced his fact finding mission’s findings as U.S. reporters seem to have intentionally tried to shield Israel from criticism.

As I indicated from the very beginning, I would have welcomed Israel’s cooperation. The purpose of the Goldstone Report was never to prove a foregone conclusion against Israel. I insisted on changing the original mandate adopted by the Human Rights Council, which was skewed against Israel. I have always been clear that Israel, like any other sovereign nation, has the right and obligation to defend itself and its citizens against attacks from abroad and within. Something that has not been recognized often enough is the fact that our report marked the first time illegal acts of terrorism from Hamas were being investigated and condemned by the United Nations. I had hoped that our inquiry into all aspects of the Gaza conflict would begin a new era of evenhandedness at the U.N. Human Rights Council, whose history of bias against Israel cannot be doubted.

CNN Caught Staging News Segments on Syria With Actors

Anderson Cooper and CNN have been caught staging fake news about Syria to justify military intervention.

The primary “witness” that the mainstream media is using as a source in Syria has been caught staging fake news segments.  Recent video evidence proves that “Syria Danny”, the supposed activist who has been begging for military intervention on CNN, is really just a paid actor and a liar.

While Assad is definitely a tyrant like any head of state, a US invasion of the country is a worst case scenario for the people living there.

By pointing out that the mainstream media is orchestrating their entire coverage of this incident, we are not denying that there is a tremendous amount of death and violence in Syria right now.  However, we are showing that the mainstream media version of events is scripted and staged propaganda.

The following video shows him contradicting himself while off air, and even asking crew members to “get the gunfire sounds ready” for his video conference with Anderson Cooper on CNN.

“Syria Danny” has also appeared on many other news programs, and every single time his story on specific events has changed.

This is not the first time that mainstream media has been exposed as propaganda, it happens all the time, especially during times of war.

Some of the most hyped up news images of our time surrounding war were not actually real but were simply public relations stunts, designed as psychological warfare operations.

No one in America can forget the image of Saddam Hussein’s statue being toppled and covered with an American flag, yet few people realize that this was a hoax, a staged psychological operation coordinated between the military and the media.  In July of 2004 journalist Jon Elmer exposed an internal army study of the war showing that this whole statue scenario was indeed a set up.

In the article Elmer writes “the infamous toppling of the statue of Saddam Hussein in Firdos Square in central Baghdad on April 9, 2003 was stage-managed by American troops and not a spontaneous reaction by Iraqis. According to the study, a Marine colonel first decided to topple the statue, and an Army psychological operations unit turned the event into a propaganda moment… The Marines brought in cheering Iraqi children in order to make the scene appear authentic, the study said.  Allegations that the event was staged were made in April of last year, mostly by opponents of the war, but were ignored or ridiculed by the US government and most visible media outlets. “[1]

The statue hoax was just one example in a long list of lies and psychological operations surrounding the multiple wars in Iraq.  At the onset of Operation Desert Storm in 1990 a public relations firm by the name of Hill and Knowlton spent millions of dollars on the government’s behalf, constructing news pieces that would sell the war to the American public.  One of the most moving pranks to come from this push to war was the testimony of a 15-year-old Kuwaiti girl, known only by her first name of Nayirah.  In a videotaped testimony that was later distributed to the media she said “I volunteered at the al-Addan hospital, While I was there, I saw the Iraqi soldiers come into the hospital with guns, and go into the room where . . . babies were in incubators. They took the babies out of the incubators, took the incubators, and left the babies on the cold floor to die.”

Sounds horrible huh?  Well, luckily it never happened, this too was a fabricated event designed to dehumanize the Iraqi people.  The whole thing was exposed when the journalists discovered that the witness Nayirah was actually the daughter of a US ambassador who was being coaxed by military psychological operations specialists.  If the government and media cooperate to deceive the American public during times of war then there should be no doubt in your mind that the same techniques are used during times of peace, and especially elections.

The following clip is another classic staged news segment that was aired by CNN:


[1] Army report confirms Psy-ops staged Saddam statue toppling – The New Standard

These Time Magazine Covers Explain Why Americans Know Nothing About The World

Time magazine hides Putin’s success from US voters

Neil Munro

White House Correspondent

  • Time magazine’s cover for its Sept. 16 issue features a picture of contented-looking Russian president Vladimir Putin, complete with a black background and a damning caption that declares “America’s weak and waffling, Russia’s rich and resurgent.”

But Time’s editors are shielding Americans from the demoralizing picture, putting a cheerful, sky-blue photo on the covers of magazines distributed in the United States.

“It’s time to pay college athletes,” says the chirpy, non-political U.S. cover, which shows a ball-carrying football player with arm outstretched.

The cover most Americans saw at the checkout counter safely overlooked a widely perceived fumble by President Barack Obama that left Russia to carry the ball in the Syrian war.

Russia Putin.JPEG

Putin seemingly headed off a U.S. airstrike on his Syrian ally, while Obama, after extensive public agonizing, has seemingly agreed to token compliance with a weapons inspection regime.

The foreign-policy fumble prompted anger, embarrassment and amazement among professionals in the U.S. foreign policy apparatus, who slammed it as the biggest foreign-policy flub since President Jimmy Carter.

But it also prompted derision and delight among America’s enemies in the Middle East, including Iran, which is backing Syria.

The foreign covers acknowledge Putin’s triumph over Obama, telling foreigners that Putin “doesn’t care what anybody thinks of him.”

The protective covers arrive as Time’s managing editor departs for a job working for one of the architects of the Syrian debacle, Secretary of State John Kerry.

In “early summer,” editor Rick Stengel was asked by Kerry, and immediately accepted, the job of running the department’s public diplomacy mission, according to Politico.

Months later, the appointment was leaked to two media outlets.

Throughout the summer, Stengel remained editor of Time while it covered U.S. politics.

Most often, the covers of Time magazine are uniform.

Periodically, Time magazine wraps its magazine in different covers for audiences in the United States, in Asia, in the South Pacific and the large “Europe, Middle East and Africa” marketplace.

Many of the different covers are non-political.

For example, the Nov. 5, 2012 U.S. cover featured the new movie about President Abraham Lincoln. The other three covers showcased the lead actor in the movie, Daniel Day-Lewis.

Time’s July 11 2012, U.S. cover featured an article about medical expenses, while the foreign editions showcased England’s soccer league.

This is not the first time the magazine has downplayed stories that might not put Stengel’s new boss — Obama — in a good light.

On July 2, 2012, the overseas covers featured China’s fast-growing manufacturing sector, while the U.S. cover was about “The History of the American Dream.”

The Dec. 5, 2011 cover featured an alarming picture of Egyptian street protests, while the U.S. cover told increasingly worried U.S. readers that “Anxiety is Good for You.”

Read more:

BBC Won’t Air Violinist’s Comments on ‘Israeli Apartheid’

The BBC will cut comments made by violinist Nigel Kennedy about “apartheid” in Israel when it broadcasts his concert with a PA troupe.
BBC Logo

BBC Logo
Arutz Sheva: BBC

The BBC will cut comments made by violinist Nigel Kennedy about “apartheid” in Israel when it broadcasts his concert onBritish television channels next week, Al Arabiya reported on Saturday.

The concert, which was held at London’s Royal Albert Hall last week, featured 17 musicians from the Palestine Strings, a group of Palestinian Authority Arab artists. The troupe performed Vivaldi’s Four Seasons alongside Kennedy.

Kennedy likened the situation in Israel to apartheid in South Africa.

“Ladies and gentlemen, it’s a bit facile to say it but we all know from experiencing this night of music tonight that giving equality and getting rid of apartheid means there’s a chance for amazing things to happen,” Kennedy was quoted by Al Arabiya as having said.

The decision to cut Kennedy’s comment was made due to “editorial reasons” and they removed because of “the way it fitted in with the program,” a BBC spokesperson told Al Arabiya.

“Nigel’s comment to the audience at his late-night prom on August 8 will not be included in the deferred BBC 4 broadcast on August 23 because it does not fall within the editorial remit of the proms as a classical music festival,” the spokesperson said.

Kennedy has previously refused to play concerts in Israel, but has participated in the PA-run Jerusalem Festival in eastern Jerusalem.

In 2007 he told Haaretz, “It’s no coincidence. I became aware of the Palestinian story while I was a student in New York. My girlfriend then was Palestinian, and, through her, I began to familiarize myself with and understand the problem even before the [separation] wall and the other atrocities.

“She had to return home every year or she would lose her citizenship, and, like it was for all of us students, that wasn’t exactly her thing. Then I understood that it was simply a way to harass the Palestinians and prevent them from studying,” he added.

Kennedy dedicated his performance at the Proms to “Palestinians”, according to his introduction as quoted by Al Arabiya.

“The concert tonight is very emotional, because I am performing for people who are imprisoned, to give them two hours of fun and show them that the world has not forgotten about them,” he said.

The BBC is known for its blatant bias against Israel and in the past has deliberately erred on naming Jerusalem as Israel’s capital. In June, the network insisted that “no offense was intended” after it reported that Tel Aviv is the capital of the Jewish state during a commentary on the UEFA European Under-21 Championship.

BBC has made the same “mistake” numerous times before, most notably during the 2012 Olympic Games when it similarly referred to Tel Avivas the capital of the Jewish state.

Some artists have refused to perform in Israel, citing its “apartheid” policy against PA Arabs, while failing to acknowledge remarks by PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas that any future Palestinian state will have no Jews or Israelis. At the same time, several artists recently refused pressure to cancel concerts in Israel.

In July, popular rhythm and blues artist Alicia Keys refused to cave in to pressure by anti-Israel activists and gave a sold out concert in Tel Aviv.

Keys announced that she had decided to go ahead with her concert in Tel Aviv despite calls from a number of anti-Israel activists to boycott the Jewish state.

The pop duo Pet Shop Boys also recently rejected calls from pro-Palestinian Authority activists to cancel a Tel Aviv concert. The concert went ahead as scheduled on June 23.

An anti-Israel group had claimed that the act of performing a concert constitutes tacit support for Israel’s “policies of discrimination.”

Pet Shop Boys member Neil Tennant, however, said he did not “agree with this comparison of Israel to apartheid-era South Africa.”

Most recently, Eric Burdon, the former lead singer in the British band The Animals, decided to perform in Israel after all, after having earlier cancelled his performance because of political pressure.

Labour’s surrender monkeys dare not criticize Britain’s conscript economy

Beginning his working life in the aviation industry and trained by the BBC, Tony Gosling is a British land rights activist, historian & investigative radio journalist.

Published time: August 16, 2013 13:06

Unemployed young people as they stand in line outside a job centre in central London.(AFP Photo / Leon Neal) Unemployed young people as they stand in line outside a job centre in central London.(AFP Photo / Leon Neal)

Britain’s shadow minister for borders and immigration, Labour’s Chris Bryant, promised to take on the big corporations this week. But as his embargoed speech was leaked to big business, the nation watched his political resolve melt into nothing.

Friends and corporate funders of the ruling Conservative-led coalition have been sacking thousands of workers. They then market those same jobs to cheaper foreign workers, bringing misery to Labour’s traditional working-class supporters.

Frequently those jobs are not even advertised in the UK. Former employees have to re-apply for their old jobs so long as they’re prepared to accept worse pay and conditions.

Standing nervously behind the workers directly hit by this practice are millions of other apprehensive wage earners. They can see how this further corrodes what has become an increasingly brutal job market.

It is the dedication of staff, not just how much they’re paid, that determines how good a service the public receives. Staff who know they can be sacked at the drop of a hat do what they are told by their managers out of fear, rather than respect. Before long that culture of fear impacts on everything a business touches.

From the voice on the phone, through quality control, to the customer facing staff, as the company’s commitment to the employee goes down, so the glue that holds the business together starts to come unstuck.

The figures, of course, look good on paper. Boardroom presentations with those efficiency graphs zigzagging gradually up accompanied by photographs of smiling staff in neatly-pressed uniforms.

But as well-paid lobbyists for these multinationals successfully demand the erosion of employment rights, trust in these cost-cutting companies is undermined. Trust doesn’t figure on the balance sheet, but it’s the only truly important quality a company has (or doesn’t have).

Britain's opposition Labour party immigration minister, Chris Bryant.(Reuters / Luke MacGregor)Britain’s opposition Labour party immigration minister, Chris Bryant.(Reuters / Luke MacGregor)

This is one of the chief reasons why recruitment agency Office Angels found last week that over half of Britons in work want out of their present job, for the first time in decades. Off the balance sheet again: an unhappy company is a bad company.

Practices like these are turning the UK into a “conscript economy.” Thirty years of retreat from Labour’s 1970s policy of full employment has tipped the balance between employer and employee off the scales, until the employer holds all the cards.

Yet, despite the slump, there seems no let-up in the flood of economic migrants moving to Britain. Last week’s net migration figures show that in the year to June 2012, 165,000 people, or nearly 500 a day, moved to the UK.

On New Year’s Day 2014, Bulgarians and Romanians too are about to be allowed to work in the UK – boosting the net figure to over 200,000.

This influx is doubly bad, cutting both ways into UK disposable incomes. It helps keep house prices artificially high, and wages artificially low. So Labour has realized that not all critics of immigration are racists and, we are told, is seeing the error of its ways.

Party chiefs, for the first time, have been weighing the rights of the British worker who loses their job against the right of the migrant to work anywhere in the EU. Weighing up, too, the good work an immigrant worker might do, against the cost to the British taxpayer of yet another British family on the dole.

So, for Britain’s opposition party, standing up for dwindling employment rights should have been an open goal.

Yes, migrant labor is justified and welcome when a country has full employment but with, for millions, wages not enough to live on and real unemployment hovering around 10 percent, to low-paid workers bringing in migrant labor just drives them further into poverty.

So Labour’s Chris Bryant was going to weigh in this week to explain that Her Majesty’s Opposition now thought it was wrong. A plea both to the origins of the Labour Party, standing up for the victims of cruel and greedy bosses… and to pragmatism. That it wasn’t racist to discourage economic migration.

Reuters / Andrew Winning Reuters / Andrew Winning

“Take the case of Tesco, who recently decided to move their distribution centre….” he was due to say,“…staff at the original site, most of them British, were told that they could only move to the new centre if they took a cut in pay. The result? A large percentage of the staff at the new centre are from the Eastern bloc.”

But Tesco’s friends in the London media tipped them off with a leaked copy of the speech, so after a call to Labour Party headquarters from Tesco this became:

“Take Tesco. A good employer and an important source of jobs in Britain… Yet when a distribution centre was moved to a new location existing staff said they would have lost out by transferring and the result was a higher proportion of staff from A8 countries… Tesco are clear they have tried to recruit locally.”

Rarely do we get the opportunity to see so transparently how meek our politicians have become in the face of corporate lobbying. Tory Tesco effectively rewriting the speech of an opposition politician, no doubt with strong-arming from Labour Party apparatchiks, too.

Bryant’s key allegation about the cut in pay disappeared. Instead, Tesco is “a good employer” that has“tried to recruit locally.” Dead on the cutting-room floor, too, is another fact that many low-paid UK jobs are not even advertised in Britain any more.

To the tune most of us know as “Oh, Christmas Tree” or “Tannenbaum,” Labour Party activists used to traditionally sing “Let’s Keep the Red Flag Flying Here” on May Day, which called for a worldwide, worker-managed utopia with no borders. But when the Labour Party is no longer allowed to criticize practices that take food out of children’s mouths, throw hard-working people out of a job, and possibly onto the streets, that party may as well pack its bags.

If the present leadership is not purged, Labour may go the whole hog and, as in Greece, show its true blue colors by going into a formal coalition with the big corporations.

UK is About to Filter Out Internet Adult Sites and…”Esoteric Material”?


Last week, UK prime minister David Cameron announced that adult sites would be automatically blocked in order to protect “children and their innocence”. After some digging however (this policy, which was strategically timed to be announced right when the Royal Baby was born) is far from being only about “protecting children”. As usual, a catchphrase that nobody can’t disagree with was used to hide the ugly truth: UK’s policy will, by default, filter out and censor a LOT of material that is deemed undesirable.

After discussing with several UK ISPs, Digital advocacy organization Open Rights Group discovered that the UK web filter will ban by default a wide range of websites including:

- violent material
- extremist and terrorist related content
- anorexia and eating disorder websites
- suicide related websites

More importantly, the filter will also censor websites that mention alcohol or smoking“web forums” and “esoteric material”. These last categories are the most worrying as their vague nature opens the door to all kinds of censorship. What exactly is “esoteric material”? Are “alternative news” and “conspiracy-related” sites included? Is mentioning the occult elite on a blog warrants a ban from the UK? The censorship possibilities are endless.

In order to unblock these sites, customers must contact their ISPs and ask to be unblocked. According to Open Rights Group, most people will not bother or even known about any of this.

“Making the filters default means most people will keep them, according to Open Rights Group Executive Director Jim Killock. “We know that people stick with defaults: this is part of the idea behind ‘nudge theory’ and ‘choice architecture’ that is popular with Cameron.”

According to the BBC, the Chinese firm Huawei controls the net filter praised by Cameron. This very company is accused of having close ties with the Chinese government, which maintains one of the most restrictive internet firewalls in the world. While we are led to think that the Western world wants to teach China about “freedom”, China is rather at the forefront of what the Western world is trying to accomplish.

According to Cameron, the new parental control settings will be turned on for all new broadband subscribers “by the end of the year.” In other words, people in the UK, there isn’t a lot of time left to get your voices heard. While it might be possible for a “computer whiz” to hack himself around this super-mega-Chinese-monster filter – it is the principle behind it that’s important. Also, this policy mostly aims the people that won’t do a thing about it: The clueless, apathetic, ignorant masses that won’t even realize that a lot of the internet was filtered out “for their own good”. 1984.

UK Internet Filter to Also Block Conspiracy Theories

Big Brother Weds the Nanny Who’s Pregnant with Internet Censorship.
Here is the real problem with the Internet
Dees Illustration

Eric Blair
Activist Post

The totalitarian tip-toe is tap dancing to tyranny with the proposed Internet censorship bill in the United Kingdom. In the name of keeping children safe from porn, the UK law will impose Internet filters on far more than just porn.

According to Wired:

As well as pornography, users may automatically be opted in to blocks on “violent material”, “extremist related content”, “anorexia and eating disorder websites” and “suicide related websites”, “alcohol” and “smoking”. But the list doesn’t stop there. It even extends to blocking “web forums” and “esoteric material“, whatever that is. “Web blocking circumvention tools” is also included, of course.

The definition of “esoteric” makes clear that censorship of broad topics is the goal of this so-called ISP filter:

es·o·ter·ic [es-uh-ter-ik] adjective
1. understood by or meant for only the select few who have special knowledge or interest;
2. belonging to the select few.
3. private; secret; confidential.

Translation: anything outside the acceptable mainstream narrative will be filtered. In short, the free flow of information is under assault with this law.

The organization Open Rights Group refers to this totalitarian tip-toe as “sleepwalking into censorship“:

What’s clear here is that David Cameron wants people to sleepwalk into censorship. We know that people stick with defaults: this is part of the idea behind ‘nudge theory‘ and ‘choice architecture’ that is popular with Cameron.

The implication is that filtering is good, or at least harmless, for anyone, whether adult or child. Of course, this is not true; there’s not just the question of false positives for web users, but the affect on a network economy of excluding a proportion of a legitimate website’s audience.

Open Rights also says the law could be used to play economic favorites, thus undermining the free market on the Internet:

There comes a point that it is simply better to place your sales through Amazon and ebay, and circulate your news and promotions exclusively through Facebook and Twitter, as you know none of these will ever be filtered.

It seems Western government’s voracity for Internet censorship has increased many fold since the Snowden revelations about digital spying.

Direct Internet censorship was imposed on millions of U.S. government computers blocking them from viewing any material related to the Snowden leak, which at the time of the leak and even now represents a large percentage of all political and technical news stories.

And as John Naughton of the Guardian points out today, the real story about the Snowden leak that everyone is ignoring are the implications on Internet freedom, which he lists as the following:

The first is that the days of the internet as a truly global network are numbered. It was always a possibility that the system would eventually be Balkanised, ie divided into a number of geographical or jurisdiction-determined subnets as societies such as China, Russia, Iran and other Islamic states decided that they needed to control how their citizens communicated. Now, Balkanisation is a certainty.

Second, the issue of internet governance is about to become very contentious. Given what we now know about how the US and its satraps have been abusing their privileged position in the global infrastructure, the idea that the western powers can be allowed to continue to control it has become untenable.

Third, as Evgeny Morozov has pointed out, the Obama administration’s “internet freedom agenda” has been exposed as patronising cant. “Today,” he writes, “the rhetoric of the ‘internet freedom agenda’ looks as trustworthy as George Bush’s ‘freedom agenda’ after Abu Ghraib.”

As a final note, porn filters already exist for parents in the private marketplace if they choose to use them.  So, there is no need for governments to make them mandatory, which indicates that the real agenda behind these new proposed laws is much more about censorship than protecting children.

National archives: Margaret Thatcher wanted to crush power of trade unions

Downing Street archives reveal Thatcher thought Norman Tebbit’s stance on union reform too timid

Margaret Thatcher in 1983

Margaret Thatcher in 1983, the year before the miners’ strike. Photograph: Chris Capstick/Rex Features

“We had to fight the enemy without in the Falklands. We always have to be aware of the enemy within, which is much more difficult to fight and more dangerous to liberty,” Margaret Thatcher speech to the backbench 1922 committee, July 1984.

The Cabinet papers published under the 30-year rule lay bare the scale of Margaret Thatcher’s long-held ambitions to crush the power of Britain’s trade unions even before she had won her historic 144-seat majority landslide victory.

The Downing Street papers from 1983 show she told Ferdinand Mount, then head of her policy unit, that she agreed that Norman Tebbit’s gradualist approach to trade union reform was too timid and that they should “neglect no opportunity to erode trade union membership”.

Thatcher told Mount to put the policy work in hand but to keep his trade union reform paper, in which he referred to the unions as “a politicised mafia”, wholly confidential. “We must neglect no opportunity to erode trade union membership wherever this corresponds to the wishes of the workforce. We must see to it our new legal structure discourages trade union membership of the new industries,” wrote Mount.

He said that by the end of the century they also hoped to see “a trade union movement whose exclusive relationship with the Labour party is reduced out of all recognition. Again, it is absurd and unjust that millions of Conservatives, Liberals and Social Democrats should be supporting the Labour party directly or indirectly. This relationship fossilises the Labour party and stultifies the whole political dialogue.”

Although the prime minister responded by saying she agreed with Mount, his demand to ensure that trade union members had to opt in, rather than opt out of the political levy – as now being contemplated by the Labour leader, Ed Miliband – was regarded as a step too far at that time by Thatcher and Tebbit because it revived the argument about the financing of political parties. The Tories feared it could also lead to a quid pro quo ban on company donations.

They were not alone in their determination to take on the unions. As early as January 1983, Nigel Lawson – who had already spent two years as energy secretary building up coal stocks in preparation for the expected showdown with the miners – was telling Thatcher: “If Scargill succeeds in bringing about such a strike, we must do everything in our power to defeat him, including ensuring that the strike results in widespread closures.”

In March, Thatcher’s press secretary, Bernard Ingham, also urged her to take on the miners, telling her: “Events have not, however, challenged the post-war impression of their invincibility, for we have yet to beat a national stoppage … In my view the last thing we should do today is lend credibility to Scargill.”

The cabinet papers released by the National Archives on Thursday show that the preparations – including a debate among Whitehall officials over whether troops should be used during the miners’ strike – were well under way. Lawson also argued for a rapid acceleration in the pace of the pit closures secretly scheduled for 1983/84, demanding that 34 pits, including a dozen in Yorkshire and the Midlands, should be listed, rather than the 20 that eventually sparked the start of the strike in March 1984.

The papers show that detailed discussions on withstanding a coal strike went on in a secret committee of Whitehall officials known as Misc 57 throughout 1983. A good deal of work had already been done in 1982, when it was decided that it was not practicable to use servicemen to move coal by rail.

By that October, in a “secret and personal” note to Thatcher, Peter Gregson, the Cabinet Office deputy secretary, was telling her that using the army to move coal by road would be a formidable undertaking: “4-5,000 lorry movements a day for 20 weeks … the law and order problems of coping with pickets would be enormous … a major risk would be the power station workers would refuse to handle coal brought in by servicemen this way”.

Misc  57 had thought there might be a limited role for the troops in delivering ancillary materials, such as lighting-up oil, under close supervision.

But Thatcher was careful not to close the door on the use of the army to move coal from the working pits to the power stations, and ordered further work to be done. In the following May, the issue was reopened when the Cabinet Office derided such uses of the army as “spectacular gestures which are likely in practice to worsen the situation”.

Brigadier Tony Budd, secretary of the civil contingencies unit in the Cabinet Office, took exception, pointing out that this had not been the case when the army was used for “firefighting, providing an emergency ambulance service, refuse collection and even providing emergency car parking in London”, despite some union “huffing and puffing”.

In the event it was the paramilitary use of the police in pitched battles with mass pickets, rather than the army, that was to lead to some of the bitterest scenes in the miners’ strike.

But the ultimately successful strategy was spelled out by Lawson to his cabinet colleagues in late 1982: to do everything to undermine the miners’ will to continue a lengthy strike by demonstrating that its effects were limited. The preparations particularly focused on ensuring that electricity supplies were not interrupted for a considerable period of time.

Peter Lyons: Kiwi battlers losing power in economic apartheid

Most Kiwis of my generation were brought up on the ideal of an egalitarian society. This involved a fair go for all. Photo / Getty Images

Most Kiwis of my generation were brought up on the ideal of an egalitarian society. This involved a fair go for all. Photo / Getty Images

In the late 1970s, when I left school, about 5000 Kiwis were unemployed. From 1984, we adopted a market model to organise our economic lives. This involved the privatisation of government assets, the adoption of free trade and the freeing up of markets. The acquisition of money and material possessions became the holy grail of what was considered the good life.

By the early 1990s unemployment had rocketed to almost 200,000. This followed a period of huge economic transformation. Government entities such as railways and phone services had been sold to private owners. They immediately indulged in massive redundancies.

Meanwhile, free trade had wiped out many industries, such as clothing and textiles, creating widespread job losses.

In 1991, the National Government decided that the best approach to reducing unemployment was to make the labour market more “flexible”. It cut benefits to encourage people to seek employment. It introduced the Employment Contracts Act to reduce union power so employers could more easily negotiate wages and conditions directly with individual workers.

No longer could people live a life of luxury on benefits. They would have to seek work and employers would have greater flexibility to employ them at whatever wage the market dictated.

In the late 1990s, the Shipley National Government introduced the concept of “dob in a beneficiary”. People were encouraged to phone the authorities if they felt that others were abusing the benefit system. There is little doubt benefit abuse does occur but there has never been any hard statistical evidence about the extent of this problem. Policy in this area has always been based largely on hearsay.

When politicians talk about making the labour market more flexible, it means ensuring that the demand and supply of labour determines the wage rate.

In its purest form this means forcing people to provide their labour regardless of the wages offered. This involves reducing benefits, cutting minimum wages and reducing union power. Cutting benefits and reducing the minimum wage can be achieved by the corrosive effects of inflation. On the demand side it means ensuring employers have the greatest possible flexibility in hiring and firing.

Most Kiwis of my generation were brought up on the ideal of an egalitarian society. This involved a fair go for all. Those who work hard, take risks, start businesses and strive for success should be entitled to the rewards of their endeavours. But those who struggle due to the lottery of birth or misfortunes in life should be given a safety net. Those who work hard but lack the skills or education to achieve a higher income should be entitled to a decent lifestyle.

This ideal has slipped away over the past few decades. We now live in a society where many economic winners feel entitled to enjoy all the benefits of their success regardless of their fellow citizens. There is little regard to equality of opportunity.

What has evolved is a system of economic apartheid that would have shocked many of previous generations. The post-war generation seemed to place a higher value on social cohesion likely due to the shared hardships of two world wars and the Great Depression. It is a sad irony that we continue to celebrate the 40-hour working week on Labour Day. Today, winners live in certain suburbs, send their children to certain schools, and even shop in different supermarkets. They seldom encounter the “have nots”. Our society is becoming polarised.

The Employment Amendment Bill before Parliament is designed to increase the flexibility of our labour market. It aims to reduce the bargaining power of unions. It is not a ground-breaking piece of legislation. It is more a subtle chipping away at the power of workers to negotiate as a group with their employers. The capitalist model of the labour market assumes that workers and employers have equal power in negotiating pay and conditions. Employers compete for workers and workers compete for jobs.

This is the ideal, but the reality is that the power balance is very skewed. Many Kiwis have been conditioned over the past few decades to feel very grateful to have a job.

Groundbreaking Investigation Reveals Monsanto Teaming Up With US Military to Target GMO Activists

Global Research, July 31, 2013

A hard-hitting investigative report recently published by a prominent German newspaper has uncovered some shocking details about the tactics being used by chemical giant Monsanto in assuming control of global agriculture. According to this thorough analysis, Monsanto appears to be aggressively targeting independent researchers, scientists, activists, and others opposed to genetically-modified organisms (GMOs) by utilizing the vast resources and manpower of both the United States federal government and the American military-industrial complex.

The report, which recently appeared in the July 13 print edition of Suddeutsche Zeitung (SZ), explains in rigorous detail how both individuals and groups opposed to GMOs and other chemical-based crop technologies have been threatened, hacked, slandered and terrorized for daring to digress from the pro-GMO status quo. On numerous documented occasions, pertinent information about the dangers of GMOs or lack of GMO safety data has been effectively blocked from timely release by mysterious forces that many say are the chemical industry in disguise.

“A conspicuously large number of Monsanto critics report regular attacks by professional hackers,” explains an English-translated snippet from the SZ report. “There are (Monsanto) ties with the U.S. secret services, the U.S. military, with very hard operating private security companies and of course, with the U.S. government.”

A telling example of this was when the European environmental group Friends of the Earth (FOTE), together with the German Environmental and Nature Protection Association (BUND), was targeted prior to releasing a damning study on the health-damaging effects of glyphosate, the primary active ingredient in Monsanto’s Roundup herbicide. A mysterious virus infected the computer of the study’s main organizer just days before publishing, which threatened to delay several important press releases.

The distinguished GMO truth website has also been relentlessly targeted with “cyber attacks” since at least 2007, a disturbing trend that the site’s main editor is convinced originates from the biotechnology industry. As we reported back in 2012, some of the strongest attacks against the site came just weeks and days before the historic Proposition 37 vote in California, which would have mandated GMO labeling at the retail level.

Monsanto’s targeting activities made possible through corporate takeover of federal government

As it turns out, Monsanto has many close friends within the ranks of the U.S. federal government these days. Scores of key government positions, in fact, are now held by former Monsanto executives, a strategic move that has given the multinational corporation exclusive access to the types of resources necessary to carry out cyber attacks against its opponents on a massive scale.

Monsanto’s own executives have even admitted in years past that so-called cyber “warfare” is necessary for the purpose of protecting its own economic interests both domestically and abroad.

“Imagine the internet as a weapon, sitting on a table,” former Monsanto Head of Public Relations Jay Byrne is quoted as saying back in 2001. “Either you use it or your opponent does, but somebody’s going to get killed.”

These are powerful words, and ones that ring increasingly true as reports continue to emerge about Monsanto’s intimidatory tactics against foreign governments that refuse its offerings. Confidential documents recently made public through Wikileaks, for instance, revealed a plan by government officials to “retaliate” against nations that refused to accept GMOs, even when the people of those nations wanted nothing to do with the technology.

All the sordid details of the U.S. government’s collusion activities with the biotechnology industry are available in the full, English-translated SZ report, which you can read here:

You can also learn more about the dangers of GMOs by visiting:

How we are impoverished, gentrified and silenced – and what to do about it

25 July 2013

I have known my postman for more than 20 years. Conscientious and good-humoured, he is the embodiment of public service at its best. The other day, I asked him, “Why are you standing in front of each door like a soldier on parade?”

“New system,” he replied, “I am no longer required simply to post the letters through the door. I have to approach every door in a certain way and put the letters through in a certain way.”


“Ask him.”

Across the street was a solemn young man, clipboard in hand, whose job was to stalk postmen and see they abided by the new rules, no doubt in preparation for privatisation. I told the stalker my postman was admirable. His face remained flat, except for a momentary flicker of confusion.

In ‘Brave New World Revisited’, Aldous Huxley describes a new class conditioned to a normality that is not normal “because they are so well adjusted to our mode of existence, because their human voice has been silenced so early in their lives, that they do not even struggle or suffer or develop symptoms as the neurotic does”.

Surveillance is normal in the Age of Regression – as Edward Snowden revealed. Ubiquitous cameras are normal. Subverted freedoms are normal. Effective public dissent is now controlled by police, whose intimidation is normal.

The traducing of noble words like “democracy”, “reform”, “welfare” and “public service” is normal. Prime ministers who lie openly about lobbyists and war aims are normal. The export of £4bn worth of British arms, including crowd control ammunition, to the medieval state of Saudi Arabia, where apostasy is a capital crime, is normal.

The willful destruction of efficient, popular public institutions like the Royal Mail is normal. A postman is no longer a postman, going about his decent work; he is an automaton to be watched, a box to be ticked. Huxley described this regression as insane and our “perfect adjustment to that abnormal society” a sign of the madness.

Are we “perfectly adjusted” to this? No, not yet. People defend hospitals from closure, UK Uncut forces bank branches to close and six brave women climb the highest building in Europe to show the havoc caused by the oil companies in the Arctic. There, the list begins to peter out.

At this year’s Manchester festival, Percy Bysshe Shelley’s epic Masque of Anarchy – all 91 verses written in rage at the massacre of Lancashire people protesting poverty in 1819 – is an acclaimed theatrical piece, and utterly divorced from the world outside. Last January, the Greater Manchester Poverty Commission disclosed that 600,000 Mancunians were living in “extreme poverty” and that 1.6 million, or nearly half the city’s population, were “sliding into deeper poverty”.

Poverty has been gentrified. The Parkhill Estate in Sheffield was once an edifice of public housing – unloved by many for its Le Corbusier brutalism, poor maintenance and lack of facilities. With its Heritage Grade II listing, it has been renovated and privatised. Two thirds of the old flats have been reborn as modern apartments selling to “professionals”, including designers, architects and a social historian. In the sales office you can buy designer mugs and cushions. This façade offers not a hint that, devastated by the government’s “austerity” cuts, Sheffield has a social housing waiting list of 60,000 people.

Parkhill is a symbol of the two thirds society that is Britain today. The gentrified third do well, some of them extremely well, a third struggle to get by on credit and the rest slide into poverty.

Although the majority of the British are working class – whether or not they see themselves that way – a gentrified minority dominates parliament, senior management and the media. David Cameron, Nick and Ed Milliband are their authentic representatives, with only minor technical difference between their parties. They fix the limits of political life and debate, aided by gentrified journalism and the “identity” industry. The greatest ever transfer of wealth upwards is a given. Social justice has been replaced by meaningless “fairness”.

While promoting this normality, the BBC rewards a senior functionary almost £1m. Although regarding itself as the media equivalent of the Church of England, the Corporation now has ethics comparable with those of the “security” companies G4S and Serco which, says the government, have “overcharged” on public services by tens of millions of pounds. In other countries, this is called corruption.

Like the fire sale of the power utilities, water and the railways, the sale of Royal Mail is to be achieved with bribery and the collaboration of the union leadership, regardless of its vocal outrage. Opening his 1983 documentary series Questions of Leadership, Ken Loach shows trade union leaders exhorting the masses. The same men are then shown, older and florid, adorned in the ermine of the House of Lords. In the recent Queen’s Birthday honours, the general secretary of the TUC, Brendan Barber, received his knighthood.

How long can the British watch the uprisings across the world and do little apart from mourn the long-dead Labour Party? The Edward Snowden revelations show the infrastructure of a police state emerging in Europe, especially Britain. Yet, people are more aware than ever before; and governments fear popular resistance – which is why truth-tellers are isolated, smeared and pursued.

Momentous change almost always begins with the courage of people taking back their own lives against the odds. There is no other way now. Direct action. Civil disobedience. Unerring. Read Percy Shelley – “Ye are many; they are few”. And do it.

Russian President Putin presents America with a beautiful sculpture to commemorate the fallen towers of New York City, on the 5th anniversary of 9/11.

Tear Drop “A Gift From the People of Russia to the USA”

Editor’s Note : The Tear Drop Memorial, is a 10 story sculpture designed by one of Russia’s leading sculptors, Zurab Tsereteli, that was given to the United States as an official gift from the Russian government as a memorial to the victims of 9/11. — Funded by private donations, the work of art called “The Tear Drop Memorial”, consists of a 100 foot tall tower, with a huge open crack running down the center.

Hanging from the crack is a massive “teardrop” designed to drip water.

The base of the monument is surrounded by a marble wall with the names of the 3000 victims engraved in alphabetical order.

The Zionist controlled US media gives the beautiful memorial, dedicated by Putin, a total silent treatment. The monument is barely known, even among  local residents of Bayonne!

President Putin’s image on the banner wall has been inconspicuously absent in the controlled media coverage that it has recieved.

(Wiki) Reaction to the monument has been mixed. It was listed as one of the The World’s Ugliest Statues by Foreign Policy magazine,[8] while The New Yorker said from far away it looked like “a giant tea biscuit.” [6] However reactions from the general public include “Pretty impressive,” said one person and another called it a “breathtakingly beautiful creation”. Read more controversy here.

Learning of the monuments existence by chance, JOHN CRAVEN, describes his Teardrop quest during his visit to New York.


On the trail of New York’s lost Teardrop: John Craven tracks down a forgotten monument to the 9/11 victims

By JOHN CRAVEN – Daily Mail, UK

Expression of grief: The huge bronze-clad monument was a gift from Russia to the US and is located on a remote stretch of waterfront with Manhattan as the backdrop: Credit : Daily Mail, UK.

About 50 million people visit New York every year and more than eight million live there but no one seems to have heard of The Teardrop…which is odd because it is a 100ft tall, 175-ton memorial to those who died on the city’s blackest day. Learning of its existence by chance, I tried to discover more from locals at Ground Zero, where the Twin Towers of the World Trade Centre stood until September 11, 2001, and was met with blank expressions.

The one person who did know was an official guide but he said: ‘I bet 99 per cent of New Yorkers haven’t a clue where it is.’

Our search began at the World Trade Centre station, where a train took us to Exchange Place in New Jersey. From then on, instructions were vague – we had to catch a light-railway tram for eight stops along the Jersey shoreline to 34th Street in Bayonne and ask around.

Eventually someone walked by and kindly offered to call a local taxi firm on his mobile. He’d never heard of The Teardrop but luckily the taxi driver had. He drove us two miles across a wasteland which was once an army base until we came to an isolated quay. And there, high on a mound, stood the monument – a massive bronze-clad block with a great gash down the middle into which is suspended a 40ft, four-ton shiny nickel teardrop.

In the far distance were the skyscrapers of Manhattan. Around the base of The Teardrop were the names of all those who died on 9/11 – including 26 Russians.

Touching: John Craven poses next to The Teardrop (left) in New York. The massive bronze-clad block features a great gash down the middle into which is suspended a 40ft, four-ton nickel teardrop Credit: Daily Mail, UK.

In fact the monument was a gift – an expression of grief – from the people of Russia to the US and officially named ‘To the struggle against world terrorism’.

Vladimir Putin was there when construction began and Bill Clinton attended the dedication ceremony in 2006.

Since then, it has been forgotten.

‘Nobody ever comes here,’ said the taxi driver. Indeed, we were the only visitors.

Surely it hadn’t been snubbed because it was from an old enemy?

I did some research and found that its designer, Zurab Tsereteli – one of Russia’s leading sculptors – went to Ground Zero after the attack. He was told boats and ferries had shuttled survivors across to New Jersey, where many of the victims had lived.

Learning that, he wanted his statue to be on the remote waterfront there with Manhattan as the backdrop. So the explanation for the anonymity of this most touching tribute is probably no more sinister than: out of sight, out of mind – and that needs remedying.

Tribute: The monument was designed by Zurab Tsereteli, one of Russia’s leading sculptors –Credit: Daily Mail, UK

My Teardrop quest happened during my first visit to the Big Apple since 9/11 and the city seemed a less aggressive place, though still full of new surprises. We walked through one of them, the High Line, which meanders for a mile on the West side. It was once an overhead freight line and now it’s full of flower beds and trees.

We stayed at the Soho Grand on West Broadway. It reflects the way the neighbourhood has been transformed from gritty industrial to tasteful, upmarket chic.

Our room had a splendid view across to the Empire State and my favourite skyscraper, the Chrysler Building. Until, that is, the last morning when it was blanked out by an unexpected blizzard.

That’s the thing about New York – it never lets you down with its surprises. The Teardrop was the major one this time.

As I stood next to this enigmatic landmark I was struck by the thought that when passengers sail into Manhattan the first monument they now pass is not the Statue of Liberty but The Teardrop. And none of them will know what it is for.

Tear Drop “A Gift From the People of Russia to the USA” –

Why weren’t we told about Tear Drop?

If Nazi Germany was a NWO prototype for future societies, Britain appears to have taken another step closer to reaching that goal.

It is now looking increasingly likely that Press TV has been banned from You Tube.

Press TV has already been illegally removed from European and American satellites amidst the usual Israeli claims of  Anti-Semitism. The following is from Wikipedia:

In July 2013 Press TV and other Iranian channels have been removed from several European and American satellites (amongst others those of Eutelsat and Intelsat), allegedly because of the Iran sanctions, even though an EU spokesman told the channel that these sanctions do not apply to media.

Based on British Ofcom reports and US parliament documentations, The removal of Press TV from satellites was illegal and against the freedom of speech and there where no real legal issue against Press TV activities , But under the pressure of UK kingdom & government and american government capitalistic & imperialistic policies , Press TV was taken off from the satellites . Also the brutal impact of israel zyonist government on western government , directs their policies against religious movements and freedom , specially Islam which is the religious of peace and brotherhood and equality , which is exactly against western imperialistic policies.

No doubt the semi retarded UK population will view this move as favourable, having never watched or viewed Press TV in their life.

In reality you will find more truth in a single broadcast from Press TV than you would in a months worth of BBC broadcasts.

Google disables Press TV Youtube account

Google has prevented Press TV from accessing its Youtube page since Thursday, causing a large number of viewers and subscribers to contact the channel to find out what has happened.

“We have not been able to upload any new videos since early Thursday,” said Press TV newsroom director, Hamid Reza Emadi, adding that Google has disabled the channel’s account without giving any explanation.

“Viewers keep emailing Press TV asking why the page is not being updated,” he said.

Emadi said Press TV “has yet to find out whether its Youtube account was blocked on political grounds or there were technical issues that could be resolved and the channel could get back on Youtube very soon.”



By Gilad Atzmon

The interventionist EU, that together with the USA inflicts terror on every piece of land rich with oil and other minerals, decided yesterday that a Lebanese resistance to occupation is terror. It designated the Shia movement as a terror organisation.

How pathetic.

The Guardian, once a respected paper, was brave enough to tackle the issue; but rather than presenting a so-called humanist or intellectual and critical approach, it pretended to present an ‘impartial position’. Yesterday it published a debate between war criminal Tzipi Livni and Sami Ramadani.

One may wonder, why is Tzipi Livni, an Israeli politician, a side in this debate? Israel is not part of the EU.  Israel is clearly the element that pushes for the EU to brand the Hezbollah as a terrorist organization. Yet, it is far from being clear why The Guardian asked Livini for her opinion in that particular debate? Maybe time is ripe for The Guardian to decide whether it is the guardian of the truth or the guardian of Israel,

However, at least psychoanalytically, Livni’s argument is fascinating.  The Israeli warmonger exhibits what projection is all about.

Livni insists, for instance, that the organization “carries out terror attacks targeting innocent civilians.” But in fact it is Israel and the Government Livni was a member of that was doing exactly that at the time of 2nd Lebanon War and Operation Cast Lead.

Livni also refers to democracy and to its values. “History has taught us how necessary it is to set limits and conditions for democratic participation”.  But the truth of the matter is that it’s Israel that locks millions of Palestinians in open-air prisons and rid them of any civilian rights.

But Livni is correct when she concludes that  “a firm distinction between legitimate political parties and terrorist organisations is crucial for the survival of freedom, democracy and moderation.” Accordingly, it is Israel that should be designated as a terrorist apparatus, once and for all. Israel terrorizes the entire region and continuously threatens world peace.

To read more:

Wikileaks Is A Rothschild Operation: Rothschilds Use Wikileaks To Wound Rival Bank, Julian Assange’s Bail Posted By Rothschilds’ Sister-in-law, Many Other Links

© Puppetworld Post (Link to this page or at least give the source)

Wikileaks’ leader Julian Assange accepts a CD from Rudolph Elmer which reveals tax evation by wealthy clients of Swiss Bank Julius Baer, a rival of the Rothschild Bank in Switzerland.

Puppetworld Post Exclusive, last updated Jan 18 2011

After being made famous, Julian Assange’s first task is to wound a rival bank of the Rothschild Bank in Switzerland.  The rival is BankJulius Baer, the top Swiss bank for centuries: the competingRothschild Bank AG opened in Switzerland in 1968.

On January 17, 2011, Assange held a press conference at The Frontline Club where Rudolf Elmer, a former employee of Bank Julius Baer, gave Assange private files from the bank’s Cayman Islands’ operation.  Elmer said he wanted to expose mass tax evasion before he flies back to Switzerland to stand trial for stealing information from a bank.  Although Elmer has not named the tax evaders, he claims the CD files contain information about 40 politicians, many business people, multinational conglomerates and “people who have made their living in the arts.”

Rothschilds’ Swiss Bank Battles: Assange’s press conference was actually a public threat to Bank Julius Baer:  Wikileaks first disclosed some of Elmer’s Julius-Baer material in 2008, naming ten clients.  At the time, Julius Baer sued and got a court injunction to effectively shut down at its web host in California.  Subsequently, the law firmFox Rothschild represented Wikileaks, got the injunction overturned, and got back on line.  Immediately, WL commenced leaking more of Elmer’s documents, which was damaging to Bank Julius Baer.

Bank JB got a lot of negative publicity from its attempt to censor the Internet.  When JB lost the suit, their super-elite clients became fearful of being exposed and prosecuted for tax evasion and money laundering.  Julius Baer shares dropped 60% during the next ten months.  On Dec. 4, 2008, the 52-year-old CEO of Julius Baer, Alex Widmer, was unexpectedly found dead.

“He was the most important person in private banking,” said a Zurich-based trader.

“This is a setback for the bank (Julius Baer),” a Swiss trading analyst said.

Reports of the cause of death were contradictory and vague and an autopsy was never released.

Wikileaks’ Julian Assange filming a video for The Economist (a Rothschild publication) which gave him its New Media Award

Wikileaks’ many other links to Rothschilds

The recent imprisonment of Wikileaks’ Julian Assange strains credulity.   His arrest by Interpol, his incarceration under draconian conditions for breaking a condom are in themselves highly unlikely events, but the timing of his imprisonment with the release of classified US cables and the campaign against Wikileaks’ funding and website host bear the trademarks of a covert operation.

The Puppetworld Post has uncovered many links between Wikileaks and the international Rothschild network:

–a sister-in-law and second cousin of the Rothschilds posted bail for Julian Assange (Puppetworld Post exclusive)

–The Economist (a Rothschild magazine) gave Assange its New Media Award in 2008

–Wikileaks used the law firm Fox Rothschild to overturn a judge’s ruling to order a web host to shut down the Wikileaks site
– The Guardian and The New York Times, two of Assange’s media partners, are linked to the Rothschilds (PwP exclusive)
–the owner of the mansion where Assange was eventually put under house arrest has links to Rothschilds
–Assange’s lawyer is also Rothschilds’ lawyer
–US Senator Joe Lieberman who was ultimately responsible for making Assange the largest media personality of the decade, is a member of the Council On Foreign Relations (a Rothschild organization)

[The Rothschilds are an international family of bankers at the centre of a web of wealthy families who control most the countries through a worldwide network of: privately-owned central banks (masquerading as federal banks), major news chains, trusts, councils, etcetera.   An unnamed source has put their monetary worth near $100 trillion—dwarfing the net worth of the likes of Warren Buffet, Bill Gates, Ted Turner, etc.]

Zac Goldsmith (married to Kate Rothschild) winning the election with sister, Jemima Khan (nee Goldsmith)(right), and mother, Annabel Goldsmith

Socialite, heiress Jemima Khan (nee Goldsmith) posted 20 000 pounds ($32 000) for the bail of Wikileaks’ leader Julian Assange.  She’s genetically related to the Rothschilds and she is a sister-in-law (Daily Mail Online, 10 May 2010).  Her father, the late James Goldsmith—British banker, publisher–is a cousin to the Rothschilds.   James’ grandfather Adolphe Goldschmidt  came to London as a multi-millionaire in 1895 and changed the family name from the German Goldschmidt to the English Goldsmith.   The Goldschmidts, like their neighbors and relatives the Rothschilds, had been prosperous merchant bankers in Frankfurt Germany since the 16th century (Wikipedia).
Following the Rothschild’s  centuries-old edict to interbreed,  Jemima Khan’s brother, Ben, wed Kate Rothschild in 2003 and recently her other brother, Zac, a new MP in British parliament had been having an affair with his brother’s sister-in-law, Alice Rothschild (Kate’s sister), up until he divorced his wife four days after he was elected MP.  Zac and Alice are presently living together.   Khan’s brothers are marrying into Rothschild wealth.

The Rothschilds began grooming Julian Assange in 2008, when Wikileaks was awarded The Economist’s New Media Award.  The Economist is the voice of Britain’s establishment (led by the British Rothschilds) which has, for example, on balance, supported Britain’s involvement in the Iraq war.    Sir Evelyn Robert Adrian de Rothschild was chairman of The Economist from 1972 to 1989.   His wife Lynn Forester de Rothschild currently sits on The Economist’s board. The Rothschild family also has a large shareholder interest in The Economist.
At first blush, it is incredulous that the The Economist, the pinnacle of the establishment, would give their award to Assange knowing full well that he was releasing classified government documents and being overly aware of the havoc this will create in the world.  The Rothschilds’ oft- stated goal (over the centuries) is for a One World Government (i.e. The New World Order).   To this end they engineer conflict between nations, to create crises that will then be utilized to increase the power of international entities – the UN, World Bank, IMF, etc.   For example, they (and other closely-related families like the Schiffs) financed the Bolsheviks.  In the past, the Rothschild empire have profited by bankrolling both sides of war.

US senator Joe Lieberman is the Rothschild’s point man in America.   During the last presidential election, he took his friend, Republican candidate John McCain to Jacob Rothschild’s house for a fund-raiser for McCain.  Lieberman is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations (a Rothschild cabal which is essentially the shadow government of the US).   Lieberman’s recent actions resulted in cutting off the money supply of Wikileaks:  Paypal, Mastercard, Visa, stopped accepting donations for Wikileaks.   Lieberman publicly took credit  for censoring Wikileaks’ website by pressuring Amazon to stop hosting the website.  The result was that Anonymous hactivists launched attacks on the websites of companies (above) which had discontinued service to Wikileaks.    Lieberman’s campaign against Wikileaks had the effect of increasing the martyrdom and hence the popularity of Assange and Wikileaks.  Lieberman made  Assange a star, nearly becoming Time magazine’s Man of The Year.
Julian Assange’s lawyer is Mark Stephens of Finers Stephens Innocent, a major London elite law firm.   They are the legal adviser to the Rothschild’s prestigious Waddesdon Trust.
Assange’s main media partner is The Guardian.    The Guardian has been infiltrated by  Rothschilds.  The Guardian is controlled by Guardian Media Group whose chairman is Paul Myners a past employee of N. M. Rothschild Limited & Sons Limited.  Guardian Media Group is owned by Scott Trust which became a limited private company in 2008 with all trustees becoming directors of the Scott Trust.  Anthony Salz was appointed as a trustee of Scott Trust in 2009:  He is currently executive vice-chairman of the investment Bank Rothschild.
The Guardian gave the US cables to the current New York Times.   The chairman of the NYT is Arthur Sulzberger Jr., a member of the Council on Foreign Relations.  He is the son of Arthur Ochs Sulzberger and grandson of Arthur Hays Sulzberger who served as a Trustee for the Rockefeller Foundation (in cahoots with Rothschilds for One World Government).
After a time in a real prison, Assange was “imprisoned” in a countryside mansion at the home of Vaughan Smith, the owner of Frontline Trust, a news organization that seeks to influence TV journalists.   Frontline is funded by George Soros’ organization, Open Society Institute, and George Soros is intimately intertwined with the Rothschilds.  George Soros has been a frequent business partner with James Goldsmith (father of Jemima Khan and cousin of the Rothschilds).  The director of Soros’ Open Society Institute, Richard Katz was director of N M Rothschild & Sons for 16 years.  Other board members like Nils Taube also hold positions in Rothschild banks, etcetera.    On October 25 and July 27 this year, Assange was a speaker at Vaughan Smith’s Frontline Trust.
Most people seem to believe that current events just happen, that events in the news are chain reactions of accidents, and that people with money and power sit idly by, watching events unfold.    However, The Rothschilds thrive on manipulating the markets by having insider information while propagating contrary misinformation.  In this way, they make huge profits.   Assange has already said that damaging information on one US bank will be released.  In this fragile recovery, the crisis could be pivotal.   The Guardian and the New York Times have this information so it is available to Rothschilds in order to “short” the bank before the information is released.  Wikileaks is an invaluable tool for the Rothschilds to manipulate the financial markets, the whole monetary system, the future of nations, and the public.

The information (or misinformation) from Wikileaks also serves the Rothschild’s aim to increase conflict among nations in order to further their goal of One World Government.

Moody’s downgrades Hong Kong, over Snowden? Is agency now a corrupt political arm of US?

21st Century Wire says…Yesterday the world made some sense, but then you wake up today and realise how far-reaching the international white collar mafia truly is…

International financial ratings agency Moody’s is not known for being a political enforcement arm of Washington DC… until now that is.In a move which sets a dangerous precedent of politicizing the world’s markets, Moody’s just made an aggressive move towards global financial warfare between Washington and China, and perhaps the rest of the world as well – by downgrading 9 major Hong Kong banks today.That will wipe a lot off money off a lot of wealthy investors’ balance sheets.So Hong Kong authorities would not to honor U.S. requests to arrest the fugitive Snowden, and then this happens.Just a coincidence? Hardly. Ratings agents appear to have gotten the call from upstairs. This, it seems, is Washington’s last desperate effort to flush out its latest public relations nemesis – the 29 year old NSA whistleblower Ed Snowden.Hong Kong’s economy is booming at present and its banks remain among the highest-rated banks globally, backed by solid levels of capitalization. Hong Kong’s financial wealth is historically linked to Great Britain, so this latest spat reinforces the narrative that the British-hatched Snowden crisis could be a behind the scenes battle between elites in the UK who want intervention in Syria and those in the US who don’t.
IMAGE: Snowden’s limited hangout in Hong Kong has come at a price to investors there.The Snowden affair is being used to set a whole new raft of measures not seen before – which makes us us all the suspicious about the timing and the nature of of this latest international whistleblower – who, like Bradley Manning, hasn’t leaked anything that we didn’t already know.Many already know that Moody’s and the rating gangs are corrupt and work hand in hand – as they did in the subprime mortgage theft, with their partners in crime at the major banks. What happens when international finance goes fully political? History tells us that a world war beckons.Regardless, it’s just another reason for the rest of the world to lose faith in the a highly rigged global financial system run out of New York and London… 

Rating Action: Moody’s takes rating actions on nine Hong Kong banks

Global Credit Research – 24 Jun 2013

Hong Kong, June 24, 2013 - Moody’s Investors Service has changed the outlooks for the bank financial strength ratings (BFSRs)/Baseline Credit Assessments (BCAs) of eight Hong Kong banks to negative from stable, and one bank’s BFSR outlook to stable from positive.

In addition, Moody’s has lowered Wing Lung Bank’s BFSR by one notch, and affirmed all other ratings of the nine banks.

Moody’s has affirmed the deposit ratings of all the nine banks involved in this rating action. However, it has changed the outlooks on the deposit ratings for five of the nine banks concerned to negative from stable, while those for the other four banks are unchanged at stable. Please click here for a list of the affected credit ratings. This list is an integral part of this press release and identifies each affected issuer.


The rating actions follow Moody’s decision to revise the outlook for Hong Kong’s banking system to negative from stable.

The change in the banking system outlook reflects the agency’s concerns regarding persistent negative real interest rates and potential property bubbles in Hong Kong, as well as Hong Kong banks’ growing exposures to Mainland China. These factors could result in adverse operating conditions for Hong Kong banks over the outlook horizon…

Read more

Henry Kissinger actually publicly stated that those who oppose the New World Order are “terrorists”.

Henry Kissinger in a speech given in Istanbul, Turkey on May 31, 2007, while the Bilderberg conference was simultaneously underway, just a few miles down the road.

“In the Middle East, we live in a different world. The nations do not represent historic entities in the same sense that European nations did. Turkey of course does, and Iran in a considerable extent does. But in the region in between, the borders were drawn by the victors of World War I on the basis largely of what would facilitate their influence. So therefore, the identities of these countries, and of their borders, can be challenged more easily.”

“What we in America call terrorists are really groups of people that reject the international system, and they’re trying to regroup it to a radical Islamic fundamentalists kind.”…………


Dr David Kelly: 10 years on, death of scientist remains unresolved for some

Senior figures unwilling to accept suicide verdict delivered after death of man who hunted WMDs for Blair government

POLITICS Iraq_Kelly 2

Dr David Kelly during questioning by a Commons select committee in 2003. Photograph: PA

It was a case of the political becoming personal, only so overwhelmingly, that it crushed a man. A decade ago on Wednesday, just after 3.20pm, Dr David Kelly began a walk from his Oxfordshire home that ended the next morning with the discovery of his body, slumped in a wood.

The Kelly family lost a loved one and a chain of events was set off that damaged trust in the Blair government and decapitated the leadership of the BBC.

Kelly was the distinguished government scientist who hunted down weapons of mass destruction of the kind used by the Blair government to justify the 2003 war with Iraq. The problem was the Saddam Hussein regime did not have them.

A BBC Today programme report claimed the government had embellished or “sexed up” the intelligence it presented to the public in 2003 to justify the war.

A furore erupted between the government, led by chief spin doctorAlastair Campbell, and the BBC, which refused to back down, having failed to spot the flaws in its reporting.

Kelly was outed as the BBC’s source, felt publicly humiliated and was reprimanded by his bosses. A proud man felt let down by them, and that his reputation built up over a lifetime was being irreparably tarnished.

In the days before that final walk Kelly’s family said they had never seen him so low. As news of his death spread, the normally self-assured Blair seemed stunned when a reporter cried: “Do you have blood on your hands?”

Kelly’s death led not to an inquest, but a public inquiry by Lord Hutton, which brought a rare glimpse into the secret worlds of Whitehall, British intelligence, the low arts of high politics, and the workings of the BBC.

Its conclusion largely absolved the government of blame, and surprised observers.

Its criticism of the BBC led to the demise at the corporation of then chairman Gavyn Davies, correspondent Andrew Gilligan and director general Greg Dyke, who on Tuesday said history has proven the broadcaster was right: “Ten years on, it is very difficult to find anyone who believes they did not ‘sex up’ that document.”

Debate still surrounds Hutton’s conclusion that Kelly committed suicide. The inquiry found that Kelly died after cutting an artery, had taken an overdose of painkillers and had heart disease which left his arteries “significantly narrowed”. Thus, said experts, less blood loss may have killed the scientist than that needed to kill a healthy man.

Among those who have called for an inquest or have doubts it was a suicide are former Tory leader Michael Howard, and Liberal Democrat minister Norman Baker, who wrote a book saying Kelly was most likely murdered.

A group of doctors say Hutton’s findings should be discarded and a new inquest held. Dr Stephen Frost said: “We have lots of evidence … No coroner in the land would reach a verdict of suicide as Lord Hutton did.”

Experts in forensic pathology point out the sceptics may be expert in their own fields, but not in the science of establishing the cause of death.

Hutton has kept silent since his report, breaking it only to write a letter denouncing the conspiracy theorists. Hutton’s conclusion is supported by the available facts and experts: “At no time … was there any suggestion from any counsel for the interested parties or in any of the extensive media coverage that any of the police officers engaged in investigating Dr Kelly’s death or any of the medical or scientific witnesses was involved in any sort of cover-up or plot to make a murder appear like a suicide.”

Dyke claimed that: “Some of Dr Kelly’s wider family don’t believe it’s suicide.”

But the Conservative-led government has said the evidence for suicide is so compelling there is no need for a fresh hearing.

Ben Page, chief executive of pollsters Ipsos Mori said the row over the 2003 Iraq war was part of a continued lack of trust in government and politicians: “It was part of the continuum of declining trust.”

“It is clear that Dr Kelly and anger over the reason Britain joined in with the Iraq war are intertwined.”

Later this year the Chilcot report is expected, but for ex-BBC boss Dyke, a one-time supporter of Tony Blair, the verdict is in: “History tells us Blair was destroyed by Iraq. Blair will be only remembered for that, just as Sir Anthony Eden will be remembered for Suez.”

Dzhokar Tsarnaev’s Throat Wound: Another Government Lie Bites the Dust

Kurt Nimmo
July 19, 2013

It’s another example of why you should never trust the government.

Back in April federal officialdom told us Boston bombing suspect Dzhokar Tsarnaev was shot in the throat and unable to talk. MassachusettsGov. Deval Patrick was trotted out to confirm this fantasy story. He said Tsarnaev was in “serious but stable condition” and “not yet able to communicate yet.”

Then we were fed a more theatric version where the young Tsarnaev attempted to take his own life when he was supposedly trapped in a boat. “It is thought the teenager placed a gun in his mouth and pulled the trigger in a desperate bid to avoid capture and a possible death penalty,” claimed the British version of the National Enquirer, The Mirror. “Reports say the bullet passed through his throat, just missing his spinal cord, and  came out the back of his neck.”

Photo: Massachusetts State Police

Photo: Massachusetts State Police

This Hollywoodesque version dovetailed nicely with the story that the evil Brothers Tsarnaev were in a running gun battle with the cops, flinging home-made pressure cooker bombs at their brave pursuers as the pair attempted to escape the long arm of the law.

Then we were told Dzhokar was being treated by Israeli doctors who “have abundant past experience treating victims of terror… because they’re from Israel.”

“Tsarnaev is in stable condition but that because of wounds to his throat, he may never be able to speak again,” The Blaze reported, feeding the fantasy.

In May, the story changed. It was said Tsarnaev didn’t have a bullet wound in his throat, but was cut by a knife. “I did see a throat injury. To me it looked more like a knife wound,” said Officer Jeff Campbell of the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority Transit Police SWAT Unit. “It wasn’t a puncture hole. It was a slice where it was spread open, possibly a piece of shrapnel from one of the explosives that they were using the night before. It didn’t look like a bullet wound to me. It looked like a cut of some kind.” Campbell was supposedly part of the team that apprehended Tsarnaev, so if anybody knew about his wounds, it would be Campbell and his fellow SWAT officers.

CNN later edited out the comment about the throat wound made by Campbell.

Now we have a photo of Tsarnaev allegedly surrendering. It was taken by a Massachusetts State Police photographer. CBS Boston reported on Thursday the photographer, Sgt. Sean Murphy, gave the photos to the Boston Magazine because he was upset by the Rolling Stone’s recent “glamorized” cover photo of the suspected terrorist. Murphy is under investigation for releasing photos to the magazine.

Note the absence of a throat wound in the photo.

The photos underscore the fact the government lied about Tsarnaev’s throat wound, as the photo clearly shows. Is there anything else the government is lying about? Is it possible the entire event is a government contrived fiction?

Now it’s time for somebody to release the video frame capture of the Brothers Tsarnaev dropping their bomb-laden backpacks, photos were are assured exist but were never released. Is it possible this is a lie as well?

Who killed Roberto Calvi?

Roberto Calvi

The mystery of ” God’s banker” Roberto Calvi who was found hanging from Blackfriars Bridge has never been fully solved.

Calvi, dubbed “God’s banker” because of his work with the Vatican, was found hanging from scaffolding beneath Blackfriars bridge in London on 18 June  1982. Bricks had been stuffed in his pockets and he had more than £10,000 in cash on him. In the months before his death he had been accused of stealing millions being laundered on behalf of the mafia.

His death was originally ruled a suicide but later judged to be murder.

According to the Guardian, his son Carlo has dedicated his life to uncovering what really happened to his father:

” The murdered man’s 37-year-old son had just two questions:

‘Tell me what you can do and how much will it cost?’

It was the autumn of 1991 and New York investigator Jeff Katz had flown to the US city to meet the dead man’s son, Carlo Calvi.

It turned out that Katz could do quite a lot.

Roberto Calvi, known as God’s banker because of his close ties to the Vatican, was found hanging from Blackfriars Bridge, central London, with a length of orange rope woven into a lover’s knot around his neck. He was weighed down by bricks and found with £15,000 in cash in his pockets.

Calvi’s death, in June 1982, was the moment the Italian underworld went overground in London. ‘If you’re going to take this case on it’ll be like dancing in the mouth of wolves,’ a secret service agent told Katz in Rome.

Katz was bitten. ‘

It was a fascinating case,’ he said in London last week. ‘It involved the mafia, the Vatican, P2 [a powerful masonic group]. It had 90 per cent of my time for two years so I was really stuck into it.

‘ The painstaking   work, carried out by the New York investigator and 30 others in the early 1990s, is now leading tantalisingly closer to the arrest of key figures in Britain and the recovery of tens of millions of pounds in what was one of the 20th century’s most intriguing murders and financial scandals.

The affair saw Italy’s biggest private bank collapse with debts of $1.4 billion in 1982.

The City of London police working on the case today describe a mosaic of vicious mafia dons, and assets traced all over the world.

But it seems there are plenty of people who still do not want the secrets which supposedly died with Calvi 21 years ago to come to light.

The Italian detective leading the investigation, Luca Tescaroli, recently received a hand-delivered letter containing black powder and two 12-volt batteries with a note saying: ‘This is an ultimatum. Stop.’

But it is too late now.

Evidence has come to light which is leading the investigation to four UK suspects who helped bring about Calvi’s downfall. Three months after Calvi’s death, a   small-time drug dealer, Sergio Vaccari, was stabbed in the face, neck and chest more than 15 times. At the time the City of London police saw no link with Calvi.

But Vaccari had possession of masonic papers. And Katz tracked down Vaccari’s former landlord, who, he learned, had demanded that his tenant left his flat. Vaccari agreed on condition that the landlord found him another home. The landlord presented two options, one of which Vaccari picked.

A while later Vaccari wanted details from the landlord of the other place; that flat was in Chelsea Cloisters, the place Calvi stayed in just before he died.

‘From there we began to make other linkages between Vaccari and the Calvi entourage,’ said Katz.

The new City of London investigation, led by Detective Superintendent Trevor Smith, drew on a detailed reconstruction of the last hours of Calvi’s life. The reconstruction, devised by Katz and a forensic expert, Angela Gallop, established conclusively that Calvi was murdered.

The scaffolding that Calvi was hung from, was assembled again,   and a man of Calvis’s height and weight climbed along it. Pressure from such weight would have left rust on Calvi’s shoes, but forensic research found no rust stuck to his footwear.

It was decided that Calvi could not have committed suicide, as was first suggested by the City of London police after an investigation that lasted no more than a week. It has long been suggested that it was a masonic influence that led the City police to issue this conclusion, a claim denied by the police.

For Carlo it was not just a case of proving that his father was murdered. A suicide verdict would have meant that   the son could not have got access to the $10m life insurance payout.

A second inquest produced an open verdict, which still did not satisfy the insurers. When subsequent forensic work did satisfy them that Calvi had not died by his own hand, his bank’s creditors – owed $1.4bn – were waiting.

Touche Ross, the liquidator, took a significant slice.

Calvi was a haunted man as he entered his final days. As chairman of Banco Ambrosiano, he was in charge of an organisation that laundered money made largely from the heroin trade for the mafia.

He knew the dark financial secrets of the Vatican.

Letters of comfort to offshore companies which he created were signed by Archbishop Marcinkus, a Chicago-born prelate and key Vatican insider who has never faced an interview or charges.

But more ominously Calvi had intimate knowledge of regular payments made by large Italian companies to political parties.

He should have known: the payments went through his bank.

Calvi was on the point of going to prison for violating exchange controls. It was Michele Sindona, once Calvi’s   mentor, who ratted on him. Calvi had one chance to avert humiliation. Tell the world what he knew. It was this which led to his death, Katz believes.

‘There was a point at which he threatened that if the Vatican and other people who he had been working with did not get him off the hook for the four years in jail for currency exchange violations, he was going to talk,’ Katz argues. ‘It would have landed the heads of all the major corporations in jail and it would have ended up probably with the indictment of political leaders.’

No mafia killing in London could happen unless it were ordered by Francesco di Carlo. He was one of the first of the Cosa Nostra to realise the need to ‘clean’ criminal profits through the financial system.

Now serving 25 years for heroin trafficking, in 1967 he had met Queen Elizabeth in Italy.

For many years it was assumed that the Calvi mystery would fade into the mists of time. But the City of London police have now established a link between di Carlo and Sergio Vaccari.

And the mists are clearing.”

Banking scandal

It was one of the biggest and most intriguing financial scandals of the last century.

Weeks after Roberto Calvi’s murder in June 1982, the Italian bank he chaired, Banco Ambrosiano, went under with a then staggering $1.4 billion debt.

Mafia, Freemasons and the Vatican are implicated in a tale of drug trafficking, money laundering and tortuous financing spanning the world.

Many believe the death of Pope John Paul I in 1978, just 33 days after his election, happened because he wanted to break the murky links between what was then Italy’s largest private bank and the Vatican.

The scandal touched financial institutions around the world and the Italian political elite.

Calvi’s bank built its empire in close association with the Vatican bank, the Institute for Religious Works.

This was headed by Archbishop Paul Marcinkus from Chicago.

While the Vatican never accepted culpability in the collapse of Ambrosiano, it stumped up $250m to creditors.

Some believe Marcinkus may yet face trial now a court case in Italy is progressing.

One of the most influential figures in the Calvi story was Licio Gelli, now 84.

He was Grand Master of the P2 masonic lodge of which Silvio Berlusconi was once a member. Gelli was sentenced to 12 years for fraud in connection with the collapse of Calvi’s bank and is under house arrest.

Calvi’s mentor Michele Sindona was friends with former US President Richard Nixon.

Sindona died in prison in 1986 poisoned by coffee laced with cyanide.

In April 2006, a remarkable letter came to light.

The typewritten note was sent to Pope John Paul II by Calvi  just days before he was found hanged.

The letter was written on June 5, 1982.

Calvi wrote:

Holiness, a possible collapse of the Ambrosiano Bank would provoke a catastrophe of unimaginable proportions in which the Church will suffer the gravest damage.

 It must be avoided at all costs.

“It was me, following the mandate of your authoritative representatives, who arranged significant financing of several countries and politico-religious associations in the East and the West.

 It was me, in agreement with Vatican authorities, who coordinated across the whole of South America the establishment of numerous banking entities, mainly aimed at countering the penetration and expansion of neo-Marxist ideologies.

“It was me, finally, who is betrayed today by the very same authority for which I have always shown the utmost respect and obedience.”

The letter bore Calvi’s signature.

Story Image

Google images
Michael Hastings, author of “The Operators,” dead at 33.

Hastings’ death in fiery car crash is just the latest in a growing list of dead investigative journos

By Andrew W. Griffin

Red Dirt Report, editor

Posted: June 19, 2013

OKLAHOMA CITY – Talk to any journalist, particularly after they’ve had a few drinks at the bar, and ask them if they are ever nervous or concerned when going up against great power. At first they will probably say “nah, I’m a reporter. I’m just doing my job and they know that.” But if you really press them on the topic – particularly after that third or fourth drink – and they will begin to admit that, yeah, taking on the powerful is a bit stressful and, perhaps, dangerous.

But most of news people know that, inevitably and given the appropriate beat, that we will end up writing stories that call for us to expose the powerful. That’s particularly true, of course, for investigative reporters.

And then think of the investigative reporters that you know who did cross the rich and powerful and ended up dead. Disappeared. Suicided. Murdered. Medical examiners get paid off or told to keep quiet. It happens all the time.

And of course the story is that they were depressed because their work wasn’t being taken seriously or they had some medical issue that was preventing them from doing their best work. Cover stories like that are thrown out there repeatedly.

Best known for dying under suspicious circumstances is former San Jose Mercury News reporter Gary Webb, he of the explosive “Dark Alliance” series (and book) and a guy of such superhuman strength that he was able to shoot himself TWICE in the head in December 2004. Now that’s something.

Webb showed how CIA-backed Nicaraguan Contras smuggled cocaine into the U.S., funneling it into the inner city of Los Angeles as crack cocaine. Webb said the Reagan administration allowed this to happen so as to fund the Contras in their battle against the leftist Sandinistas.

Webb, we now know, will be the subject of an upcoming Focus Features film titled Killing the Messenger starring Jeremy Renner as Webb. We just hope they get it right.

And back in ’91 – again in a motel room – this time in Martinsburg, West Virginia, investigative reporter Danny Casolaro was found dead – of self-inflicted wounds, of course. Suicided. Casolaro was looking into a vast, criminal conspiracy he called “The Octopus.” Seems as though Casolaro may have gone too far.

We hear there will be a film made next year based on the play Danny Casolaro Died For You. Again, we hope they get it right.

Remember J.H. Hatfield dying alone in that motel room in Springdale, Arkansas in 2001? Hatfield, as troubled as he was, exposed George W. Bush’s drug-addled past in Fortunate Son. As Hatfield says in the Horns and Halos documentary, “If anything happens to me, get it out to the press.”

And what of Hunter S. Thompson? The iconic Rolling Stone gonzo journalist who hated Nixon? He reportedly committed suicide back in 2005. But two years earlier, on the verge of the Iraq War, Thompson – a virulent critic of George W. Bush – made cryptic statements about his head getting cut off for refusing to shut up about various topics, particularly those related to his criticism of Bush.

Conservative blogger Andrew Breitbart also was murdered, we are convinced. As we wrote in March 2012, as soon as we learned of his passing, Breitbart was on the verge of releasing “explosive tapes featuring Obama.”

And while Breitbart’s current team at doesn’t talk about it, at a recent blog convention in Dallas RDR attended, there was mention of Breitbart’s murder several times during the weekend. People know.

And now we have Michael Hastings, dead at 33. A “fiery car crash” we are told. The car “jackknifed.” Not sure how that happens. (Oh and it just so happens that Hastings’ car crash occurred the same day a story is released saying that “cyber-terrorists and hackers” can break into your vehicles’ electronics and take over, even while you are driving).

Yeah, it was Hastings’ terrific article on the real Gen. Stanley McChrystal in Rolling Stone in 2010 called “The Runaway General” that got a lot of people’s attention. The Operators went even further, giving readers an intimate look into how the military’s upper echelon really think. Ultimately, a disgraced McChrystal opted for “early retirement” due to Hastings’ work reporting on McChrystal’s activities in Afghanistan and elsewhere.

Now, while we are awaiting the official “accident report,” I should note that in my March 2012 review of The Operators last year, I noted a particularly sinister exchange between Hastings and staffers of Gen. McChrystal.

From The Operators, Hastings writes that as they drank and sang, several McChrystal staff members make subtle threats, saying:

You’re not going to f*ck us, are you?” asks one staff member.

Hastings responds: “I’m going to write a story; some of the stuff you’ll like, some of the stuff you probably won’t like.

Another staffer then says: “We’ll hunt you down and kill you if we don’t like what you write.”

Not exactly subtle, in retrospect. Perhaps they followed through with their threat?

One has to imagine that Hastings was looking over his shoulder in the wake of “The Runaway General” piece and The Operators. I saw him on a cable-news program not too many months ago and he comes across as serious and professional.

And now we hear that Hastings’ car “crossed the median, slammed into a tree and bust into flames.” Hastings was found dead at the scene, a’la whistleblower Karen Silkwood in 1974, here in Oklahoma. Will we get the truth of how Hastings’ car went out of control? Granted, a lot of investigative journalists are known to love “living on the edge.”

And while journalism is viewed as one of the worst professions in America, journalists are desperately needed to keep the powerful honest. They need to be the watchdogs. We are so sorry to hear about the death of Michael Hastings. He was a brave and honest reporter.

The Singapore way of censorship: blogs must be licensed, license costs $39500

A crowd with posters denouncing “internet censorship” gathered on Saturday in Speakers’ Corner at Hong Lim Park to demand the withdrawal of the policy. The peaceful demonstration in the Southeast Asian city-state was organized by a group of bloggers called “Free My Internet.”
The message of the gathering – “the government must trust us, and stop treating us like babies,” said Choo Zheng Xi, the group’s spokesperson. “It is an international embarrassment when governments around the world are working to deregulate the Internet, and Singapore, one of the wealthiest nations per capita, is going in the opposite direction,” the activist told AFP.
Under the rules that came into force in June, news websites must obtain annual licenses if they have over 50,000 unique visitors from Singapore every month and publish at least one weekly article on the island’s news over a period of two months.
To get the license, they must pay about $39,500. Also, licensed sources will be subjected to government control and will have to remove banned content – such as articles that undermine “racial or religious harmony” – within 24 hours after they get a notification from Singapore’s media regulator.
The new regulations have sparked fierce criticism among the city-state’s internet community who accused the government of attempts to introduce online media censorship. Authorities, in response, assured web-users that their personal blogs and many news commentary website will not be affected.
According to Information Minister Yaacob Ibrahim, the websites that are required to get licenses will “have to conform to certain minimum standards as far as we are concerned, and we think it’s not as onerous as what’s been made up by some people online,” he said earlier this week, as cited by AP.
The new regulation affects ten websites so far, including Yahoo! News in Singapore.
A day earlier, some 162 websites blacked out their content in protest against the licensing rules, Asia One reported.  Most of the sites replaced their homepages with a “Free My Internet” message on black screen and information on the Saturday rally.
Human Rights Watch also criticized the move in a statement on Friday, saying that the Singapore licensing policy “casts a chill over the city-state’s robust and free-wheeling online communities,” and will limit Singaporeans’ access to independent media.
Singapore is placing its status as a world-class financial center at clear risk by extending its record of draconian media censorship to the digital world,” said Cynthia Wong, senior internet researcher at Human Rights Watch, as quoted by Reuters.

Woman Being Denied Citizenship Because Her Morality Doesn’t Come From Religion

Margaret Doughty, a 64-year old woman from the UK who has spent the past 30+ years in the U.S., is in the process of applying for United States Citizenship and happens to be an atheist. She is currently a permanent resident running non-profit adult literacy organizations, doing her part to enrich the lives of American citizens. In the process of applying for citizenship, all candidates are asked if they’d be willing to take up arms in defense of the United States of America.  Ms. Doughty responded,
“I am sure the law would never require a 64 year-old woman like myself to bear arms, but if I am required to answer this question, I cannot lie. I must be honest. The truth is that I would not be willing to bear arms. Since my youth I have had a firm, fixed and sincere objection to participation in war in any form or in the bearing of arms.  I deeply and sincerely believe that it is not moral or ethical to take another person’s life, and my lifelong spiritual/religious beliefs impose on me a duty of conscience not to contribute to warfare by taking up arms…my beliefs are as strong and deeply held as those who possess traditional religious beliefs and who believe in God…I want to make clear, however, that I am willing to perform work of national importance under civilian direction or to perform noncombatant service in the Armed Forces of the United States if and when required by the law to do so.”
Despite being an atheist, Ms. Doughty was told that any conscientious objection must be based on religious grounds, not simply moral objections. So as someone who was not religious, and didn’t believe in a god, she had no basis for objecting. Her statement has been denied and she has been informed that to move forward in the process she must submit a letter from the elders of her church to prove her conscientious objections are religiously based.
The USCIS has told her,
“Please submit a letter on official church stationery, attesting to the fact that you are a member in good standing and the church’s official position on the bearing of arms.”
She has been given until June 21st to show that her objection is religiously-based, or her application will be denied.
This is not the first time a non-religious person has raised a conscientious objection to joining the armed forces. In fact, related issues have gone to the Supreme Court and have been ruled in favor of the non-religious objector.  In Welsh v. United States, Elliott Ashton Welsh refused to take up arms on a moral objection rather than a religious one.  However, under the Universal Military Training and Service Act, one could only object to joining the armed forces based on a religious conviction involving a Supreme Being. The Court agreed that Welsh could be considered a conscientious objector based on his personal moral grounds, and that the exemption being purely religious was a violation of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.
It appears that Margaret Doughty is facing a very similar First Amendment violation. As a conscientious objector to war, she is basing her position on her personal ethical code rather than a religious one. The response from the INS suggesting her claim must be based on religion is the same sort of First Amendment violation we saw in Welsh v. US.
Please join us in spreading the word about this case so that we can fight discrimination against non-believers. Coincidentally, Ms. Doughty’s stepson is Chris Johnson, a New York based photographer. He’s working on a book called A Better Life, which aims to shine a positive light on atheists by featuring 100 nonbelievers who found joy and meaning in their lives without god.

Report on GCSB changed from ‘sensitive’ to ‘sanitised’

By David Fisher @DFisherJourno

Sir Bruce Ferguson said he read the report at the GCSB where his cellphone was removed before entering the building. Photo / Mark Mitchell

Sir Bruce Ferguson said he read the report at the GCSB where his cellphone was removed before entering the building. Photo / Mark Mitchell

The senior lawyer appointed by the Prime Minister to investigate the GCSB wrote a report which was more detailed and highly classified than the one released.

The existence of the highly classified version of the report was revealed by Air Marshal Sir Bruce Ferguson, who was a former director of the GCSB and consulted on a draft of the report. He said the report released was “a sanitised version”.

“The draft I read wasn’t just sensitive. It was more than that.”

Green Party co-leader Russel Norman expressed surprise over the existence of a more highly classified version of the report. “If it’s true they sanitised the report before releasing it, it means there’s another version somewhere. It means they have not been completely straight with us.”

Sir Bruce said he had been asked to read the first draft of the report before being interviewed by its author, Rebecca Kitteridge, the Cabinet secretary seconded by John Key to carry out the inquiry. He said he read the report at the GCSB where his cellphone was removed before entering the building.

“I sat in [a] room with a guard closely monitoring, making sure I didn’t take photographs, didn’t take notes.”

He was not shown any appendices, which were never released because of their security classification, and sections of the draft were obscured so he could not read them. He said he read the version released publicly and “there was lots missing”.

A spokesman for the GCSB said the production of the final report saw it prepared for public release with classified information moved into the appendices. A spokeswoman for the Prime Minister said the only copy Mr Key ever received was released in full with classified appendices withheld.

Toby Manhire: Step up, Mr Dunne, become a hero

Whistleblower or not, Peter Dunne remains an important part in all this. Photo / Natalie Slade

Whistleblower or not, Peter Dunne remains an important part in all this. Photo / Natalie Slade

Anything we can do, they can do bigger.

New Zealand’s scandal around the mysterious leak of confidential spy papers was made to look all rather feeble by the Americans over the weekend, as the Guardian revealed slides from a secret presentation that illustrated the massive scale of surveillance undertaken by the National Security Agency, and boasted of direct access to the servers of the biggest internet players – Google, Facebook, Yahoo and more.

While the courageous whistleblower Edward Snowden was holed up in a Hong Kong hotel, our own (presumed) leaker, Peter Dunne, went into exile in Johnsonville.

But for all that, the news about America’s Prism and related programmes, and its extensive, indiscriminate scraping of citizens’ phone records, directly informs our understanding of New Zealand’s surveillance operations – and the way they’re being changed in two new bills before Parliament that reconfigure the remit of the beleaguered Government Communications Security Bureau and the rules that enable snooping on New Zealand communications information.

These are not legislative tweaks. According to civil liberties advocate Thomas Beagle, the New Zealand changes could even equip our agencies with powers that outstrip those in America, giving the GCSB “practically unlimited capacity to intercept New Zealand communications”.

With legislators in the US objecting that when they voted in favour of the Patriot Act they did not intend to sanction the style and scale of spying that has this week been revealed, it is no time for New Zealand to rush through new laws that could enable a similar mission creep.

With sales of George Orwell’s great warning 1984 – published 64 years ago this week – soaring in the days since the first Prism headlines, only those with both empty brain and empty life could continue to peddle straight-faced the “nothing to fear, nothing to hide” mantra. To quote one of our own age’s great thinkers, Stephen Colbert: “If you’re doing nothing wrong, you have nothing to hide from the giant surveillance apparatus the Government’s been hiding.”

Nor is there anything innocuous about the collection of metadata, the record of individuals’ activity on the phone and online, minus the content of messages. The NSA is drift-netting this information indiscriminately and without a warrant, and the New Zealand’s GCSB and Telecommunications Interception Capability and Security bills make it much easier to do so here.

It isn’t just as an instructive example that US events should alarm us. Under the Echelon (“Five Eyes”) agreement, New Zealand’s spy agencies routinely share information with the NSA. It is inconceivable that such sharing does not include Prism. John Key has not denied that it does. Indeed, the carefully crafted prime ministerial response to any question on New Zealand agencies, the NSA and Prism has been repeated so often this week it’s become an earworm. What-I-can-tell-you-is-we-don’t-ask-foreign-intelligence-agencies-to-act-in-any-way-that-circumvents-the-law. That’s all you’re getting. Everything else, apparently, is an “operational matter”.

Yesterday’s decision to extend submissions on the GCSB bill by a week to next Friday is a step in the right direction, but fails to meet the request by internet NZ and the Telecommunications Users Association of NZ for at least a fortnight’s grace, in light of the NSA revelations. When Rebecca Kitteridge in her now famous report called for “a public discussion about the powers and functions of GCSB”, it’s a fair bet she wasn’t envisaging a truncated submissions process.

But even that seems insufficient. With every disclosure, the need for a broad-ranging, non-partisan inquiry of New Zealand’s spy agencies and operations becomes plainer.

Changes in the way humans communicate and the techniques for snooping on those communications have left the law seriously out of synch. The right and sensible approach is to start from the ground up, and ask some rudimentary questions. Beginning with the biggie: how much of privacy and liberty are we willing to compromise in the cause of security? Are the safeguards and oversight sufficiently robust? This stuff is central to any durable social contract between the state and its citizens, at the heart of public trust in government.

Along the way, a host of other important questions will crop up, not least: are we happy with the privatisation of surveillance tasks “digital Blackwater”, in the words of one former NSA director – as is now commonplace in the US and may be under way in New Zealand in the example of Palantir?

Conducted as openly as possible, a happy byproduct of a wide-ranging inquiry would be a big boost to New Zealand’s global reputation for transparency and good government.

Whistleblower or not, Peter Dunne remains an important player in all this. As a servant of common sense, he could use his pivotal vote to forestall the passage of these new laws in the absence of a proper public conversation. In so doing, he’d achieve not just an honourable redemption, he’d be a kind of hero.

A Story of Surveillance

Washington Post Staff Writer
Original posted Wednesday, November 7, 2007


His first inkling that something was amiss came in summer 2002 when he opened the door to admit a visitor from the National Security Agency to an office of AT&T in San Francisco.

“What the heck is the NSA doing here?” Mark Klein, a former AT&T technician, said he asked himself.

A year or so later, he stumbled upon documents that, he said, nearly caused him to fall out of his chair. The documents, he said, show that the NSA gained access to massive amounts of e-mail and search and other Internet records of more than a dozen global and regional telecommunications providers. AT&T allowed the agency to hook into its network at a facility in San Francisco and, according to Klein, many of the other telecom companies probably knew nothing about it.

Klein is in Washington this week to share his story in the hope that it will persuade lawmakers not to grant legal immunity to telecommunications firms that helped the government in its anti-terrorism efforts.

The plain-spoken, bespectacled Klein, 62, said he may be the only person in the country in a position to discuss firsthand knowledge of an important aspect of the Bush administration’s domestic surveillance program. He is retired, so he isn’t worried about losing his job. He did not have security clearance, and the documents in his possession were not classified, he said. He has no qualms about “turning in,” as he put it, the company where he worked for 22 years until he retired in 2004.

“If they’ve done something massively illegal and unconstitutional — well, they should suffer the consequences,” Klein said. “It’s not my place to feel bad for them. They made their bed, they have to lie in it. The ones who did [anything wrong], you can be sure, are high up in the company. Not the average Joes, who I enjoyed working with.”

In an interview yesterday, he alleged that the NSA set up a system that vacuumed up Internet and phone-call data from ordinary Americans with the cooperation of AT&T. Contrary to the government’s depiction of its surveillance program as aimed at overseas terrorists, Klein said, much of the data sent through AT&T to the NSA was purely domestic. Klein said he believes that the NSA was analyzing the records for usage patterns as well as for content.

He said the NSA built a special room to receive data streamed through an AT&T Internet room containing “peering links,” or major connections to other telecom providers. The largest of the links delivered 2.5 gigabits of data — the equivalent of one-quarter of the Encyclopedia Britannica’s text — per second, said Klein, whose documents and eyewitness account form the basis of one of the first lawsuits filed against the telecom giants after the government’s warrantless-surveillance program was reported in the New York Times in December 2005.

Claudia Jones, an AT&T spokeswoman, said she had no comment on Klein’s allegations. “AT&T is fully committed to protecting our customers’ privacy. We do not comment on matters of national security,” she said.

The NSA and the White House also declined comment on Klein’s allegations.

Klein is urging Congress not to block Hepting v. AT&T, a class-action suit pending in federal court in San Francisco, as well as 37 other lawsuits charging carriers with illegally collaborating with the NSA. He was accompanied yesterday by lawyers for the Electronic Frontier Foundation, which filed Hepting v. AT&T in 2006. Together, they are urging key U.S. senators to oppose a pending White House-endorsed immunity provision that would effectively wipe out the lawsuits. The Judiciary Committee is expected to take up the measure Thursday.

In summer 2002, Klein was working in an office responsible for Internet equipment when an NSA representative arrived to interview a management-level technician for a special job whose details were secret.

“That’s when my antennas started to go up,” he said. He knew that the NSA was supposed to work on overseas signals intelligence.

nsa_octopusThe job entailed building a “secret room” in an AT&T office 10 blocks away, he said. By coincidence, in October 2003, Klein was transferred to that office and assigned to the Internet room. He asked a technician there about the secret room on the 6th floor, and the technician told him it was connected to the Internet room a floor above. The technician, who was about to retire, handed him some wiring diagrams.

“That was my ‘aha!’ moment,” Klein said. “They’re sending the entire Internet to the secret room.”

The diagram showed splitters, glass prisms that split signals from each network into two identical copies. One fed into the secret room, the other proceeded to its destination, he said.

NSA spying diagram3d_color“This splitter was sweeping up everything, vacuum-cleaner-style,” he said. “The NSA is getting everything. These are major pipes that carry not just AT&T’s customers but everybody’s.”

One of Klein’s documents listed links to 16 entities, including Global Crossing, a large provider of voice and data services in the United States and abroad; UUNet, a large Internet provider in Northern Virginia now owned by Verizon; Level 3 Communications, which provides local, long-distance and data transmission in the United States and overseas; and more familiar names such as Sprint and Qwest. It also included data exchanges MAE-West and PAIX, or Palo Alto Internet Exchange, facilities where telecom carriers hand off Internet traffic to each other.

“I flipped out,” he said. “They’re copying the whole Internet. There’s no selection going on here. Maybe they select out later, but at the point of handoff to the government, they get everything.”

Qwest has not been sued because of media reports last year that said the company declined to participate in an NSA program to build a database of domestic phone-call records out of concern about its legality. What the documents show, Klein contends, is that the NSA apparently was collecting several carriers’ communications, probably without their consent.

Another document showed that the NSA installed in the room a semantic traffic analyzer made by Narus, which Klein said indicated that the NSA was doing content analysis.

Steve Bannerman, Narus’s marketing vice president, said in an interview that the NarusInsight system is “the world’s most powerful Internet traffic processing engine.” He said it is used to detect worms, as well as to capture information to help authorities stop criminal activity. He said it can track a communication’s origin and destination, as well as its content. He declined to comment on AT&T’s use of the system.

Klein said he decided to go public after President Bush defended the NSA’s surveillance program as limited to collecting phone calls between suspected terrorists overseas and people in the United States. Klein said the documents show that the scope was much broader.

Klein was last in Washington in 1969, to take part in an antiwar protest. Now, he said with a chuckle, he’s here in a gray suit as a lobbyist.

Four Things To Know About Surveillance Leaker Edward Snowden

June 9, 2013

Edward Snowden, the 29-year old defense contractor who leaked classified documents on U.S. government surveillance programs, revealed himself Sunday afternoon in interviews with The Guardian and the Washington Post.Snowden, an employee of Booz Allen Hamilton for the last three months, moved to a Hong Kong hotel on May 20, after accessing a trove of classified information from a government office in Hawaii with the intent to reveal information on the controversial classified programs, the Guardian reported.Last week the British paper revealed details on two classified programs—one pertaining to the seizure of all telephone metadata in the United states, and another dealing with an effort to monitor Internet activities overseas using the resources of American technology firms. The Washington Post revealed information about the second program, called PRISM. Both papers confirmed that Snowden passed them the information.1. Snowden was previously a technical officer for the Central Intelligence Agency and worked for Dell at the National Security Agency before being hired by Booz Allen as an infrastructure analyst for the NSA in Hawaii. According to the Guardian, Snowden told supervisors he was seeking treatment for epilepsy and his girlfriend that he would be away for a few weeks before traveling to Hong Kong along with the government secrets he hoped to release. Snowden told the paper that he decided to come forward with the documents because “I don’t want to live in a world where there’s no privacy and therefore no room for intellectual exploration and creativity.”2. Snowden voted for a third party in 2008, he told the Guardian, but believed in Obama to put an end to some of the surveillance practices. Instead, after a review, Obama continued the program according to administration officials, adding in additional layers of review to prevent abuse. He told the Guardian he “got hardened” after he “watched as Obama advanced the very policies that I thought would be reined in.”3. Snowden claimed vast powers to both initiate surveillance and shut down the U.S. programs. “I had full access to the full rosters of everyone working at the NSA, the entire intelligence community, and undercover assets all around the world,” he told The Guardian. In a video posted on the website, Snowed claimed that “Any analyst at any time can target anyone … I, sitting at my desk, certainly have the authorities to wiretap anyone — from you or your accountant, to a federal judge, to even the President.”Additionally he claimed he said he could shut down the entire system in an afternoon if he wanted to. The revelation that Snowden was a contractor with that wide-ranging access to some of the most closely guarded U.S. government programs is sure to provoke a reexamination of the explosion of contractors filling traditional government jobs in defense and intelligence agencies.4. Snowden told the Post “I’m not going to hide,” but his future is uncertain. Hong Kong and the United States maintain a bilateral extradition treaty, but includes exceptions for political crimes. It is unclear how Chinese government, which maintains significant influence in the special administrative region, will react to Snowden’s presence or how they will treat him. He told the Post, he is seeking “asylum from any countries that believe in free speech and oppose the victimization of global privacy.”The Office of the Director of National Intelligence said Sunday that the investigation has been referred to the Department of Justice. Among the possible outcomes, officials could choose to interrogate him for details on the classified information he acquired, turn him over to the United States, or grant him asylum.

Inside Bilderberg: Clues left in the Grove Hotel reveal another piece to their financial agenda

21st Century Wire says…As the dust had settled from Bilderberg’s global weekender held at The Grove Hotel in Watford, England, some members of the alternative media stayed on site continuing to dig for answers…Investigative journalists from the UK Column, American Free Press and Sovereign Independentaccidentally wandered into a presentation suite at the Grove – only discover the remnants of a presentation by Thomson Reuters which Bilderberg organisers had neglected to take down after the event. It read “”unleashing the power of our unified platform on financial markets”.Of course this reminds us of a similar international cartel , or syndicate called LIBOR, where bankers successfully gamed global interest rates enabling them to reap easy billions at the expense of the lower classes. Money for nothing. They did so with impunity, all but laughing in public at any attempt to bring any of the gold collar criminals to book for financial fraud and racketeering.
It’s no coincidence that LIBOR’s biggest inside player was also in attendance at Bilderberg 2013. The teflon banker himself – the elusiveMarcus Agius, the former Group Chairman of Barclays, and chairman of the British Bankers Association (BBA). It’s worth pointing that LIBOR’s rate scam was being calculated and published by Thomson Reuters on behalf of the BBA.Only days after, events on the news wires – of international banking tycoon gaming the world’s currency markets – provided the connection to this topic discussed behind closed doors between members of the global industrial and political elite.Decide for yourself…
A New Financial Scandal – Bigger Than LIBOR?Mike Robinson
UK Column
Last Monday, our Malcolm Massey, Neil Foster and Mark Anderson took a post-Bilderberg walk around the Grove Hotel to see what they could see. What they found was a meeting room with a Thomson Reuters display panel. 
The display panel with Thomson Reuters logo clearly marked was entitled “unleashing the power of our unified platform on financial markets”.A Bilderberg Agenda Item?
PHOTO: UK Column found Thomson Reuters boards still up from Bilderberg.Why would Thomson Reuters advertise to Bilderberg Attendees? It is easy to see that Reuters would do so at a financial event for City of London traders or casino bank managers, but politicians and industrialists? How likely is it that the attending bankers were not already aware of the implications of Reuters trading platforms?Was this just an advertisement, or were Reuters running some kind of presentation? Those who saw the room first hand certainly left with the opinion Reuters had given a presentation of some kind.If that is the case, then the question becomes what is meant by “unleashing the power … on financial markets?Perhaps some news released by Bloomberg yesterday gives a clue what happens when Reuters trading platform is unleashed on financial markets, for we seem to have yet another global manipulation scandal on our hands, possibly even more significant than LIBOR.Bloomberg reported yesterday that five whistleblowers who have been working as foreign exchange traders have stated that the $5 trillion foreign exchange market is rigged. They allege that the world’s biggest banks have been systematically manipulating the foreign exchange rates used to set the value of trillions of dollars of investments and derivatives. The main target of this has been pension funds all over the world.Not surprisingly the centre of this activity has been the City of London, just as with LIBOR.The traders told Bloomberg that the banks were actively trading against their clients by making use of a 60 second window in which trading is supposed to be paused. The traders told Bloomberg that, “dealers colluded with counterparties to boost chances of moving the rates.”The Financial Conduct Authority, one of the bodies set up to replace the Financial Services Authority, says it is investigating and is speaking to the relevant parties.Which platform is used to distribute the Foreign Exchange rates? None other than Thompson Reuters, as with LIBOR. The same Thompson Reuters which took part in Bilderberg.

The Omniscient State

by craig on June 10, 2013 9:10 am in Uncategorized

It is not whether the individual had done anything wrong: it is whether the state has done anything wrong. Hague’s plea for the omniscient state is chilling: if you have done nothing wrong, then you have nothing to worry about. So it is alright for the state to eavesdrop all our social interactions, to follow our every move? Is there to be no privacy from the prying eye of the state, which can watch me on the toilet, and if I have done nothing wrong I have nothing to hide?

The terribly sad thing is that, by a media campaign which has raised public fear of terrorism beyond any rational analysis of the risk (depending which year you take as the base line, you have between 40 and 300 times more risk of drowning in your own bath than being killed by a terrorist) there is great public acceptance of the intrusive state. This of course depends on the notion that the state is not only omniscient but benevolent. I do urge anyone infected by this way of thinking to read Murder in Samarkand for a practical demonstration of just how malevolent, indeed evil, the state can be.

GCHQ and NSA share all intelligence reports, as do the CIA and MI6, under US/UK intelligence sharing agreements first put in place by Roosevelt and Churchill. That is one of the most widely known of all official secrets – there are probably fifty thousand current or retired civil servants like me who know that, and many academics, journalists etc – but even in the light of the Snowden revelations, you probably won’t see it much in print, and you won’t hear it in Parliament, because it is still a criminal offence to say it. Let me say it again:

GCHQ and NSA share all intelligence, as do the CIA and MI6, under US/UK intelligence sharing agreements first put in place by Roosevelt and Churchill. NSA and GCHQ do the large bulk of communication interception. Now both NSA and GCHQ are banned from spying on their own citizens without some motive of suspicion – though as Edward Snowden has been explaining, that motive of suspicion can be terribly slight, like you have someone as a facebook friend who has a facebook friend whose sister once knew someone connected with an animal liberation group. But in any event, the safeguards are meaningless as NSA and GCHQ can intercept communications of each other’s citizens and they share all information. I have been explaining this in public talks these last ten years – I am happy it is finally hitting the headlines.

We need Edward Snowden and we need Bradley Manning. I had hoped that the barefaced lies of Bush and Blair, leading to a war that killed hundreds of thousands, would make people see that politicians, and the corporate interests that stand so close behind them, simply cannot be trusted.

The world needs whistleblowers. Now more than ever.

The Search for Change by craig on May 21, 2013 10:50 am in Uncategorized The linked long term phenomena of falling electoral turnout and a decreasing percentage of those who do vote, voting for the two main parties, leaves politicians in power with the active support of an increasingly small minority of the population. To date this has not seriously impacted on consent – the Majority are apathetic, and devoid both of interesting sources of useful political information, and of social cohesion. Membership of organisations of horizontal solidarity is also in long term decline. I would love to see an attempt at long term quantification of the difference between the parties in terms of the manifesto policies they offer. I have no doubt that there will be a very sharp reduction in difference, or rather policy convergence between the parties. If you look at 1911 – social insurance, pensions, power of the hereditary aristocracy, 1945 – nationalisation of major industries, initiation of the NHS and full welfare state, and 1983 – privatisation, nuclear weapons – there were very real and sharp political differences that offered voters a distinct ideological choice. The country – and your own future – could be recognisably different dependent on for whom you voted. The last two times our government changed parties, the new party came in to pledge to continue the fiscal measures already projected by the treasury under its predecessors. Anyone who believes the Treasury would be fundamentally different under Balls or Osborne is delusional, and responding to tribalism not real difference. Who introduced tuition fees? New Labour. Who accelerated the “marketization” of the NHS? New Labour. Who vastly expanded PFI? New Labour. Who bailed out the banks? New Labour. In effect, the parties offer exactly the same neo-con policies. NATO, Trident, Occupation of Afghanistan, Privatisation, Tuition Fees – the only apparent alternative at the last election came from the Lib Dems, and the electorate grasped at it in larger numbers than a third party had ever received before, something we have quickly forgotten. The reason that we have forgotten it is that Clegg, who was never any kind of Liberal, dumped the entire radical heritage of his party as soon as he came to power.

Dumb & Dumber

Dumb & Dumber

There is a much wider point to what happened to the Lib Dems. Two other changes – the introduction of PR for the European Parliament, and the large increase in expenses for MP’s staff – had made a radical change to that party. Lib Dem conferences were suddenly places of power dressing, not woolly jumpers. A great many young professional politicos – MPs research assistants, and staffers from Brussels – were all over the place. Bright, presentable, highly paid, most of them had no connection with liberalism, had never read John Stuart Mill or Hazlitt, had no idea who Lloyd George was and cared less. They had latched on to a rung of paid political work, had become part of the political class – that was the entire purpose of their activity. The woolly jumpered chap who had campaigned about paving stones in Salisbury and passionately wanted to abolish Trident and adopt green energy became sidelined, an amusing anachronism, the subject of the jokes of the sophisticates. Of course, their focus groups showed that the people want policies which the ever shrinking ownership of the mass media promotes, because they are the only policies they have ever heard of. But the people no longer trust the ownership of the media, and the expenses scandal caused a much-needed scepticism of the appalling political class. People are desperate for leaders who look honest and say something different. So do not despise UKIP supporters. They are not vicious racists. They are in fact brighter than those stupid enough to continue voting for the three neo-con parties, despite having their lives crippled for the next three decades to pay unconceivable sums to the bankers. The UKIP voters at least wish to punish the political class and wish to hear of some different policies. The problem is that the only alternative of which the mainstream media is prepared to inform them is Mr Farrage and his simple anti-foreigner maxims. Many of the bankers are keen to leave the EU, as Nigel Lawson told us. So if people want an alternative, that is the one they will be offered. Only in Scotland have people been offered a more radical alternative – and while I do not wish to exaggerate the economic radicalism of the SNP, they are markedly to the left of Westminster on issues like tuition fees, healthcare and PFI. The great question of the day is, how to put before the population, in a way that they will notice, a radical alternative other than simple right wing populism. I have a strong belief that there remains a real desire in society for a more social policy, for a major and real check on the huge divergence between rich and poor, for good public services, for a pacific foreign policy, and for leaders not just in it for the money or to promote wealthy interests. But how do you get that message to people?


Former Child Actor is Let Down After Opening Up to Media: ‘I named names, but they’ve buried my story’

Big Media also plays its own shameful role in covering for pedophiles in high places.Patrick Henningsen21st Century WireHas Rupert Murdoch’s Times Newspaper also joined the BBC’s practice of covering for child abusers in high places?LONDON – On Friday Oct 11, former child actor and now investigative journalist, Ben Fellows,published his own sordid account of his personal experiences growing up in show business and working at the BBC. The following week, his story was picked-up by the London newspaper Daily Express on Oct 17th.Ben Fellows on the BBC’s News 24 in 2006.What the public is not aware of however, is that the Murdoch-owned Times newspaper in London had also summoned Fellows to an interview regarding his story the following day on Thursday Oct 18th.(Read Ben’s full account of interview and commentary here)“Since the original story I wrote, a lot of readers, people and other members of the media have been asking me to name names, and actually accusing me of feeding the abuse system by not naming names in my initial story. So when the Times contacted me, it seemed like the ideal opportunity to names names”.Fellows continues, “It’s all rather easy to pin the entire scandal on a deceased, former celebrity like Jimmy Savile, but if you’re going to name the names of currently active entertainment professionals and politicians, you have to go with the biggest and strongest media outlet because you will get sued and the Times told me, ‘You have nothing to worry about, we have the most powerful lawyers in the world’ – and that gave me the confidence to name names”.According to Fellows, he was interviewed by Jack Malvern, a veteran and senior writer with theTimes at the Novotel in Greenwich last Thursday, with the promise that his story would go out in the Saturday morning edition of the Times, but when Saturday arrived, no story appeared – and thus, no names were named. “The fact they haven’t run my story worries me, because they asked me to talk and I did – and now I’m not sure which way to turn”, explains Fellows.“It made me feel like I had been ‘debriefed’ and not interviewed, and that maybe the only reason I was summoned there was to give information to them (the Murdoch press) for their own internal use.”” The irony of this situation is too much to ignore, as the Murdoch empire’s flagship ‘anti-paedophile’ newspaper, The Sun, is pulling no punches with the BBC over their Jimmy Savile cover-up, since the BBC has been exposed for mothballing two internal investigations over child abuse within their state-funded media realm.In the case of Fellows, he appears to have hand-delivered a number of top show business and political personality names to the Times, names whom he has witnessed first-hand to be involved with a wide range of highly inappropriate and illegal activities – including predatory advances on a child actor (Fellows), offering and consuming of Class A narcotics, and the promise of success by top producers in exchange for sex. He maintains that some of the names the Times is currently holding include a few of the most powerful individuals in the entertainment industry.According to Fellows, he had mentioned MP Ken Clarke. Interestingly, Clarke has just been linked to paedophile predator Savile this week, as Savile was handed the keys to Broadmoor secure hospital in 1988 – under the watch of Minister Ken Clarke. Fellows believed that the reason the Times has killed the story is because one of the names he gave was a celebrity who SKY TV has a heavy amount invested in for the coming season.“They wanted me to name names, but not the ones I gave them!” said Fellows.“I had no idea that this person was to be the star of SKY this coming season when I named them in my Times interview. Now they are sitting on the whole story because it conflicts with their organisation’s plans this year. The hypocrisy is clear to see, and very disappointing to say the least.”“What the Times is doing here, is no different than how the BBC is covering for itself. And the end result of both cover-ups is that the public have less knowledge of child abuse in the system. I think our major media outlets are failing the public, and now it’s there for everyone to see.”It appears that now the Times has joined the BBC – in covering-up reported activities of people in positions of power and influence, in their own self-interest.“I was offered an ‘Exclusive’, but I did not respond to what this offer alluded to because it sounded like code for ‘money’, but I fully expected them to run my story with so many high-profile people mentioned”, said Fellows.Tonight’s episode of Panorama on BBC is nothing more than a late move to try to repair what is clearly a broken and corrupt public funded media giant. Ofcom licenses have been pulled for less.Similarly, Tuesday’s appearance at a House Select Committee by George Entwistle, current Director General of the BBC, is unlikely to yield much, as Entwistle, then Director of Programming at the BBC, was also the man who allegedly pulled the BBC’s ‘Newsnight’ investigation into Savile’s unsavoury habits last Dec 2011. Certainly, the BBC will be expected to produce some sacrificial lamb to draw a line under this scandal, but it’s unclear as yet who that will be.

Fellows adds here, “I am concerned that when it’s all said and done, the BBC and the government are just going to have Jimmy Savile ‘done and dusted’ and maybe pin some conviction on an old employee, then close the book on what is clearly an institutional and social disease which has infected the BBC and other corridors of power in Britain”.How long will the Times sit on this story, and if they do run it, will they name the names that Fellows delivered to them?Considering the weight of allegations from the Savile Affair, we all can agree that it’s in a free society’s best interest for any major newspaper to print a story which deals with the protection of children or unethical and illegal behaviour by BBC employees – which is certainly, at least in the opinion of this website - in the public’s interest to know. ….

Original SCALLYWAG Magazine Paedophile Ring Investigation Turns Up Online

NOVEMBER 15, 2012 BY  1,032 COMMENTS
21st Century WireIt seems that the original 1990′s SCALLYWAG Magazine paedophile investigation has popped-up online, included in it the complete exposé of the North Wales Boys Homescandal, and details of a sophisticated child abuse network running through Westminster, and elsewhere. The SCALLYWAG article in questions is as hot today as it was back then, and names X, Y, and Z - including top Tory Party officials, police, along with other detailed information on men surrounding Bryn Alyn Boys Home in Wrexham, Wales. The article states:

“This ‘rent boy’ ring has operated for more than 20 years, and is still in operation at addresses all over Britain, despite the fact that the mastermind behind it all is at present on bail awaiting trail with 10 specimen cases against him…”

At the time, this particular Scallywag Mag in-depth investigative article from the 1990′s contains pieces of information from other investigations in the Observer, Private Eye, HTV and the Independent on Sunday, all of which were under threat of libel of North Wales ex-Supt Angelsea at the time. Some commentators believed that Scallywag had sufficient evidence during the time of their publishing the article, but details are sketchy. Other famous politicans did sue Scallywag, like John Major, over allegations of an extramarital affair. This Scallywag article was very controversial at the time and continues to be so today, with speculation that it may have been connected to the bizarre death of the magazine’s editor Angus  James, co-founder of Scallywag, who died  in Cyprus in 1994 some time after the magazine  was investigating the elite paedophile ring.

Photo: Scallywag publisher, Simon Regan

The  letter below was penned  by Simon Regan, Editor of Scallyway Magazine, and  half  brother  of Angus  James Wilson,  co-founder of Scallywag, who later died  in Cyprus in 1994. Regan laments the tragic  cover-up by the Courts and the Establishment – a concerned shared by most of Britain,especially in the wake of hundreds of  different Jimmy Savile revelations.

Here’s Regan’s letter…


The Waterhouse Report  By Simon Regan  20 February 2000  The fact that the Waterhouse report went as far as it did is highly commendable, and obviously long overdue. But the trouble with any investigation which tries to break through a ‘cult of silence’ is the lingering doubts that it will ever get down to the whole full truth of the matter. Waterhouse is probably merely the tip of the iceberg….

Read full text of Regan’s letter here

So why are the Law Lords so eager to shut this case downHere is a recent interview with survivor Steve Messham, where it appears as if the police deliberately lost the key evidence…
It’s an incredible story, but only a proper resourced, independent investigation can do this kind of story justice. Will we get one this time around?

Good question… good questions.

RELATED: Max Clifford on Alan Clark: ‘I have all the evidence’, know where all bodies are buried

RELATED: CAMERON JUST DOESN’T GET IT – The Police and Judiciary are Part of UK Abuse Problem

A SHOCKING INTERVIEW: Wrexham Child Home Abuse Victim Describes Elite Paedophile Sex Parties

The world is run by Satanists. The UK is run by Satanists. In the UK people with influence such as politicians, police, bankers, journalists, corporate “leaders”, tend to be freemasons. Regulars to this website know that Blair, Brown, Cameron, Osborne, The Royals, Obama, Bush I & II, Kerry, Clinton, all their wives and all their bag-carriers are freemasons or the female equivalent. So it’s not outrageous to state that the UK is run by freemasons. Now look at any masonic monitor, which is the handbook that each masonic lodge issues to new members. They are all pretty much the same as they have to be endorsed by the grand lodge of the order. Page one explains to new masons that freemasonry is not a social club and that it is not a meeting place for people to further their careers. The masonic lodge is a temple and freemasons go there to worship, so new members should behave accordingly while in the temple. What kind of religion that is is made clear in the rest of the monitor, and in the masons’ “bible”, “Morals and Dogma” by Albert Pike.

Alfred Pike kabala6

I recommend everyone read it – you can download it for free and if you can’t be bothered to have a skim through it then you really can’t expect your opinion on freemasonry to be heard. To cut a long book short, freemasons believe that Lucifer is the good god and that the God of the bible is evil. They believe that Lucifer is the light-bringer who tried to bring knowledge and god-like status to humans in the garden of Eden but evil God stopped him and has been stopping him ever since. If freemasons do Lucifer’s bidding then they can bring about Lucifer’s reign on earth and become enlightened, making them gods. The mass of humanity is seen as rough and directionless, and in order for humanity to have value the freemasons must give it direction. That means infiltrating governments and power structures and bringing about permanent war, strife and suffering. They believe that peace and prosperity would make the human race worthless. So freemasonry is Luciferianism, which is the worship of Satan. That’s why it’s fair to say that the UK is run by Satanists. It’s even clearer that the US is run by Satanists when you see all the many photos of Obama and wife, the Bushes, and Clinton and wife brazenly giving the devil’s-head salute at public gatherings.


Go a bit deeper and you see that in fact the hierarchical structures that control politics, the media, commerce, and the military all over the world are run on satanic lines. That’s why the media bombards our kids with satanic imagery 24/7. Now I know a lot of people will say “I don’t believe in God or the Devil, so none of this matters.” But it doesn’t matter what you believe, it matters what the people who control politics, economics, war and public consciousness believe. You might think it’s all bullshit but if everyone who controls your life thinks that they are doing satan’s work then it really does matter. As an aside, I haven’t been capitalising the words Satanist or Satanism, but IE10′s new built-in spell-checker is automatically “correcting” it. I didn’t even ask to download IE10 but here it is, making sure that I pay proper respects to satan’s church. Tell me that Satanism isn’t a real influence over the world. Posted on May 24th, 2013 at 2:10 pm


Britain’s Eton College Asks King’s Scholar Candidates to Pretend to Be PM and Justify Army Shooting Protesters Dead

In LEAKSOURCE ORIGINAL NEWS on May 24, 2013 at 7:45 PM

2011 Eton Exam Q - Concerning Cruelty and Clemency, and Whether It Is Better to Be Loved Than Feared 04/24/2013 Eton College asked 13-year-old boys competing for a scholarship to pretend to be Prime Minister and justify the army shooting dead 25 protesters as a “necessary and moral” decision, it has emerged. The question, which was put to students applying for the King’s Scholarship in 2011, is entitled “Concerning Cruelty, Clemency and Whether It Is better To Be Loved than Feared”, and follows a passage from Machiavelli. The question tells the teenagers: “The government has deployed the Army to curb the protests. After two days the protests have been stopped but 25 protesters have been killed by the Army.
cameron-bullingdon-club “You are the Prime Minister. Write the script for a speech to be broadcast to the nation in which you explain why employing the Army against violent protesters was the only option available to you and one which was both necessary and moral.” Both the current British Prime Minister David Cameron and London Mayor Boris Johnson went to Eton, Boris was also a King’s Scholar. 2011 Eton Exam Q (FULL) - Concerning Cruelty and Clemency, and Whether It Is Better to Be Loved Than Feared

Media Disinformation and the Conspiracy Panic Phenomenon

Global Research, May 24, 2013

To posit that one’s government may be partially composed of unaccountable criminal elements is cause for serious censure in polite circles. Labeled “conspiracy theories” by a corporate media that prompt and channel emotionally-laden mass consent, such perspectives are quickly dispatched to the memory hole lest they prompt meaningful discussion of the political prerogatives and designs held by a global power elite coordinating governments and broader geopolitical configurations.

Cultural historian Jack Bratich terms such phenomena “conspiracy panics.” Potentially fostered by the coordinated actions of government officials or agencies and major news organs to generate public suspicion and uncertainty, a conspiracy panic is a demonstrable immediate or long-term reactive thrust against rational queries toward unusual and poorly understood events. To be sure, they are also intertwined with how the given society acknowledges and preserves its own identity—through “the management and expulsion of deviance.”[1]

In the American mass mind, government intelligence and military operations are largely seen as being directed almost solely toward manipulation or coercion of unfortunate souls in foreign lands. To suggest otherwise, as independent researchers and commentators have done with the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, the CIA-Contra-crack cocaine connection, and 9/11, has been cause for sustained conspiracy panics that act to suppress inquiry into such events by professional and credentialed opinion leaders, particularly journalists and academics.

At the same time a conspiracy panic serves a subtle yet important doctrinal function of manifesting and reproducing the apt ideational status quo of the post-Cold War, “War on Terror” era. “The scapegoating of conspiracy theories provides the conditions for social integration and political rationality,” Bratich observes. “Conspiracy panics help to define the normal modes of dissent. Politically it is predicated on a consensus of ‘us’ over against a subversive and threatening ‘them.’”[2] These days especially the suggestion that an official narrative may be amiss almost invariably puts one in the enemy camp.

Popular Credence in Government Conspiracy Narratives

The time for a conspiracy panic to develop has decreased commensurately with the heightened spread and availability of information and communication technology that allows for the dissemination of news and research formerly suppressed by the perpetual data overload of corporate media. Before the wide access to information technology and the internet, independent investigations into events including the JFK assassination took place over the course of many years, materializing in book-length treatments that could be dismissed by intelligence assets in news media and academe as the collective activity of “conspiracy buffs”—amateurish researchers who lack a government or privately-funded sinecure to overlook or obscure inquiry into deep events.

Not until Oliver Stone’s 1991 blockbuster film JFK, essentially an adoption of works by author Jim Marrs, Colonel L. Fletcher Prouty, and New Orleans District Attorney Jim Garrison, did a substantial conspiracy panic take shape as a response to such analysis thrust upon the public in popular narrative form. This panic arose from and centered around Hollywood’s apt challenge to traditional journalism’s turf alongside commercial news outlets’ typically deceptive  interpretation of the event and almost wholly uncritical treatment of the Warren Commission Report.

Shortly thereafter investigative journalist Gary Webb’s “Dark Alliance” series for the San Jose Mercury News demonstrated the internet’s capacity to explain and document a government conspiracy. With Webb’s painstaking examination of the CIA’s role in the illicit drug trade hyperlinked to a bevy of documentation and freely distributed online, the professional journalistic community and its intelligence penumbra fell silent for months.

In the interim the story picked up steam in the non-traditional outlets of talk radio and tabloid television, with African Americans especially intrigued by the potential government role in the crack cocaine epidemic. Then suddenly major news outlets spewed forth a vitriolic attack on Webb and the Mercury News that amazingly resulted in the Mercury‘s retraction of the story and Webb’s eventual departure from the paper and probable murder by the US government.[3]

Criticism of Webb’s work predictably focused on petty misgivings toward his alleged poor judgment—specifically his intimation that the CIA intentionally caused the crack epidemic in African American communities, an observation that many blacks found logical and compelling. So not only did Webb find himself at the center of a conspiracy panic because of his assessment of the CIA’s role in the drug trade; he was also causing mass “paranoia” within African American communities allegedly predisposed toward such thinking.

Since the mid-1990s conspiracy panics have increasingly revolved around an effort by mainstream news media to link unorthodox political ideas and inquiry with violent acts. This dynamic was crystallized in Timothy McVeigh, the principal suspect in the April 19, 1995 Oklahoma City Murrah Federal Building bombing,  who through the propaganda-like efforts of  government and major news media was constructed to symbolize the dangers of “extremist” conspiratorial thought (his purported fascination with white supremacism and The Turner Diaries) and violent terrorist action (the bombing itself). Conveniently overlooked is the fact that McVeigh was trained as a black ops technician and still in US Army employ at the time of his 2001 execution.[4]

Through a broad array of media coverage and subsequent book-length treatments by the left intelligentsia on the “radical right,” the alleged lone wolf McVeigh and the Oklahoma City bombing became forever coupled in the national memory. The image and event seemingly attested to how certain modes of thought can bring about violence–even though McVeigh’s role in what took place on April 19 was without question one part of an intricate web painstakingly examined by the Oklahoma Bombing Investigation Committee [5] and in the 2011 documentary A Noble Lie: Oklahoma City 1995.

The Quickening Pace of Conspiracy Panics

Independent researchers and alternative media utilizing the internet have necessitated the rapid deployment of conspiracy panic-like reactions that appear far less natural and spontaneous to neutralize inquiry and bolster the official narratives of  momentous and unusual events. For example, wide-scale skepticism surrounding the May 1, 2011 assault on Osama bin Laden’s alleged lair in Pakistan was met with efforts to cultivate a conspiracy panic evident in editorials appearing across mainstream print, broadcast, and online news platforms. The untenable event supported only by President Obama’s pronouncement of the operation was unquestioningly accepted by corporate media that shouted down calls for further evidence and alternative explanations of bin Laden’s demise as “conspiracy theories.”

Indeed, a LexisNexis search for “bin Laden” and “conspiracy theories” yields over five hundred such stories and opinion pieces appearing across Western print and broadcast media outlets for the week of May 2, 2011.[6]

“While much of America celebrated the dramatic killing of Osama bin Laden,” theWashington Post opined, “the Sept. 11 conspiracy theorists still had questions. For them and a growing number of skeptics, the plot only thickened.”[7]

Along these lines retired General Mark Kimmitt remarked on CNN, “Well, I’m sure the conspiracy theorists will have a field day with this, about why it was done? Was it done? Is he still alive?”[8]

“The conspiracy theorists are not going to be satisfied,” Glenn Beck asserted. “Next thing you know, Trump is going to ask for the death certificate, and is it the real death certificate? And then all hell breaks loose.”[9]

Like 9/11 or the Gulf of Tonkin, the narrative has since become a part of official history, disingenuously repeated in subsequent news accounts and elementary school history books—a history handed down from on high and accepted by compromised, unintelligent, or simply lazy journalists perpetuating nightmare fictions to a poorly informed and intellectually idle public.

This psycho-symbolic template is simultaneously evident in the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting and Boston Marathon bombing (BMB) events and their aftermaths. Indeed, the brief yet intense Sandy Hook conspiracy panic, and to a lesser degree that of the BMB, revolved at least partially around the “conspiracy theory professor,” who, as a credentialed member of the intellectual class, overstepped his bounds by suggesting how there are many unanswered questions related to the tragedies that might lead one to conclude—as social theorist Jean Baudrillard observed concerning the 1991 Gulf War—that the events did not take place, at least in the way official pronouncements and major media have represented them. It is perhaps telling  that critical assessments of domestic events and their relatedness to a corrupt media and governing apparatus are so vigorously assailed.

Yet to suggest that the news and information Americans accept as sound and factual on a routine basis is in fact a central means for manipulating their worldviews is not a matter for debate. Rather, it is an empirically verifiable assertion substantiated in a century of public relations and psychological warfare research and practice. Such propaganda efforts once reserved for foreign locales are now freely practiced in the US to keep the population increasingly on edge.

Still, a significant portion of the population cannot believe their government would lie to or mislead them, especially about a traumatic and emotional event involving young children or running enthusiasts. To suggest this to be the case is not unlike informing a devoted sports fan that her team lost a decisive game after she’s been convinced of an overwhelming win. Such an allegation goes against not only what they often unconsciously accept to be true, but also challenges their substantial emotional investment in the given mediated event.

In a revealing yet characteristic move the reaction by corporate media outlets such as the New York Times, FoxNews, CNN, and in the case of the BMB the New York Times-owned Boston Globe, has been not to revisit and critique their own slipshod coverage of the Newtown massacre or BMB that often bordered on blatant disinformation, but rather to divert attention from any responsible self-evaluation by vilifying the messenger in what have been acute conspiracy panics of unusual proportion.

As a disciplinary mechanism against unsettling observations and questions directed toward political leaders and the status quo, conspiracy panics serve to reinforce ideas and thought processes sustained by the fleeting yet pervasive stimuli of infotainment, government pronouncements, and, yes, the staged events that have been part and parcel of US news media and government collaboration dating at least to the Spanish-American war. Despite (or perhaps because of) the immense technological sophistication at the dawn of the twenty-first century a majority of the population remains bound and shackled in the bowels of the cave, forever doomed to watch the shadows projected before them.

Dragnet: Ex-Tory chief faces child sex arrest over claims of girl raped, boys abused

“After the 1986 operation into Cooke was disbanded the former officer went to check the file – only to find the pictures had disappeared and any mention of the men involved had also vanished. The former officer said: “It was clear a cover-up had taken place.”The probe into a former Cabinet minister, the notorious paedophile Sidney Cooke, Jimmy Savile and MP Cyril SmithJustin Penrose

Police are ­preparing to arrest a former Tory Cabinet minister after a woman came forward to claim she had been raped by him as a girl.

Links to MP Sir Cyril Smith

Detectives are also investigating claims that he abused boys.

We can reveal that the former minister is suspected of being part of a VIP ­paedophile ring that was regularly handed boys by child rapist and killer Sidney Cooke for vile sex orgies.

The former high-ranking MP, who we cannot name, is under investigation by Scotland Yard’s paedophile unit.

Sources close to the probe gave details of the new allegations to the Sunday ­Mirror and investigative news website ­Exaro.

A former detective who worked on the original investigation into Cooke told the Sunday Mirror that the minister was among those alleged to have been ­photographed in a 1986 police surveillance on premises where boys had been dropped off.

Others allegedly included Jimmy Savile, MP Cyril Smith and top judges – though none of them were ever arrested.

Cooke, 85 – dubbed Britain’s most notorious paedophile after he tortured and killed 14-year-old Jason Swift in 1985 – would pick the unsuspecting teenage boys up off the streets around Kings Cross.

He would drive them to locations across North London where paedophiles lay in wait to repeatedly rape them.

Last week the former officer, who worked on Operation Orchid which convicted Cooke and his gang, said they had taken pictures of the minister.

The former officer said up to 16 high profile figures were due to be arrested. But the day before they were to be carried out detectives were told the operation had been disbanded.

The revelation means Scotland Yard knew about allegations concerning the Cabinet Minister and Savile in 1986 but did nothing about it, instead choosing to cover up the claims.

A source told Exaro last week that senior officers, including Commander Peter Spindler, the head of the Paedophile Unit, have had a secret briefing on preparations to arrest the ex-minister.

It is understood that the investigation is at an early stage but there is a plan to arrest him in the next few weeks.

After the 1986 operation into Cooke was disbanded the former officer went to check the file – only to find the pictures had disappeared and any mention of the men involved had also vanished.

The former officer said: “It was clear a cover-up had taken place.

“The investigation showed that Cooke would pick up rent boys and take them back to flats or garages where large groups of men were waiting to abuse them.

” /> Savile: Linked to other pedo rings

“These paedophiles, which included a lot of high-profile figures that were said to include the former Cabinet Minister, Savile and MP Cyril Smith, all knew each other and all operated together. They would lie in wait and Cooke would turn up with the boy who wouldn’t know what was going to happen.

“We had photographic evidence of these high-profile figures entering or leaving buildings where the abuse was taking place. Everyone knew Savile was a paedo but nothing was ever done.

“Cyril Smith was photographed going into one of the properties with a high-profile film director.

“All of the others were pictured and were going to be arrested before the plug was pulled. I was sickened and to this day I wonder how many children we could have saved if we had been allowed to arrest those men.

“I feel guilty they weren’t arrested but there was nothing I could do at the time as the evidence had gone.”

The Sunday Mirror knows the identity of the paedophiles in the gang but has chosen not to name them.

In 1993 Detective Superintendent Ed Williams tried to track down the Orchid file on Cooke to see if there were any similarities with the abduction and murder of nine-year-old Daniel Handley, but he struggled to find the folder.

He eventually found it in the basement of Arbour Square Police Station in Stepney, East London.

While there were references to a “wider paedophile ring” there were no photographs or names.

Mr Williams said: “I was very upset about the way the Met treated paedophile cases but I was a voice in the wilderness at that time and people thought I was being over-emotional.

“I found the Orchid files where they had been put for storage purposes and somebody had completely forget to send it back to the Yard. I was trying to look for paedophiles and connections with other cases as I was trying to build up a profile of the offender. “The report spoke about boys being passed around from paedophile to paedophile.

Sidney Cooke: Ring leader and child killer

“There were no pictures on the file. It did mention that there was a wider ring of individuals but did not mention Jimmy Savile or a cabinet minister.”

Sidney Cooke, along with three accomplices – Leslie Bailey, Robert Oliver and Steven Barrell – was found guilty of the manslaughter of Jason Swift in May 1989. They have been linked to up to 20 murders.

Cooke was believed to have murdered seven-year-old Mark Tildesley but the Crown Prosecution Service decided not to bring charges as he was already serving 19 years for Jason’s death.

He was released in 1998, to a public outcry, but was rearrested the following year for systematically abusing two boys in the 1970s and jailed for life.

Savile was exposed last year as one of the UK’s most prolific paedophiles, with 450 victims. Police said he “groomed a ­nation” by avoiding justice while ­abusing hundreds of children over 54 years.

Officers on Operation Yewtree, which investigated the claims, have also ­arrested celebrities including Gary Glitter, comedian Freddie Starr, DJ Dave Lee Travis, publicist Max Clifford and comedian Jim Davidson. All have denied any wrongdoing and not all the allegations involve under-16s.

Scotland Yard said they would not comment on an on-going investigation.

The Trouble with BBC ‘Children in Need’ Ambassador Max Clifford and Tory MP Alan Clark

Nicholas Myra 21st Century Wire Nov 13, 2012 You’d better believe that Max Clifford has a lot of skeletons in his filing cabinet. If you have enough money, you too can have your skeletons filed away in these rather seedy archives. In the leaked video that has since gone viral, allegedly filmed before last year, the camera man managed to loosen up Clifford enough to spill a large can of beans. In the video, the legendary PR Guru to the stars and elites let slip that he had successfully hid away the sins of one Tory MP, and ‘diarist’, Alan Clark.

Tory MP Alan Clark

Alan Clark’s noted adulterous affair with Valerie Harkess, the wife of a South African judge, and her two daughters Josephine and Alison, for their tale of the seduction of all three by Clark (to whom he referred collectively as “the coven”) made the Harkesses ‘a lot of money’ according to Clifford.  The affair became public knowledge in 1992 after Clark left the House of Commons, and later took its place between the covers of a few best selling seedy novels. Both sides had profited from the affair, but according the Clifford in the video below, it seemed that MP Alan Clark had to bury a rather inconvenient detail which would have landed him in a criminal court. Here are two excerpts from the video which was released by super blog site Guido Fawkes“He enjoyed it that whole thing, Alan Clark loved the whole thing…  they(the Harkesses) made a lot of money out of it, he used them, so they wanted to make money out of it, and had a … so they did, he(Alan Clark) enjoyed it and sold a lot of books.” “The only slightly serious side of it was that he(Alan Clark) actually interfered with those girls from the age of 14…” He seems to be referring to the crime of paedophilia there… If this was indeed the case, then Clark would have also profited from it. Fancy that. Watch the video here:

The next line is the real killer though, and one which we should all stop, pause, and consider properly – particularly during the current paedophile upheaval which the BBC and the current government are so anxious to draw a line under. Following the fake duel between the BBC’s Newsnight and much maligned Lord McAlpine, the establishment was hoping that no more high-ranking figures or MP’s would be fingered for paedophilia or child abuse. This much is certain – the elite power brokers want their public nightmare to end with Savile.  Casually referring to the volumes of dirt he has tucked away for a rainy day, Max Clifford ignominiously boasts here: “I’ve got all the evidence, I’m the one who’s hidden it from the world, I know where everything is…” If this video is genuine and what it appears to be, then Clifford could eventually become a key figure at the centre of this issue. The Independenthad published a story on this incident entitled, Publicist Max Clifford Denies Covering Up Conservative MP Alan Clark’s Underage Sex Scandal, but then quickly removed it from their website. This is not surprising because Max still wields incredible power on Fleet Street. The full text of their article can be found here, explaining:

“The former government minister Alan Clark had sex with children, according to the publicity agent Max Clifford. In a secretly filmed, three-minute interview posted on the internet last night, the publicist said that the Tory MP and diarist had “interfered” with two 14-year-old girls. But he added, during a discussion of his success in suppressing scandals, that the story had never come out. Last night Mr Clifford, who was unaware his comments were being recorded, strenuously denied that he had told the girls’ family to stay quiet about the allegations.”

Max: Keeps ugly secrets safe.

Max Clifford keeps things tidy for the elite, and the dirt he collects keeps him safe from reprisals. It’s a high stakes game, and he is undoubtedly one of the best ever to play it. He knows where the bodies are buried, so to speak. Sure, it would be career suicide for his PR business, but if he chose to, he could certainly help towards gaining justice for many sexually abused children. In the end, that’s up to Max Clifford, but because of the nature of his work and the confidentiality which is the currency of his profession – any disclosure on crimes in high places is unlikely to happen. One might ask here, where does Clifford stand morally, or legally for that matter, if he is holding back information about known paedophiles, particularly those in government? Does he have the same sort of protection from disclosure as say, a doctor, or Catholic priest? He has not committing any offense as such, but it’s worth asking here, does he have a duty to report a child abuse case? Critics might charge here, and rightly so, that Clifford is somehow putting his own wealth above the safety of children. If it’s a paedophile in government, then it could be viewed as a national security issue because that public official could be blackmailed by a foreign interest. It would be interesting to know if Sir Jimmy Savile was a past client of Clifford’s, or of another firm. An intriguing question now is: how many more MPs, celebrities and various oligarchs (these are the only people who can afford to retain the services of a high flyer like Max Clifford) have had their sins washed away by Clifford, or other PR firms like his? Since the Savile scandal broke, guess who have been getting flooded with phone calls from ‘frightened’ celebrities who are afraid of being implicated, for unknown offenses and associations with Savile, including – paedophilia. A recent article describes the phenomenon:

Dozens of big name stars from the 1960s and 70s have contacted Max Clifford “frightened to death” they will become implicated in the widening Jimmy Savile child abuse scandal, the PR guru has claimed. He said the stars, some of whom are still big names today, were worried because at their peak they had lived a hedonistic lifestyle where young girls threw themselves at them but they “never asked for anybody’s birth certificate”.

Most celebrities and TV people will use the ‘rock n roll’ get out clause, claiming that children were “throwing themselves at me”, and this tends to work in Britain where morals are now subject to the laws of relativity. But after Savile, the rock star excuse doesn’t hold as much credence. They are all genuinely scared, feeling guilty, because they know they got away with it back them because the system covered for them, but that system is crumbling – that’s why they’re calling Max – to preserve their media value. More girth for Max Clifford’s expanding filing cabinet? More girth in fees too. This couldn’t come at a worse time, as Max Clifford has recently been appointed as the PR Ambassador to the BBC charityChildren In Need. Is a man who makes his living running cover for the rich and powerful the right man to steer a children’s charity? You cannot ignore the spooky echoes of old Esther Rantzen and pal Jimmy Savile and their Child Line panto. Without a doubt, there is a lot to speculate on – is this yet another example where the activities of paedophiles in high places strangely link with these “children’s charities” in Britain? This comment below is from the forum at Mumsnet: Above text states: “Paul Roffey (child protection expert) said that pop stars used their position to manipulate young women to carry out acts which were as illegal then as they are now. Clifford also says he has also been contacted by women claiming ‘all kinds of things’, some of whom want to make money out of the abuse scandal. He actually says that he doubts that 50% of what they have told him is true! And Yet he believes his famous friends who come to him because they are worried about associations with JS and child abuse. He defends clients such as OJ Simpson, Mohamed Al Fayed, David Copperfield, Kerry Katona, Simon Cowell, Shilpa Shetty, the five men who were suspected of killing Stephen Lawrence, Gillian McKeith and Shrien Dewani, the man accused of orchestrating the murder of his wife, Anni in S Africa. I rest my case. MC is, in fact, the perfect, living embodiment of contemporary hypocrisy. God Help us!!” You can try and spin it all you want, but an older folks having sex with a child is morally, and legally wrong. Let’s be honest with ourselves on this issue - paedophillia seems to be acceptable with certain privileged people in power. Therein lies the BIG problem we are facing as a society. …. RELATED: Gatekeepers Attempt to Erase Pedophilia: BBC and Gov’t Operatives Still Hoping To Stop

Shrimpton: Ted Heath ‘Murdering Pedo’, David Kelly, Robin Cook and Diana ‘Assasinated’

Make of this interview what you will, but what Shrimpton claims about former British PM and Savile pal, Ted Heath, is given in graphic detail, and clearly implicates more than one top ranking government official in murdering children – which was covered-up.

Like the Taliban, BBC Erase Banksy Artwork Which Exposed Their Internal Savile Cover-up


What Do The Taliban And The BBC Have In Common?

The Needle Taliban

Before……. and After the Taliban
Before and……and After the BBC
Yes, that’s right, they both destroy great works of art in pursuit of their closed minded ideology. Banksy, to my mind the UK’s greatest living artist (and actually, yes, I could justify that statement) created a piece of meaningful art outside of BBC Television Centre in central London which summed up just how disillusioned the British public, especially of my generation, feel right now. It was the poignant image of a young boy dropping his ‘Jim’ll Fix It’ medal into a drain. The BBC sent the workmen in to scrub it away. Why ? Because it implied criticism of the corporation. All great art speaks, all great art stimulates thought, all great art, from Giotto via Manet’s ‘Olympia’ and beyond Picasso’s ‘Guernica’ to the present day, has been provocative. The cultural philistines at the BBC can have as many Yentob inspired documentaries as they like but until they put artistic creation above managerial expediency they can never be a Corporation that Broadcasts for the British license fee paying public. And do they own that hoarding ? Does the BBC actually own that piece of hardboard that Banksy chose to place this artwork ? And if the BBC are sued because a precious work of art has been destroyed and they didn’t own the hardboard hoarding opposite BBC Telivision Centre, who pays ? Not the BBC management on their ludicrously high salaries, but all of us who pay the BBC license fee. Just like McAlpine’s £185,000.


Alex of Zion Plays a Blinder at the BBC

A wretched mornings viewing this Sunday on BBC1.On ‘The Daily Politics’ there was, for the first time, an item on the Bilderberger Conference, held this year at ‘The Grove’ in Watford, UK. There were large crowds of protesters outside, if somewhat distant from, the hotel itself. BBC coverage managed to make it look like a handful of fruitcakes carrying ventriloquist’s dummies, wearing clown suits and carrying  deranged-looking ( to the disinterested observer) placards about paedophilia and the like. Cut to the studio where Andrew Neil interviewed David Aaronovitch and (Blimey What’s This!) Alex Jones about the Bilderbergers. Look at the clip below (to the very end please) and judge for yourselves but for once, and it is once, I have to almost agree with David Aarovitch when he said, re global criminal conspirators manipulating world events, to Jones:“The fact you are here indicates that either that one, they don’t exist or two, you are part of the conspiracy. I say the first.” Anyone who watches the entire sorry performance below will surely go with number two.Could Jones possibly have used this precious time more wastefully. Could he possibly have given a more discreditable performance. God help us!. He was embarrassing to watch and said nothing, in my view, that would tempt the casual government-trusting observer to change their views. Andrew Neil’s gesture at the end was surely, to the average viewer, quite fitting.Jones is the very worst kind of spokesman for those of us who try to educate people about deep manipulation of political processes, the hegemony of finance, and the breathtaking and murderous lies of all our leaders.I admit to having learnt quite a bit from Jones myself but this ‘limited hangout’ artist acts like a fool, looks like a fool and, what’s worse, brings down ridicule on the heads of the rest of us.Most of us quickly grow out of admiring this Zion-funded egomaniac.What was it Lenin said?The best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves.Looks like Alex, smells like Alex.Must be Alex.For more BBC1 manipulation watch ‘The Big Questions’ on BBC iPlayer (series 6, episode 20), aired this morning also, but not yet online.The debate about Syria was so skewed it was sickening to watch. There were two opponents of ‘our’ intervention in Syria, the main guy being a decent enough military fellow but a bit dim. He pointed out the obvious dangers based on the experience of Iraq and Afghanistan but failed to also make the point out that it was US/UK/EU politicians (with the support of Qataris and Saudis) that kicked off the’Syrian Rebellion’ that these same politicians now find so ‘heartbreaking’. He also did not challenge the picture of a satanic government at war with its own people when NATO’s own research shows that 70% of the Syrian public support Assad, 20% are neutral and only 10% support the rebels. This is a level of support that David Cameron and Barack Obama can only dream about.The (don’t laugh) ‘democrats’ pushing for war far outnumbered these two and were allowed to bang on about our ‘humanitarian duty’ ad nauseam. One also notes that whenever issues of war are debated on the BBC, the Jewish representative from the ‘Henry Jackson Society’ always seems to make an appearance, loathsome dissembling git that he is.Yup, the BBC know how to create the impression they desire. Gotta be the world’s most skilled and practiced liars. Increasing numbers, encouragingly, are seeing through the system. Even Tory MP’s are up in arms about the prospect of our arming ‘the rebels’ (as their party leaders recommend) so these people are getting educated somewhere even if it is not by the BBC.P.S. Here is a powerful report about and appeal for Syria written by Nobel Laureate, Mairead Maguire.
It’s conclusion (below) contains the kind of truth you will never read in the western mainstream media,

Following many authorized reports in the mainstream Medias and our own evidences I can stress that the Syrian State and its population are under a proxy war led by foreign countries and directly financed and backed mainly by Qatar who has imposed its views on the Arab League. Turkey, a part of the Lebanese opposition and some of the Jordan authorities offer a safe haven to a diversity of jihadist groups, each with its own agenda, recruited from many countries. Bands of jihadists armed and financed from foreign countries invade Syria through Turkey, Jordan, and Lebanon porous frontiers in an effort to destabilize Syria. There are an estimated 50,000 foreign jihadist fighters terrorizing Syria.Those death squads are destroying systematically the Syrian State infrastructures (Electricity, Oil, Gas and water plants, High Tension Pylons, hospitals, schools, public buildings, cultural heritage sites and even religious sanctuaries).  Moreover the country is submerged by snipers, bombers, agitators, bandits.  They use aggression and Sharia rules and hijack the freedom and dignity of the Syrian population.  They torture and kill those who refuse to join them. They have strange religious beliefs which make them feel comfortable even perpetrating the cruelest acts like killing and torture of their opponents. It is well documented that  many of those terrorists are permanently under stimulant like Captagon. The general lack of security unlashes the terrible phenomenon of abduction for ransoms or for political pressure.  Thousands of innocents are missing, among them the two Bishops, Youhanna Ibrahim and Paul Yazigi, many priests and Imams.

Whistle-blowing officer punished

Colleagues say man who reported alleged drug-dealing boss was investigated before concerns taken seriously
Michael Blowers fought to keep his identity secret after his arrest on the grounds that publishing his name would cause "extreme hardship" to his family and in his current job. Photo / One News

Michael Blowers fought to keep his identity secret after his arrest on the grounds that publishing his name would cause “extreme hardship” to his family and in his current job. Photo / One News

The detective who blew the whistle on his alleged drug-dealing boss was removed from his squad and investigated before senior police took his concerns seriously.

Michael David Blowers, a former detective sergeant, was later charged with supplying methamphetamine and selling cannabis while in charge of the organised crime unit in Northland.

When Blowers’ identity was made public, Northland’s top officer said the probe which led to the prosecution began after a concerned member of staff came forward.

But the Weekend Herald can reveal the officer was removed from Blowers’ organised crime squad and put under strict supervision after he gave senior police management a report on his boss’ movements.

Disappointed colleagues say the disciplinary action undermines police attempts to encourage a culture where inappropriate conduct is reported to management without fear of reprisal.

The detective became suspicious of Blowers’ behaviour and tailed his visits to the home of a Whangarei woman before handing a dossier – which included covert photographs – to senior CIB management.

But instead of immediately probing Blowers’ movements, police management removed the whistleblower from the organised crime squad and placed him under strict supervision.

He was also subjected to an internal code of conduct inquiry which centred on his use of the National Intelligence Application computer system, which is supposed to be used only on official police business.

Several weeks passed until the detective was cleared of any breaches and attention later switched to Blowers, who became the subject of an internal inquiry.

This was elevated to a criminal inquiry when the woman he was visiting told police he gave her methamphetamine and cannabis taken from the police exhibit locker between June 2011 and June 2012.

He was arrested in April and has denied the charges. At the time, Superintendent Russell Le Prou, the Northland district commander, said the inquiry started when a member of staff came forward with concerns. A source within the Northland police took exception to the statement.

“It’s absolute bull****. [Northland CIB] looked at this detective really hard before deciding to look into [the allegations against] Blowers. It was being swept under the carpet until common sense prevailed.”

In a statement to the Weekend Herald, Mr Le Prou said he could not comment on the treatment of the whistleblower as “internal employment matters” were private between employer and employees.

“As I have stated before, a member of police did have the courage to come forward with concerns about a colleague. These concerns led to an investigation and resulted in some serious charges being laid.

“Northland staff can have confidence that if they do come forward it will be treated seriously.”

But the revelations will damage police efforts to build a culture where inappropriate conduct is reported.

Just 58 per cent of Northland police staff are confident they can raise concerns about colleagues without fear of reprisal – 10 per cent lower than the national average – according to a recent workplace survey.

Blowers was a veteran officer with 20 years’ experience, with particular expertise in battling the drug trade, and resigned two weeks before his arrest.

He fought to keep his identity secret after his arrest on the grounds that publishing his name would cause “extreme hardship” to his family and in his current job.

Name suppression was lifted last month after a High Court judge said the public interest was “perhaps stronger than usual” because of Blowers’ occupation at the time and the nature and circumstances of the charges.

“Moreover, that interest cannot be dismissed as merely prurient; the public has a legitimate right to know about matters potentially impinging on the integrity and proper functioning of our law enforcement agencies and their officers,” said Justice Rebecca Ellis.

Blowers has pleaded not guilty and will appear in the High Court at Whangarei again next month.

Re: I believe the government should be allowed to view my e-mails, tap my phone calls, and view my web history for national security concerns

By 161719 — reddit readers forum June 7, 2013

I live in a country generally assumed to be a dictatorship. One of the Arab spring countries. I have lived through curfews and have seen the outcomes of the sort of surveillance now being revealed in the US. People here talking about curfews aren’t realizing what that actually FEELS like. It isn’t about having to go inside, and the practicality of that. It’s about creating the feeling that everyone, everything is watching. A few points:
1) the purpose of this surveillance from the governments point of view is to control enemies of the state. Not terrorists. People who are coalescing around ideas that would destabilize the status quo. These could be religious ideas. These could be groups like anon who are too good with tech for the governments liking. It makes it very easy to know who these people are. It also makes it very simple to control these people.
Lets say you are a college student and you get in with some people who want to stop farming practices that hurt animals. So you make a plan and go to protest these practices. You get there, and wow, the protest is huge. You never expected this, you were just goofing off. Well now everyone who was there is suspect. Even though you technically had the right to protest, you’re now considered a dangerous person.
With this tech in place, the government doesn’t have to put you in jail. They can do something more sinister. They can just email you a sexy picture you took with a girlfriend. Or they can email you a note saying that they can prove your dad is cheating on his taxes. Or they can threaten to get your dad fired. All you have to do, the email says, is help them catch your friends in the group. You have to report back every week, or you dad might lose his job. So you do. You turn in your friends and even though they try to keep meetings off grid, you’re reporting on them to protect your dad.
2) Let’s say number one goes on. The country is a weird place now. Really weird. Pretty soon, a movement springs up like occupy, except its bigger this time. People are really serious, and they are saying they want a government without this power. I guess people are realizing that it is a serious deal. You see on the news that tear gas was fired. Your friend calls you, frantic. They’re shooting people. Oh my god. you never signed up for this. You say, fuck it. My dad might lose his job but I won’t be responsible for anyone dying. That’s going too far. You refuse to report anymore. You just stop going to meetings. You stay at home, and try not to watch the news. Three days later, police come to your door and arrest you. They confiscate your computer and phones, and they beat you up a bit. No one can help you so they all just sit quietly. They know if they say anything they’re next. This happened in the country I live in. It is not a joke.
3) Its hard to say how long you were in there. What you saw was horrible. Most of the time, you only heard screams. People begging to be killed. Noises you’ve never heard before. You, you were lucky. You got kicked every day when they threw your moldy food at you, but no one shocked you. No one used sexual violence on you, at least that you remember. There were some times they gave you pills, and you can’t say for sure what happened then. To be honest, sometimes the pills were the best part of your day, because at least then you didn’t feel anything. You have scars on you from the way you were treated. You learn in prison that torture is now common. But everyone who uploads videos or pictures of this torture is labeled a leaker. Its considered a threat to national security. Pretty soon, a cut you got on your leg is looking really bad. You think it’s infected. There were no doctors in prison, and it was so overcrowded, who knows what got in the cut. You go to the doctor, but he refuses to see you. He knows if he does the government can see the records that he treated you. Even you calling his office prompts a visit from the local police.
You decide to go home and see your parents. Maybe they can help. This leg is getting really bad. You get to their house. They aren’t home. You can’t reach them no matter how hard you try. A neighbor pulls you aside, and he quickly tells you they were arrested three weeks ago and haven’t been seen since. You vaguely remember mentioning to them on the phone you were going to that protest. Even your little brother isn’t there.
4) Is this even really happening? You look at the news. Sports scores. Celebrity news. It’s like nothing is wrong. What the hell is going on? A stranger smirks at you reading the paper. You lose it. You shout at him “fuck you dude what are you laughing at can’t you see I’ve got a fucking wound on my leg?”
“Sorry,” he says. “I just didn’t know anyone read the news anymore.” There haven’t been any real journalists for months. They’re all in jail.
Everyone walking around is scared. They can’t talk to anyone else because they don’t know who is reporting for the government. Hell, at one time YOU were reporting for the government. Maybe they just want their kid to get through school. Maybe they want to keep their job. Maybe they’re sick and want to be able to visit the doctor. It’s always a simple reason. Good people always do bad things for simple reasons.
You want to protest. You want your family back. You need help for your leg. This is way beyond anything you ever wanted. It started because you just wanted to see fair treatment in farms. Now you’re basically considered a terrorist, and everyone around you might be reporting on you. You definitely can’t use a phone or email. You can’t get a job. You can’t even trust people face to face anymore. On every corner, there are people with guns. They are as scared as you are. They just don’t want to lose their jobs. They don’t want to be labeled as traitors.
This all happened in the country where I live.
You want to know why revolutions happen? Because little by little by little things get worse and worse. But this thing that is happening now is big. This is the key ingredient. This allows them to know everything they need to know to accomplish the above. The fact that they are doing it is proof that they are the sort of people who might use it in the way I described. In the country I live in, they also claimed it was for the safety of the people. Same in Soviet Russia. Same in East Germany. In fact, that is always the excuse that is used to surveil everyone. But it has never ONCE proven to be the reality.
Maybe Obama won’t do it. Maybe the next guy won’t, or the one after him. Maybe this story isn’t about you. Maybe it happens 10 or 20 years from now, when a big war is happening, or after another big attack. Maybe it’s about your daughter or your son. We just don’t know yet. But what we do know is that right now, in this moment we have a choice. Are we okay with this, or not? Do we want this power to exist, or not?
You know for me, the reason I’m upset is that I grew up in school saying the pledge of allegiance. I was taught that the United States meant “liberty and justice for all.” You get older, you learn that in this country we define that phrase based on the constitution. That’s what tells us what liberty is and what justice is. Well, the government just violated that ideal. So if they aren’t standing for liberty and justice anymore, what are they standing for? Safety?
Ask yourself a question. In the story I told above, does anyone sound safe?
I didn’t make anything up. These things happened to people I know. We used to think it couldn’t happen in America. But guess what? It’s starting to happen.
I actually get really upset when people say “I don’t have anything to hide. Let them read everything.” People saying that have no idea what they are bringing down on their own heads. They are naive, and we need to listen to people in other countries who are clearly telling us that this is a horrible horrible sign and it is time to stand up and say no.

Bradley Manning: the angry young man who turned whistleblower

To his former Welsh classmates the soon-to-be soldier was an oddball – a whizz on computers who didn’t quite fit in

Bradley Manning

Bradley Manning attended Tasker Milward school in Haverfordwest, Wales, between 2001 and 2005. Photograph: Mandel Ngan/AFP/Getty Images

Tasker Milward school in Haverfordwest closed a week or so ago for the summer holidays, and its peeling black metal gates on Tuesday opened on to an almost empty car park, the three-storey red brick and cream building nearly deserted in the warm Pembrokeshire afternoon.

In term time, 1,200 pupils mill around the grounds, representing a significant chunk of the young people in the small town of 13,000, situated at the very westernmost tip of Wales.

It is less than a decade since one of those spilling out of these gates in a red polo shirt and bottle green sweatshirt with a red dragon crest was a diminutive blond 17-year-old with a thick Oklahoma twang, just 1.57 metres (5ft 2in) tall and weighing only 47.43kg (7½ stone).

In the years since he left Tasker Milward, Bradley Manning has become arguably the highest profile whistleblower of his generation, the source of the biggest data leak in US military history and will continue to be a hero to some, a traitor to others. Between 2001 and 2005, however, to his Welsh classmates he was just Bradley, the oddball who was a whizz on computers but didn’t quite fit in, who liked political arguments in class, whose mum made “brilliant” beefburgers after school.

Manning today finds himself at the heart of a quite extraordinary episode in US diplomatic, military and legal history. The account of what took him, in less than five years, from the computer club of a west Wales secondary school to US military custody accused of trying to help al-Qaida attack America may be one of the remarkable aspects of the young army private’s story.

Manning doesn’t hold a British passport and doesn’t consider himself to be a UK citizen, but he is unquestionably half Welsh (the Foreign Office, notably, has stressed he is “British by descent”). Though he was born in the US, his parents met when Brian Manning, a US naval intelligence analyst, was stationed in the very southwest tip of Wales; Susan Manning, then Fox, was a local girl from Haverfordwest. An older sister, Casey, was born in Wales; Bradley followed in 1987 after his parents had returned to the tiny Oklahoma town of Crescent where Brian took up a job in a car rental firm. The marriage was not a success, and in 2001, after Brian walked out, Susan returned to her home town with her children.

His new school was around the size of his entire home town, and friends from that time recall a complicated boy who never quite fit, didn’t get the Welsh humour, was hotheaded and unpredictable and sometimes bullied. “An American at a Welsh school is always going to stick out, isn’t he?” his friend James Kirkpatrick has said. “And his personality is unique, extremely unique. Very quirky, very opinionated, very political, very clever.”

Manning’s mother and extended family still live in and around Haverfordwest; they have largely withdrawn from the media and campaigners since the early days of his detention.

Those who have examined closely Manning’s time in Haverfordwest, however, are clear that even while a young teenager there were signs of the young man he was to become. Tim Price spent 10 months talking to Manning’s family members, friends and former teachers as research for a play, the Radicalisation of Bradley Manning, staged last year by the National Theatre of Wales, and remains close to Manning’s mother.

“The people who knew Bradley when he was in Wales say he was an incredibly bright young guy who was also incredibly thoughtful,” says Price. While still at school he built an early social media website called Angeldyne, “and there were stories on there written by a young Bradley Manning that were not written by your average teenager, a story aboutDr David Kelly, for example. He was an unusual teenager, very politically engaged.”

Vicky Moller, who runs a local campaign in support of the soldier, says former teachers have told her of a student who was “highly intelligent, engaged in long political discussions, had a questioning mind”. Moller feels that the Welsh education system – which she says focuses on “civil awareness and a moral approach to the human role in society” – may even have contributed to the actions that Manning would later take.

However bright and engaged, he does not seem to have been particularly happy while in Haverfordwest. Schoolfriends have said they didn’t know at the time that Manning was gay, and on leaving school after his GCSEs, he returned to live with his father and new stepmother, with the promise of a job in software.

But neither the job nor the new family dynamic worked out, and within a year he was sleeping on friends’ couches or in his pickup truck, making ends meet through casual jobs. “Bradley seems always to have been desperate to be wherever he wasn’t,” says Price. “He seemed like a guy who was permanently frustrated with the world.” By October 2007, dreaming of the university future it offered through a military scholarship, Manning had enlisted in the US army.

It may seem a curious decision for the 20-year-old – now openly gay and, say friends, increasingly politicised – and indeed his military career seems to have soured very quickly. Within a month of arriving at his first posting he was on the brink of expulsion; peers have described bullying so severe Manning wet himself on more than one occasion.

A short posting to upstate New York was happier; he met his first serious boyfriend Tyler Watkins, a student at Boston’s Brandeis university, and through him became involved in the Boston hacker community.

But once Manning had been posted to an isolated military base in the Iraqi desert in October 2009, that relationship, too, would quickly disintegrate. Forward Operating Base Hammer was an isolated, depressing place where morale was rock bottom and security slipshod.

Increasingly disillusioned with the US mission, Manning’s behaviour deteriorated, culminating in his punching a female officer in the face and being told he would be demoted and discharged. Within days he had contacted the notorious hacker Adrian Lamo, writing: “If you had unprecedented access to classified networks 14 hours a day, seven days a week for eight-plus months, what would you do?” The rest has been rehearsed exhaustively during an eight-week trial.

In Haverfordwest on Tuesday, views on his actions, however, were mixed. “My view is that he shouldn’t have done it,” said David Thomas, visiting from nearby Swansea. “He took an oath. How naive was he?” To Callum Downes, however, manning a collection stall for a soldiers’ charity called Afghan Heroes, the issue was more nuanced. “Nobody should leak secrets that will let an enemy to get the upper hand, but the government should not keep secrets from its people. All I know is, I have a couple of friends who are out there, and they hate it when they are kept in the dark.”

A respected academic, who just happens to be Muslim, was challenged by a Fox News anchor as to why he was qualified to write about Christ

A car crash television interview during which a Fox News host asked the author of a new biography about Jesus, why he, as a Muslim, feels able to write about the Christian Messiah, has had an unexpectedly positive outcome – with sales of the author’s book increasing by 35 per cent in just two days.

The excruciating 10-minute interview, during which broadcaster Lauren Green was left with egg on her face after she tried to pin down respected scholar Reza Aslan, who just happens to be Muslim, on why he felt capable of writing a book about the life of Jesus, went viral at the weekend after it was posted on Buzzfeed.

Ms Green asks: “You’re a Muslim, so why did you write a book about the founder of Christianity?”

To which a visibly surprised Mr Aslan responds: “I am a scholar of religions with four degrees, including one in the New Testament, and fluency in biblical Greek, who has been studying the origins of Christianity for two decades, who also just happens to be a Muslim.”

“It’s not that I’m just some Muslim writing about Jesus,” he continued. “I am an expert with a PhD in the history of religions.”

But all publicity is good publicity, as they say, and this embarrassing episode for Fox News has had an extremely positive outcome for Mr Aslan whose controversial biography of Jesus, Zealot: The Life and Times of Jesus of Nazareth, has now reached number 1 in the Amazon books charts.

Publishers Random House had to rush to meet a surge in demand for the book, ordering an additional 50,000 copies to be printed on Monday, bringing the total copies in print to 150,000.

The biography, published on 16 July, had already been selling well prior to Mr Aslan’s appearance on Fox News, having reached number 8 in the Amazon book charts on Friday, but Mr Aslan is “thrilled” at the increased exposure on the back of the viral interview.

“I’ll be perfectly honest — I’m thrilled at the response that people have had to the interview,” Mr Aslan told the New York Times. “You can’t buy this kind of publicity.”

The Fox News interview has been watched nearly 4.5 million times on Buzzfeed, which posted the video under the title “Is this the most embarrassing interview Fox News has ever done?”, and Mr Aslan has gained an additional 5,000 Twitter followers since it went out.

The book is to be published in the UK by The Westbourne Press with the ebook available from today and the hardback in bookstores from 15 August.

Motion Stabilization Of The Critical Frames


I motion stabilized the critical frames of the JFK shooting. The shot caused the cameraman to jerk.

You can see that he was hit in the head from the front by an incendiary round, which caught fire, exploded his head, and jerked it backwards.

He was slumped forward from a previous rear shot. The incendiary device struck him in the front of the skull and lodged there. You can see flames shooting out of the front of his skull in each subsequent frame. His skull was jerked sharply backwards over the next quarter of a second, and by the last frame you can see that much of his skull is gone.

Oswald was behind him.

You Can’t Fire A Bolt Action Rifle That Fast

In 1987, former U.S. Marine sniper Craig Roberts, a seasoned veteran of the Vietnam war, stood for the first time at the 6th floor “Sniper’s Nest” window of the Texas School Book Depository. As he looked down into what the U.S. government maintains was the kill zone used by Lee Harvey Oswald, he immediately knew that the Warren Commission’s verdict – that Oswald, acting alone from that position, fired three shots in 5.6 seconds from a bolt-action rifle, with a fatal head shot being the last shot fired – was a lie.

Kill Zone: A Sniper Looks at Dealey Plaza: Craig Roberts: 9780963906205: Books

I have a similar WWII Hungarian rifle. The fastest you could possibly reload, and aim through a scope for the next shot is about five seconds. Most people would require ten or more seconds.

It’s time to start talking 9/11

This is a mind blowing essay where via a FOIA request, a blogger got ahold of an abridged 500 page FBI file on the five dancing Israelis, (the classified version is 1,800 pages). You won’t find better than this ANYWHERE.

The official 2001 FBI docs on Urban Moving Systems and the 9-11-2001 Dancing Israelis incident

Comment #2 goes over how anyone can get their own copies of these documents on a CD from the FBI (for those skeptics who claim this is “disinfo” – as if I have any time to slug this stuff together).  Here is the boilerplate letter I received from the FBI after making the initial request and asking for a fee waiver (my personal info has been whited out).

I’ve saved many the trouble of getting their own documents by posting them on, links are in the notes area.  Article begins here:

Section 5, page 42

Above:  A snippet from the 2001 FBI files on Urban Moving Systems and the 9-11 Dancing Israelis incident.  An employee of UMS dishes on the boss (Dominik Suter?) who not only cheats customers but seems to harbor a huge grudge against the United States.  

Here are videos for those unfamiliar with the story:

The controversy around Urban Moving Systems (active as a business since approximately 1996) centers around the fact that it was a Mossad front company, and whether or not the “employees” (agents) knew what was about to go down on September 11th.  There were also, according to the FBI report, traces of explosive in the van used in the Dancing Israelis incident.  Were members of this group involved in rigging the towers for demolition?

Section 1, page 35

In section 5, page 25 of the FBI report, a male eyewitness who was painting the interior of an apartment spots the Dancing Israelis on a nearby roof “less than 5 minutes” after the first plane hits the WTC.  The location of the roof, The Doric Apartments at 100 Manhattan Avenue in Union City, NJ, is a 5 minute drive from Urban Moving Systems at 3 W 18th Street in Weehauken.  This contradicts the statements of the Israelis in the 4th video (starting at 3:55), who claim they began driving to that point after the first plane hit the towers.

Section 1, pages 36-37

There were a number of reasons I retrieved and posted the 4 page police report from the East Rutherford, NJ P.D. and these FBI documents on the 9-11-2001 Dancing Israelis incident (links are below).  If any 9-11 researchers had seen them, they failed to make them available for public scrutiny.  As a consequence, some individuals have concluded that the Dancing Israelis were an “urban legend”, based only on researchers’ opinions and a slew of seemingly disparate facts.

Section 5, page 41

Fill out an FOIA request, or write a letter, and these public records are yours for a few dollars, or free.  So why have we not seen (until now) official documentation on these suspicious events – events that apparently never got a mention in the 9-11 Commission Report?

Section 5, pages 62-63
The FBI’s investigation of the Dancing Israelis is close to 550 pages long – redacted pages (not included in the above count), had they been made available, would bring the actual report closer to 1800 pages.  Of the released pages, many are partially blanked out.  The investigation won’t be completely declassified until 2030 at the earliest; however it appears that date was changed to 2035 (see above stamps that appear on most pages).
Section 5, page 30

 The report is in 6 sections. The PDF “search” option does not seem to be working.  A brief synopsis of some findings are below, section by section.

Section 1, page 33

Because of time constraints, I have not vetted everything.  Please note in the comments area any section/page of interest found in these documents.  I have posted some snippets, however, I may have missed a few things, and would appreciate any insights, help etc.

Section 5, page 47
From the official East Rutherford, New Jersey police report, page 4 – suspect claims they were in Manhattan on the West Side Highway during the attack on the WTC (stated as “the incident”)
Section 1, page 65
Above:  A female witness at 100 Manhattan Avenue spots the Israelis “high fiving” each other while watching the WTC burn.  Were they really happy to see the WTC burn, or were they just fans of Seattle’s “High Five’n White Guys”?:
The first 9 links below this article under “Related posts” are my own independent research.  Some of these articles contain evidence that some actors in this group are still active in the US.

The Doric Apartments, 100 Manhattan Ave, Union City, NJ – “…the Doric stands on the cliffs of Union City offering non-obstructed breathtaking views of the New York City’s skyline” – quote from Doric’s website
One view of Manhattan from the Doric Apartments – from and Google Maps
The Doric Apartments’ garage rooftop parking area where the Dancing Israelis were spotted on 9-11-01.  Below, a promo video for the Doric Apartments.

FBI documents on Urban Moving Systems and the Dancing Israelis (these notes will be updated as time permits)

Regarding the Dancing Israelis connection to the Mossad, here’s an article from the Jewish Daily Forward. 

For an interesting analysis of the information in these documents, please see
The “Dancing Israelis” FBI Report – Debunked. 

A concise video of the same analysis is here on YouTube.

UPDATE:  On Scribd, the documents are available for reading, however Scribd is now charging for downloads.  Free downloads are available via this blog. 

Section 1 (full text at this link)

Section 1, page 7
Section 1, page 12.  Flyer found for party at the Garage on 99 7th Avenue in Manhattan.  The date “7-11″ (exactly 2 months before 9-11) is prominent.  Is the address (99 7th Avenue – 99 = 9×11) significant?  Keren is a common Israeli women’s name. What is being covered up on the right side of the flyer?   Below a snippet from a Google search for DJ VanJee that refers to Jaffa, a city located in Israel.
Section 1, page 23.  An “unscheduled” UMS van is spotted in Plymouth, MA on 9-11-2001 at 6:45 a.m.
Section 1, page 30. AA flight 11 was scheduled to depart Boston’s Logan Airport at 7:45 a.m.

p. 36 and p. 52-53 – An “unscheduled” Urban Moving Systems van is stopped by Pennsylvania State Police as it is traveling toward the Shanksville, PA hijacked flight 93 crash site:

Section 1, page 36
Section 1, page 30

p. 36 – An “unscheduled” Urban Moving Systems van is found in Nashua, NH on 9-11:

Section 1, page 36
Section 1, page 34  Airline tickets with immediate travel dates found in NJ van.
Section 1, page 39

p. 61-77 – Tenants at 100 Manhattan Avenue apartments are questioned about sightings of Israelis prior to 9-11.

Section 1, page 61.  One of the 5 Dancing Israelis was spotted at 100 Manhattan Ave. on 9-10-01.  Was he helping the mysterious couple (below) move out of their apartment?
Section 1, page 71 – Manager at 100 Manhattan Ave.
regarding tenants moving out using a UMC truck on 9-10-01
Section 1, page 73 – Urban Moving sighted at 100 Manhattan Ave. 9-10-01
Section 1, page 73.  Did the mysterious tenant who moved on 9-10-01 “work” at the WTC?

Hoboken PATH Station
1 Hudson Place, Hoboken, NJ 07030.
Served by Newark-World Trade Center, Hoboken – 33rd Street, and Hoboken-World Trade Center lines. 

Section 1, page 96 – a few of the odd photos found
Section 1, page 100 – flight itinerary – 12 Sept departure
Section 1, page 112 – Letter posted from Charlotte, NC.  The Fox News video below at the 1:26 mark reports the presence of Israeli Mossad in North Carolina.Are the numbers 6 and 8 significant (68 cents postage, sticker with 8 legged figure juggling 6 balls)?Do some research on the zip + 4 number (“28210-5700″) and you might find it links back to Union City, NJ.

pages 128-129 – addresses in Missouri and Texas

Section 2 (full text at this link)

Section 2 covers insurance papers for Urban Moving Systems.
p. 35 includes VIN numbers for all UMS vehicles, including the famous white van.

p. 77 is a report of said van at Liberty State Park, NJ.

Section 3 (full text at this link)

Section 3, page 28.  A 9-16-01 memo details a new UMS warehouse location at 73-75 Gould Street in Bayonne, NJ.  I exposed this warehouse and the UMS connection to Israeli mall sales of Zoomcopters in an article in 2009
9-11, Mossad Mall Spies, Zoomcopters and Dominik Suter

Section 4 (full text at this link)

Section 5 (full text at this link)

P 21:  female employee of UMS arrives at work at 8:58 am (shown on punched time card). A co-worker brings her some cookies – she estimates this happened about 5 minutes after she clocked in (9:03)  She talks with co-worker for “a few more minutes” and then hears someone in the building shout “Oh my God a plane just hit the World Trade Center.”   She then heads into the dispatch room of Urban Moving Systems (where the shout came from) and sees “a still picture on a computer screen of a plane hitting one tower”.

p. 25:  A painter at the Doric Towers, 100 Manhattan Ave, Union City, NJ is informed by a partner of the disaster “less than 5 minutes” after the first plane hits the north tower”.  He “stands up from painting the baseboard, looks out of the window, and notices 3 young men taking video and still photographs from atop the roof of the parking garage adjoining Doric Towers. (ed. note:  Urban Moving Systems is a 5 minute drive from 100 Manhattan Ave.)

Section 5, page 27 – cigarette butts as evidence

Section 6 (full text at this link)

p 8:  foreign names and names of obscure towns in India and Nepal.p 30:  report on Israeli art vendor arrested in Mercer county.  Found traveling in the vicinity of the FAA center in Pomona, NJ and also taking pictures of bridges and freeways:

Section 6, page 30
Below, video on Israeli “art sales”:

p 33: four Israeli nationals arrested by Mt. Holly Police dept on 8 14 2001

p 38:  FBI declares Israelis innocent

p 40:  phone number found in notes connected to individual in S. America with “ties to Islamic militants in the ME”

P 41:  another phone number is connected to a hash dealer in NY – this info is considered moot.p 43:  FBI admits wide discrepancies in suspects stories

Section 6, page 45 – witness describes video camera
Section 6, page 47  Dancing Israelis, Classic International Movers and the 19 hijackers
Section 6, page 48 – Dancing Israelis heading to NJ at 7:48 a.m. on 9-11-01.  From Brooklyn-Battery Tunnel (A) to Urban Moving (B) – an 18 minute commute that passes by the WTC and also uses the Lincoln Tunnel (map below).

p 63: FBI references

p 89:  items not claimed by suspects destroyed

And the aftermath continues:

Related posts:

The FBI, the NYPD and the 9-11-2001 King Street Exploding Mural Truck – All Roads Lead to Nowhere

A 9-11 and Mossad-connected Israeli you’ve never heard of – Uzi Bohadana 

From Union to Scab Labor at the WTC – 9-11′s Missing Link? 

9-11, Mossad Mall Spies, Zoomcopters and Dominik Suter

Suter’s Back in Town – 9-11′s Dominik Suter is Alive and Well and Living in New Jersey? 

Are the “Dancing Israelis” Plotting Revenge?  And Why is (at least) One of Them Still Residing in the US? 

9-11′s Dancing Israelis bailed on 3+ Million $ Debt 

One of Dancing Israeli Suter’s Enterprises Still Going Strong? and the Odigo 9-11 Messages

The Billion Dollar Israeli Scammer Machine

9-11 and the October 19, 2001 Philly bus station bomb

9-11 – A date awaited by Rabbis for the past 400 years 

US Consulate whistleblower: 9/11 hijackers passports were issued by the CIA

Sept.2002 – Mossad (Shavit) and CIA Chiefs (Woolsey) elected to FDNY Terrorism Preparedness Taskforce  

12-14-2012 – 9-11′s Rudi Dekkers in Jail for Drug Trafficking (Houston) article re: its inclusion in the above FBI documents 

9-11 Commission attorney tied to Jewish Mafia

‘Cheering Movers and Art Student Spies: What Did Israel Know in Advance of the 9/11 Attacks?’
Dozens of Israeli Jews Are Being Kept in Federal Detention

Was September 11th a cover up of a financial fraud? – The Israeli Art Student Mystery 

Wayne Madsen – The Israeli Art Students and Movers Story 

FBI Turning Over Stones With Israelis Underneath

World Trade Center Occupancy obtained thru Freedom of Information Act from Port Authority of NY / NJ * 1972-2001

Fed gives grant to Urban Moving Systems
Controlled Demolition Inc. employee:  evidence of demolition, explosives at WTC  

Mossad Agents Back in the Malls – 9-11 Profiteer Lowy Owns Malls Israelis Work In (Deja Vu All Over Again?)

Working in Tokyo for the Israeli Mafia

Israeli Illegals Finding New Lives In South Florida

Israeli Mall Spy Disrupts Commercial Flight

Dancing Israelis: Further Evidence of Foreknowledge

Rubbing our noses in it – US to build “Site 911″ bunkers in Israel 

The Spy Who Loves Us - Pay no mind to the Mossad agent on the line.
By Philip Giraldi

<a title="The Experts Are<br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br />
Starting To Say The 9/11 Conspiracy Wackos May Be Right" href="">The Experts Are Starting To Say The 9/11 Conspiracy Wackos May Be Right

100 Critical Points about 9-11

- See more at:



Introduction by Gilad Atzmon:

A few weeks ago some of us were rather amused to see Max Blumenthal, in conversation with Paul Jay (The Real News Network), deliver the usual anti-Zionist Zionist (AZZ) spiel. After the program many Palestinian solidarity and anti-warcommentators were outraged and demanded that Jay provide me with a right to reply. So Jay approached me, asked to clarify a few issues and promised to come back to me shortly with an answer. I didn’t hold my breath because since the incident I had learned a little about Jay’s political affiliations and motivations.

Yesterday, he came back with his answer (see below) which he manages to stuff with a pile of confused and jumbled arguments that convey profound intellectual ignorance and are riven with a host of embarrassing contradictions. But one thing was for sure. Gilad Atzmon would not be appearing on Jay’s show. Why? Because, above all, Jay is a coward and must have realised that he doesn’t stand a chance of countering my ideas in front of a camera, not even in his own studio.

I define Jewish Power as the power to divert the attention from Jewish Power and Paul Jay clearly engages in just such an endeavour. In fact, my main contribution to this discourse is probably my capacity to expose this very power and the manner in which it is wielded (Actually, all I do is hand the microphone to my detractors and let their symptoms speak for themselves).

But Jay’s muddled text cries for attention because it is an invaluable glimpse into the deeply corrosive and dishonest attitude that currently contaminates Palestine solidarity, the anti-war movement and the entire peace movement.

Jay attempts to build  his entire argument around the notion that I am an ‘anti Semite’ only to eventually admit that actually I am not.“Since the late 19th century the term (anti Semitism) has been used to mean hatred of Jews….Do I believe you (Gilad) hate all Jews? No. But your theory leads to that”

Well, I have some news for Jay & Co. ‘Theories’ do not hate, ideas do not kill, it is people who hate and people who kill. My ‘theories’ are there to enlighten people, including Jews.  My ideas offer Jews, even the so-called progressive Jews such as Jay himself, an opportunity to self-reflect and, hopefully, to correct that which needs correction. But here we have a problem. As I explore in The Wandering Who, Jewish identity politics is a general state of blindness, a detached collective mind-set which Jay himself proudly exhibits. We know that the Israelis will accept no criticism and their Jewish so-called  opponents react exactly the same. Time after time, they kill the messengers – or at least attempt to do so. This is why I am not at all angry with Jay, in fact I feel for him. He is trapped – metaphysically, spiritually and intellectually. Jay’s plight is the Jewish tragedy – a disastrous tale I explore fully in my writing. From a  psychoanalytical perspective  the man is in ‘denial’ and, like other progressive Jews, he, for the time being,  resists therapy.

Now, before I let you read Jay own words, allow me to address some of his mistakes:

Jay fails to grasp the obvious distinction between ‘Judaism’ (the religion), ‘Jews’ (the people) and ‘Jewishness’ (the Ideology). In my work I concentrate on Jewish ideology and since I believe that every ideology and politics must be subject to criticism, this obviously includes Jewish identity politics. Jay, on the other hand, tries to block any criticism of Jewish politics and ideology. Is this because he believes that Jews are chosen? You be the judge.

Jay proclaims “the internalization of racism is not inherent in identifying ones cultural and ethnic roots as being Jewish, and to do so, is nothing uniquely Jewish.” Now, if Jay is correct, what is it that makes the ‘Jewish state’ Jewish? And what is it that makes JVP (Jewish Voice for peace) Jewish?  Moreover, How many Goyimserved as the secretary of JVP or ‘Jews for Justice’ in the last decade?  Not one is the answer, and the reason has much to do with racial and ethnic qualification. Sooner or later even Jay will have to admit that by its very nature, Jewish politics is exclusivist.

Jay, who goes on for six pages about my criticism of Jewish politics, apparently doesn’t understand a thing about Judaism, Zionism and their relationship with Jewish textual heritage. For example he is particularly concerned my interpretation of the following Biblical verse: “Then when the Lord your God brings you to the land he promised your ancestors Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob to give you – a land with large, fine cities you did not build, houses filled with choice things you did not accumulate, hewn out cisterns you did not dig, and vineyards and olive groves you did not plant – and you eat your fill.” Deuteronomy:  Six: 10 –11No one who reads the above can turn a blind eye to the continuum between the Biblical call for plunder, the Zionist project and the Israeli practice. But Jay simply attempts to smokescreen this glaring fact.

Interestingly enough, in my latest book The Wandering Who I try to rescue Judaism out of this continuum. But Jay, being a secular Jew, doesn’t want anyone to fiddle with his cultural heritage in spite of the fact that he himself is totally unfamiliar with any Jewish text, let alone its cultural meaning.

So here is the story Jay seems to miss: Judaism is not driven by the Torah – the Talmud is a central text of Judaism. It was actually Zionism that revised and revolutionized the relationship between Jews and their forming texts and made the Torah into its primary text. Hence, Biblical plunder is deeply rooted in the new Hebraic culture, Israeli politics and legislation, a topic about which Jay is obviously clueless which may explain his obvious fear of facing me on his show.

It takes six pages for Jay to spit out his banal, materialist, Marxist clichés regarding Israel and its origin. “Israeli state is a product and significant piece of the system of international capital”.  But here is the problem Jay is unable to integrate into his system.  Israel defines itself as “The Jewish State”, its tanks are decorated with Jewish symbols and, as I write these lines, its Jewish Lobbies are pushing for, on its behalf, a war in Syria. And as if this were not enough, the Jewish progressive network invests all its energy in trying to stop us from discussing it at all. This is the reality Jay attempts to disguise. But he can’t. No one can, not anymore. If anything Jay’s conduct in this affair only reveals the destructive and sinister power of Zionism within media in general and within the anti war movement in particular.

The Wandering Who? A Study Of Jewish Identity Politics, available on

Paul Jay to Gilad Atzmon

CC:  Alison Weir, Harvie Branscomb  Jeff Balnkfort,  Monir Deeb Shahram Vahdany, Janet Mcmahon,   Delinda C. Hanley, Paul Latudee and others


Dear Gilad,

, you asked for a chance to respond to Max Blumenthal’s accusation that your views are anti-Semitic. I promised to read some of your work and then reply. I’ve now read enough to give an answer.First let me make a few things clear about my point of view.I think any state based on religion or ethnicity is racist and inherently anti-democratic. Israel fits that bill, as do others.I think the occupation of the West bank and siege of Gaza is illegal. In the brutal wars against the Palestinian people, Israel has committed countless war crimes.If this was 1948, I would be opposed to the establishment of the State of Israel. A democratic, secular, inclusive state where everyone who was living on the territory of Palestine could become a citizen is what should have been created.That is what should happen now. If Palestinians vote for a two-state solution that is their right, but it’s also their right to demand one-person one vote and thus transform the current Israeli state into a truly democratic one.Now, let’s turn to your thesis.I do not think that Zionism grows out of “Jewish ideology”. In fact, I reject the concept that there is something one can call a generic Jew or a Jewish ideology.In your book The Wandering Who, you define Jewish ideology as someone who politically identifies as a Jew, “Jewishness is an ethno-centric ideology driven by exclusiveness, exceptionalism, racial supremacy and a deep inherent inclination toward segregation”.In Israel, where national character and Jewish identity merge given the ethnic/religious basis of the state, this argument may have some merit, but it has nothing to do with the national and class ideology of thousands of Jews around the world who have little to no affinity with Israel and do not begin their political equation with “what’s good for the Jews”.I’m not suggesting there are no such Jews, probably a majority at least when it comes to support for Israel. As odious as this is, this type of chauvinism is nothing unique, whether it’s Aryan, Han, Japanese, Russian, Saudi or American. Many nationalist cultures consider themselves to be “chosen” and “exceptional”.Polling shows younger generations of American Jews are increasingly more distanced from feelings of affinity with Israel. Of course, they may adopt the religion or ideology of Americanism in its place (an ideology, in spite of its crimes, you seem to have no problem with as it’s not Jewish).The point is that the internalization of racism is not inherent in identifying ones cultural and ethnic roots as being Jewish, and to do so, is nothing uniquely Jewish.Just as it is pointless talking about a generic Catholic without taking into consideration country of origin, national psychology, and most importantly class – it’s meaningless talking about a generic Jew.There are Catholics whose politics begin with “what’s good for the Catholics” . . . mostly to be found in the Vatican, but not exclusively. There are many Muslims who say the same about Islam.But millions of people identify as Catholics and Muslims who do not start their political equation from identity politics. There is no “Catholic ideology or Muslim ideology” above national and class interest. The world view of a Sri Lankan catholic peasant has far more in common with an Indian Hindu peasant than with a Brazilian catholic finance capitalist. That’s not to say there are no instances of tribalism that influence sections of the population, but again, nothing uniquely Jewish about it.There is no generic Jew.A Canadian of Jewish Ashkenazi East European origin, who has no religious beliefs but identifies as a cultural Jew, opposes the Israeli occupation, has some nostalgic feelings about grandparents who spoke Yiddish and made chicken soup on Fridays, and most importantly understands that the Nazis made no differentiation between believers and non-believers when they knocked down the door . . . has far more in common, shares more of a world view with a progressive Muslim Canadian, than with an Israeli Jew who is dripping with racist hatred for Palestinians.Hitler and the Zionists created a vision of a generic Jew with a metaphysical identity, transmitted by blood or the product of a Jewish soul. The Zionists concocted that this “identity” necessarily leads to support for the State of Israel. That’s why they promoted Hebrew as a modern language and virtually suppressed Yiddish – to invent an identity out of time and place.Your thesis is the same as the Zionists. Your “Jewish ideology” exists only in abstract form and you also conclude it necessarily leads to support for Zionism. Unless a Jew renounces being a Jew, as you have, they must believe in “exclusiveness, exceptionalism, racial supremacy and a deep inherent inclination toward segregation” . . . in one form or the other. Your definition transcends nation and class, because for you, the Jewish identity trumps all other factors.

You write on the comments section of TRNN, “My scholarship is not concerned with Judaism (the religion) nor am I referring to Jews (the people). I am critical of Jewish Identity politics and Jewish ideology. I elaborate on Jewish-ness and Jewish culture as opposed to Judaism. Race, genetics or biology have never been part of my study. If anything, I am critical largely of Jewish secular politics and culture rather than the Jewish religion.”

Your writing is so self-contradictory that I’m sure you can find a quote that will deal with all criticisms, even if your statements are opposed to each other.

You write in your email to me and elsewhere, “Zionism is a dynamic continuation of Jewish-ness: it (Zionism) is racist, exclusive, supremacist and self- centered, yet it is not Judaic. It has very little to do with Judaism. It may be messianic in a territorial sense, yet it lacks the Judaic divinity. In fact, in this sense, Zionism opposes Judaism. (The Wandering Who footnote 46, P’197)

Yet in the same email you write, “However, it is rather obvious and very embarrassing to admit that the Judaic God, as portrayed by Moses in Deuteronomy 6:10, is an immoral and evil God. It is a God who leads his people to plunder, robbery and theft.”

Further down you write “In short, it is actually impossible not to see the continuum between Deuteronomy 6:10 and the crime against the Palestinian people that is committed by the Jewish State in the name of the Jewish people”.

So Jewish ideology is not Judaic, but its roots are to be found in a continuum from Deuteronomy 6:10.

You claim this is an attack on an ideology, not Jews themselves, but I think it’s mental gymnastics. Certainly you admit to hating your own “Jewish ideology”, and when you assert that all those who ascribe to a Jewish identity necessarily have this ideology – it amounts to the same thing.

One could say, as the Catholic Church does, they don’t hate homosexuals, only their behavior, but it is completely disingenuous. Just as the Church is homophobic, your position is anti-Jewish.

Anti-Semitic because even though technically Semites include those from the region, since the late 19th century the term has been used to mean hatred of Jews. So I think Max Blumenthal’s charge is justified.

Do I believe you hate all Jews? No. But your theory leads to that.

I think you are rejecting a vicious form of racism that permeates Israeli society. For that I applaud you. It’s not easy to break with the pressure put on Israelis to fit the mold and give up any independent thinking.

This racism does express itself amongst some people of Jewish origin in North America and elsewhere, who as a result of experiencing the WWII genocide, or in a desperate search for meaning in their lives, or to create business alliances or advance their careers, have latched on to a fictitious poisonous brew cooked up by Zionist leaders to win support for the occupation.

But there are people who identify as Jews around the world, who reject all of this and share most, if not all, of the positions of the Palestinian solidarity movement.

Your “Jewish ideology” also has nothing to do with the brave Israeli Jews who put their lives and freedom on the line working in the solidarity movement, or refuse to join the armed forces, and other forms of resistance. Most of them could leave but choose to stay and fight. They don’t have to renounce their identity as a Jew to denounce the racist nature of the state and call for an end to the occupation.

You have many critics who are activists and Jews in the Palestinian solidarity movement. You seem to have special venom for them, denouncing them as just another form of Zionist ideologues.

But you have also been denounced by leading Palestinians. In a statement of which you must be aware, signed by twenty-three Palestinian activists, it says: “Atzmon’s politics rest on one main overriding assertion that serves as springboard for vicious attacks on anyone who disagrees with his obsession with “Jewishness”. He claims that all Jewish politics is “tribal,” and essentially, Zionist. Zionism, to Atzmon, is not a settler-colonial project, but a trans-historical “Jewish” one, part and parcel of defining one’s self as a Jew. Therefore, he claims, one cannot self-describe as a Jew and also do work in solidarity with Palestine, because to identify as a Jew is to be a Zionist. We could not disagree more. Indeed, we believe Atzmon’s argument is itself Zionist because it agrees with the ideology of Zionism and Israel that the only way to be a Jew is to be a Zionist”. I don’t think these leading Palestinian activists can be accused of basing their critique of you on their “Jewish ideology”.

I’m going to post this letter in the comments section under the Blumenthal interview. As far as you answering Max goes, or responding to this letter, you are free to write a response and have it posted there. But I will not interview you about these issues.

I believe your theories have no historical or factual basis. I share the view that your theories serve Zionist propaganda and divide the solidarity movement. I concur that your thesis is anti-Semitic at its core. I don’t think a debate about these issues is called for or serves any kind of useful intellectual endeavor. I will not get into a drawn out back and forth with you on this.

While I appreciate much of your critique of the Israeli state, your theoretical work on the roots of Zionism is just not a serious analysis.

Your hatred for all things politically left, especially Jewish and left, is superficial and banal. I quote your email to me, “Sadly we have to admit that hate-ridden plunder of other people’s possessions made it into the Jewish political discourse both on the left and right. The Jewish nationalist would rob Palestine in the name of the right of self-determination, the Jewish progressive is there to rob the ruling class and even international capital in the name of world working class revolution. I better stay out of it. “

It’s beyond me how you can’t see that the Israeli state is a product and significant piece of the system of international capital, something you seem anxious to defend from “Progressive Jewish robbers”. Here you reveal your ideological roots as a defender of the “ruling class”.

Your grandfather would have been proud; you describe him in your book as a “. . . veteran Zionist terrorist. A former prominent commander in the right-wing Irgun terror organization”. You write, “More than anything, though, my grandfather hated Jewish leftists”.

When you equate the militarist Zionist state’s occupation of Palestinian lands with those who want a more equitable society, and call them all plunderers who share this “Jewish ideology” – then you also hate Jewish leftists “more than anything”. You hate them more than Zionism and building a united front against it.

Paul Jay
Senior Editor

Mainstream Media and the Truth that Matters is like Father Ted Kicking Bishop Brennan up the Arse

. Father Ted had to kick Bishop Brennan up the arse (as a forfeit for cheating in a football match) he expected to get away with it.He knew that the suggestion he had kicked his excellency up the arse WAS SO UNSPEAKABLE IT COULD NOT POSSIBLY BE TRUE.NO ONE WOULD BELIEVE SUCH AN OUTRAGE COULD POSSIBLY HAVE HAPPENED.And so it proved for a while.In spite of the fact that the exact moment of the event was photographed by Ted’s assistant, Fr. Dougal………in spite of the physical evidence showing at least six inches of Ted’s boot invisible between the cheeks of the good Bishop’s buttocks…….it was safe to say……..IT NEVER HAPPENED.

AND TO MOCK ANYTHING AND ANYONE THAT SUGGESTED OTHERWISE.And thus do the mainstream media treat state-sponsored outrages.There is silence about the devastating physical evidence relating to 9/11, 7/7 and any number of other terrorist hoaxes crafted to promote the neo-Imperialist agenda under the guise of the phoney ‘War on Terror’.

This same silence applies to the fact that the privately-owned parasitic international banksters, being afforded the privilege of creating our money out of nothing, now effectively own our governments also (of course, these financial interests own our entire mainstream media too).

We can also be sure that hell will freeze over (or the system will be overthrown) before physical evidence challenging the existence, in Auschwitz particularly, of human gas chambers during WW2 will be aired and fairly debated in the public domain.It is worth noting that at the end of the aforementioned episode, Bishop Brennan finally realises the truth and kicks Father Ted’s arse up and down the length of Craggy Island.Banksters, media shills

The day will come.

CNN Fabricates President Rouhani’s Words About the Holocaust

News Brief — Sept 26, 2013

First the Western media used a mistranslation of a speech President Ahmadinejad to promote the idea the he wanted to “wipe Israel off the map
Now CNN has been caught fabricating President Rouhani’s replies during an interview with Christiane Amanpour. The passage in question occurs when Christiane Amanpour asks:
“One of the things your predecessor (President Ahmadinejad) used to do from this very platform was deny(ing) the holocaust and pretend(ing) it was a myth, I want to know you, your position on the holocaust, do you accept what it was, and what was it?”
According to Fars News an exact translation of Rouhani’s reply reads:

“I have said before that I am not a historian and historians should specify, state and explain the aspects of historical events, but generally we fully condemn any kind of crime committed against humanity throughout the history, including the crime committed by the Nazis both against the Jews and non-Jews, the same way that if today any crime is committed against any nation or any religion or any people or any belief, we condemn that crime and genocide. Therefore, what the Nazis did is condemned, (but) the aspects that you talk about, clarification of these aspects is a duty of the historians and researchers, I am not a history scholar.”

However CNN’s translation reads:

“I’ve said before that I am not a historian and then, when it comes to speaking of the dimensions of the Holocaust, it is the historians that should reflect on it. But in general I can tell you that any crime that happens in history against humanity, including the crime that Nazis committed towards the Jews as well as non-Jews is reprehensible and condemnable. Whatever criminality they committed against the Jews, we condemn, the taking of human life is contemptible, it makes no difference whether that life is Jewish life, Christian or Muslim, for us it is the same, but taking the human life is something our religion rejects but this doesn’t mean that on the other hand you can say Nazis committed crime against a group now therefore, they must usurp the land of another group and occupy it. This too is an act that should be condemned. There should be an even-handed discussion”.

Fars News notes that the Yellow parts have been added or completely altered. while the Orange parts seem to be the result of conceptual, and imprecise translation.
However, Ms Amanpour should know better. The daughter of an Iranian Muslim father and an English mother, she spent her early years in Iran before leaving to attend boarding school in England aged 11.
Proving her knowledge of Farsi, Ms. Amanpour has appeared in many videos on the internet speaking Persian fluently and then even translating it into English for her audience.
This may just be sloppy journalism but as Fars News notes, CNN has yet to explain the mistranslation or even apologise for it.
Although it won’t have anywhere near the same impact as the now notorious “wipe Israel off the map” mistranslation it shows how the Western corporate media works. They are literally putting words into President Rouhani’s mouth and calling it news. Presenting an entirely fictitious account of events as factual reporting.


Millions of private details are being swapped between Government agencies every year, including your name, birth date, income, IRD number, citizenship, travel plans, ACC claims, home address and phone numbers. The list goes on.

This New Zealand Herald interactive graphic maps out the different relationships between each department, what information they share and the reasons why.

Hover over each link to find out what they know about you.

Have Your Say! Rate This Film!
Rating: 4.7/5 (78 votes cast)

UD admin note: This is a fascinating look at one of the most lied about periods in the history of mankind.  It has a some controversial content.  A friend advised me not to post it, saying it was too objectionable.  The film maker takes a neutral  to pro-Hitler stance.  In keeping with our motto, “Free movies, free minds, free speech,” I’ve decided to post it and ask that “You watch, you decide.”

This documentary chronicles the rise of Germany from defeat in WWI, communist attempts to take over Germany, hyperinflation during the Weimar Republic, widespread unemployment and misery, and Hitler’s rise to power.

It also reveals a personal side of Adolf Hitler – who he was, his family background, his artwork and struggles in Vienna and what motivated him to come to power.

There’s too much hidden history to recount here – FDR Pearl Harbor conspiracy, Soviet brutality, the root causes of WWII, etc.  You will have to watch, do your own research, and decide what to believe.

10/13/13 Update:

This is the filmmakers new website:

Originally posted on Floating-voter:


French Court Orders Google to Take Mosley S/M Photos Offline

Kurt Nimmo

Privilege has its perks. For instance, the privilege enjoyed by Max Mosely, a former barrister and president of the Fédération Internationale de l’Automobile.

On Wednesday, A French court ordered Google to remove several embarrassing images of Mosely from its search engine. The images in question show the Formula One boss engaged in sadomasochistic acts during an orgy held in 2008. The now defunct British tabloid, News of the World, posted the images alongside an article describing the incident as a “sick Nazi orgy.”

“Although we initially thought it was the world’s zaniest April Fool’s joke, we were wrong,” Wes Siler wrote for the website Jolopink in March, 2008. “Sick and wrong. During the five-hour video, which the tabloid also has in possession… Mosley appears to be both dominated and submitting to the five hookers, who NOTW alleges…

View original 19,775 more words

That world famous Jewish sense of humour…

  • larry 640

Jewish Jokes about Goyim & God


Q:  Why were gentiles invented?

A:  Somebody has to pay retail.

Some Jewish jokes elucidate themes
that explain our reality. 

Jokes suggest some Jews think God is a wily businessman they cannot outfox.

by Henry Makow Ph.D. 

Jews love Jewish jokes as much as anyone. Many focus on how money-minded Jews are supposed to be. I love this Woody Allen one-liner: “See this pocket watch? My grandfather sold it to me on his deathbed.”

Recently, I read some jokes meant for Jewish eyes only. They came from a Chapter “Jacob and Esau” in “Jewish Wit and Wisdom” published in 1952. Many reflected the traditional Jewish-Gentile relationship down through the centuries. The first one emphasized the view that Jews are smarter than others.

A rich man left his fortune to his three friends, an Irishman, a German and a Jew. The only stipulation was that each had to put a $100 bill in his coffin just before it was lowered into the ground. At the funeral, the Irishman and the German both gladly fulfilled their obligation. Then it was the Jew’s turn. He picked up the two hundred dollar bills and left a cheque for $300 in the coffin!

This is fairly benign compared to what came next.

Two Jews, one from London and one from a small shtetl (village) in Poland met at a spa in Germany. The Londoner asked his Polish friend how many Jews were in his village. 700. And how many goyim? 45. And what do the Jews do? They are artisans and shopkeepers and traders. And the goyim?  “They make themselves useful to the Jews. They sweep out the stores and on Sabbath make the fires and remove the candlesticks.”

Then, it was the Pole’s turn. On learning there were 200,000 Jews in London, and seven million goyim, he quite rightly inquired, “What do you need so many goyim for?”

This story nicely illustrates the parochial quality of many Jews. Is it good or bad for the Jews? is a common reflex. Call it a “self-referential” quality, where the world revolves around them, and they create reality according to their prejudices and self-interest. (Is it a coincidence that the mass media and Hollywood are dominated by these “reality-creators?” And they have used this power to divert gentiles from the diabolical Judeo Masonic conspiracy?) This Jewish “solipsism” now passes as “Modernism.”


In his book, Sex and Character (1903), the Jewish philosopher Otto Weininger, left, labeled it “subjectivity” and compared Jews with some women, saying neither are able to see situations objectively, or in moral terms. Everything is a reflection of their emotion, vanity and self-interest. Have you noticed that people in general are becoming more selfish and self-centered as Christian influence fades?

The joke also reminds me that while Jews have convinced themselves and the world they are the victims of irrational “hate,” the Talmud tells us the hate originates somewhere within Jewish ranks. The rest of us cannot conceive that certain people would set themselves up in opposition to the human race and actually succeed.  

The notion that the goyim will serve “the Jews” motivates the Illuminati in general. (The Illuminati include Freemasonry.) This explains why the human race is kept in a state of arrested development, in a perpetual adolescence. This is why there is no common effort to lift humanity to a higher spiritual and mental plane. On the contrary, the general effort is directed at degrading, re-engineering and indoctrinating it for permanent servitude.


The following joke (from Wikipedia) illustrates that Judaism may be deficient as a religion. You cannot have religion without God.

Two Rabbis argued late into the night about the existence of God, and, using strong arguments from the scriptures, ended up indisputably disproving His existence. The next day, one Rabbi was surprised to see the other walking into the Shul for morning services. “I thought we had agreed there was no God,” he said. “Yes, what does that have to do with it?” replied the other.

Many observers have noted that Judaism is about empty observance and conformity rather than a living relationship with God. Arthur Koestler famously said “Judaism teaches Jews how to cheat God.” The following stories suggest some Jews think God is a wily businessman they  cannot outfox.   This is from Wikipedia.

A poor man walking in the forest feels close enough to God to ask, “God, what is a million years to you?
God replies, “My son, a million years to you is like a second to me.”
The man asks, “God, what is a million dollars to you?”
God replies, “My son, a million dollars to you is less than a penny to me. It means almost nothing to me.
“The man asks, “So God, can I have a million dollars?”
And God replies, “In a second.”

I found this last one (from the book, p.361) quite shocking:

A Jew buys a lottery ticket and goes to the synagogue where he promises God that he will donate a new scroll if he wins. When he fails to win, he exclaims “the Jewish God is no  businessman,” and goes to the Christian church where he promises to pay for a new roof.
He wins a large prize but welches on his promise. Instead he returns to the synagogue where he praises the Jewish God in these terms: “You knew all along that I wont keep my promise so you ignored me. But the Christian God naively believed me. After all, there is no God like the Jewish God.” 

These stories suggest that some Jews have created God in their own image. They are their own God.  Unfortunately, their God has become ours.


Makow – The Jewish Banker Conspiracy –

———- The Illuminati Reality Bubble 

——–  How Kulture is Contrived

——— Jews and the Devil 

——–  Confessions of an Ex-Luciferian Jew

NPR Can’t Stop Talking About Jews 

Watch Obama Pay Tribute to Zionist Gods  (Bro Nataniel) 

Israeli Talk Show – What the Israelis Really Think About Christians


Edited by Elias Harb

This video is one more example of the racism that exists in Israel. Israeli forces and settlers have on numerous occasions attacked mosques and Christian holy sites in the occupied Palestinian territories.
The violations of human rights is unprecedented,  racism is widespread against both Christians and Muslims, even harsher in Palestinian occupied territories, where Palestinians are subjected to humiliating military checkpoints, targeted assassinations, house demolitions, ethnic cleansing, curfews and an Apartheid wall.

WARNING!!! Explicit and offensive anti-Christian material contained


 From the show “Toffee VeHa-Gorillah” – WARNING!!! Explicit and offensive anti-Christian material contained.

Video  embedding was disabled by request. YouTube must have disabled it. Please click on link and you can see video  in YouTube.

Show host to monkey depicting Jesus on the cross – “You are a Nazi, Yeshu (Jesus), you are a Nazi”.

by: Tim King /

(SALEM) - So, a slutty Israeli TV show features a chick in a skimpy bikini mocking Jesus Christ by showing him as a stupid looking monkey hanging on a cross. Then using the ‘f’ word, she proceeds to tell Jewish viewers that Christians, we ‘goyam’, are ‘dangerous’ toward Jews. From there, it gets much worse.

We aren’t making this up; this is Israeli television being widely viewed today. The show is called, “The History Program of Toffee the Gorilla”. Anyone who advocates for this should not write a comment, instead they should consider ripping their heart out and sticking it in a jar; it would have equal purpose and someday we could study it and perhaps determine what the hell is wrong with you)

Host: “I came to talk about the highlights of the history of the Jewish people – from times past until today. Today we will learn about he crucifixion of Yeshu. Have you heard about Yeshu?”

Monkey: “I’ve heard he’s an honorable person”

Host: “No, Yeshu was an enemy of the Jewish people. He attempted to convert us all into Christians. Although there are good Christians, to the Jew this is a terrible danger, a threat to the peace of the Jewish people”.

Monkey: “I want to assimilate”.

Host: Do you even know what it is to assimilate? It means to get fucked up with a goyah; this is something that neither me or you, obviously, want.

(Later in the show, the host tells the monkey that if he really wants to understand Jesus, he would have to act out the scene. Soon the mockery of Christ goes into third gear, as she gets out a hammer and literally nails the monkey to the cross.”)

Monkey yells: “My God, Why have you forsaken me?”

He is screaming, further mocking the agony of Jesus as he was crucified. Then she tells the Jesus Monkey.

Host: “You are a Nazi, Yeshu (Jesus), you are a Nazi”.

So all of you who tell me how bad I am for the articles I write about Israel, let’s hear your defense for this one. Come on, you guys who wrote all of that horrible shit last week about the murder of our friend Vittorio Arrigoni in Gaza, and the week before about the murder of Juliano Mer-Khamis in Jenin.

Let’s hear your thoughts on your comrade who decimates any hint of respect for my faith and the faith of many good people. Once again, most sadly, I am sorry for my Jewish friends who are indirectly represented by insanity like this. Just remember that it is extremely indirect.

Welcome to Israel, where American tax dollars support this kind of scummy broadcast. Honestly I think we are bigger sluts than Israel on many occasions, but this one takes the cake.

And by the way all you Israel fans, we have this pathetic clip of your whorish talk show host downloaded and trust me that if it goes down the Google hole, that it will spring back up all over the place, so you might as well leave it alone.

Did I mention what Israel needs to really do with that monkey?

Nazi jokes get Brand booted from awards party

British comedian Russell Brand [Jewish] has been kicked out of the GQ Awards afterparty after cracking jokes about Nazis.

Brand was picking up the Oracle of the Year prize at the annual ceremony in London on Tuesday when he took a shot at the evening’s sponsors Hugo Boss, the German fashion firm which produced uniforms worn by Adolf Hitler’s troops during World War II.

He said, “If any of you know a little bit about history and fashion, you’ll know it was Hugo Boss (who) made the uniforms for the Nazis. The Nazis did have flaws, but they did look f**king fantastic, let’s face it, while they were killing people on the basis of their religion and sexuality!”

Later in his speech, Brand placed a finger under his nose to impersonate Hitler, joking, “I’m a comedian and it’s my job to make jokes about things. Hugo Boss, it’s fair enough, he might not have known! “We’re selling a lot of these f**king (uniforms), they’re flying off the shelves!’ Don’t take life too seriously, soon we’ll all be in the grave. Oh f**k!”

Organisers reportedly had Brand ejected from the star-studded aftershow event, but the controversial comic took to to defend himself, relaying the conversation he had with GQ magazine’s editor Dylan Jones.

He wrote, “GQ editor: ‘What you did was very offensive to Hugo Boss.’ Me: `What Hugo Boss did was very offensive to the Jews.’ GQAwards nazitailor.”

‘Curb Your Enthusiasm’: Larry David Urinates on Picture of Jesus

HBO’s hit series “Curb Your Enthusiasm” has pushed the comedic envelope for many years, but what happened in Sunday’s episode was so disgraceful it’s already received comment from the Catholic League’s Bill Donohue.

The set-up is the show’s star and producer Larry David is taking some medication that is making him urinate quite forcefully.

It’s so powerful that while urinating in his assistant’s bathroom, he accidentally splashed some of it on a picture of Jesus Christ hanging on a nearby wall.

This prompted the following response from Donohue (video embedded below the fold h/t Big Hollywood):

At one point in the show, David goes to the bathroom in a Catholic home and splatters urine on a picture of Jesus; he doesn’t clean it off. Then a Catholic woman goes to the bathroom, sees the picture and concludes that Jesus is crying. She then summons her equally stupid mother and the two of them fall to their knees in prayer. When David and Jerry Seinfeld (playing himself) are asked if they ever experienced a miracle, David answers, “every erection is a miracle.” That’s what passes for creativity these days.

Was Larry David always this crude? Would he think it comedic if someone urinated on a picture of his mother? This might be fun to watch, but since HBO only likes to dump on Catholics (it was just a couple of weeks ago that Sarah Silverman insulted Catholics on “Real Time with Bill Maher“), and David is Jewish, we’ll never know.

A Big Hollywood reader sent an e-mail message to the website asking an interesting question:

Of course, the hypocrisy is that Mr. David would never exhibit such gross contempt for any other religion, especially Islam. Can you imagine the s**t storm that would follow if David pissed on a painting of the prophet Muhammad? Of course, HBO, the complicit scum that they are, would not have allowed that to air.

No, likely not.

Larry David Blasted for ‘Curb’ Episode Where He Urinates on Jesus Painting

Comedian Larry David is under attack from critics who say he pushed the mocking of religion and Christian belief in miracles over the edge in the latest episode of his HBO series “Curb Your Enthusiasm,” which the cable network defended as “playful.”On the show’s most recent installment, which aired Sunday, David urinates on a painting of Jesus Christ, causing a woman to believe the painting depicts Jesus crying.Deal Hudson, author and publisher of, said he doesn’t find any humor in the episode.”I don’t think it’s funny,” Hudson told “Why is it that people are allowed to publicly show that level of disrespect for Christian symbols? If the same thing was done to a symbol of any other religions — Jewish or Muslim — there’d be a huge outcry. It’s simply not a level playing field.”Hudson said an apology from the show’s producers and writing team should be issued.”Somebody should [apologize],” Hudson said. “When is it going to stop? When is common sense going to dictate that people realize this willingness of artists to do to Christianity what they would never do to Judaism or Islam?”In a statement to, HBO downplayed the controversy.”Anyone who follows Curb Your Enthusiasm knows that the show is full of parody and satire,” the statement read. “Larry David makes fun of everyone, most especially himself.  The humor is always playful and certainly never malicious.”Bill Donohue, president of the Catholic League, also criticized the episode, saying David should “quit while he’s ahead,” and that the show is proof that the comedian’s best years are behind him.”Was Larry David always this crude? Would he think it’s comedic if someone urinated on a picture of his mother?” Donohue said in a statement. “This might be fun to watch, but since HBO only likes to dump on Catholics (it was just a couple of weeks ago that Sarah Silverman insulted Catholics on ‘Real Time with Bill Maher‘) and David is Jewish, we’ll never know.”During Sunday’s episode, David, who created, wrote and produced “Seinfeld,” visits a bathroom in his assistant’s home and splatters urine on a picture of Jesus. Instead of wiping it off, David leaves the restroom. Minutes later, David’s assistant enters the bathroom and concludes that Jesus is crying. She then summons her mother to the bathroom, where both women kneel in prayer.”When David and Jerry Seinfeld (playing himself) are asked if they ever experienced a miracle, David answers, ‘every erection is a miracle,’ Donohue’s statement continued. “That’s what passes for creativity these days.”The episode, “The Bare Midriff,” primarily revolves around David’s assistant and her belly-revealing attire. According to the show’s Web site, a “new pill” increased David’s urine flow, leading to the “misunderstanding about a miraculously weeping Jesus.”HBO promoted the controversial scene on the show’s site, complete with a “squirm-o-meter” that ranked the urine incident ahead of David’s confronting his assistant about her exposed midriff.

Larry David Pees on Picture of Christ. Another Comic Goes Christian Bashing

Larry David has seen some high times in his life. Seinfeld comes to mind. But it’s been a long run since then. Nothing near as popular as Seinfeld has come from Larry David in recent years. Mr. David may have reached a new low. On his show “Curb your Enthusiasm” he is depicted taking a pee, with a strong, forceful stream shall we say. A picture of Jesus is hanging nearby that gets splashed by urine. He stares at it and leaves it. Next to use the potty room is a young gal who sees the pee on Jesus’ face and thinks she’s seen a miracle. A lot of laughs so far? Peeing on a picture of Jesus..not funny Larry David. Not funny. ( See video here if they haven’t taken it down already.)If you’re a comic and cannot get a good honest laugh, I guess the next step is just to draw your 15 minutes of fame by having people talk about how despicable you are. Larry David is not a Christian. What he did is not Christ-like. The curiosity of why comics like Larry David choose to pick on Christians and not Muslims is not a mystery. Larry David would think heaven itself had fallen on him if he had used a picture of the prophet Muhammad instead of Jesus to urinate on.. Larry David is either a coward or afraid his head would be separated from his neck if he had done so.There is always a Larry David around. The disappointing thing is that Christians are counted as fair game to be openly laughed at, mocked and have their savior ridiculed and defiled. Had the picture been of a gay, a black, a Muslim or a woman..would HBO have aired it? No.What’s a Christian to do about Larry David? At first glance, I’d love to see him sued. But, it’s Larry David that gets to meet with Jesus, our Lord and Savior, when he has taken his last breath. Christ himself declared that we, as Christians, would be treated badly. Stay true to your faith as Christians. Don’t apologize for being a Christian. When things like this happen, find your voice.Larry David tried to be funny at the expense of Jesus and at the expense of Christians. Christians are a tough bunch, I dare say Larry David has no idea how tough. Christians are not meant to be anyone’s doormat. And Larry David is like a gnat. He’s irritating. Not funny..but irritating.
I’d like to see Larry David make jokes about this:

Two more babies stricken with herpes after ritual ultra-orthodox Jewish oral blood sucking circumcision in New York City

  • Since 2000 13 known cases of herpes have been contracted from the religious practice
  • Two deaths and two babies suffering brain damage have resulted
  • Department of health warns there being no safe way to perform the ritual that dates back more than 5,000 years

Read more:

Fry Up

By Gilad Atzmon

In my latest book The Wandering Who, I explore the ideological, spiritual and political continuum between Jewish identity politics and gay theory. Yesterday, Stephen Fry, a British gay Jewish playwright and celebrity, provided us with an opportunity to review the tight political and spiritual affinity between Jewish identity politics and the LGBT call.

In An Open Letter to PM David Cameron and the International Olympic Committee, Fry equated Putin’s anti gay policy with Hitler’s Jewish hatred.  Fry’s argument deserves some attention.
Hitler, says Fry “banned Jews from academic tenure or public office, he made sure that the police turned a blind eye to any beatings, thefts or humiliations afflicted on them, he burned and banned books written by them. He claimed they ‘polluted’ the purity and tradition of what it was to be German…”
According to Fry, “Putin is eerily repeating this insane crime, only this time against LGBT Russians. Beatings, murders and humiliations are ignored by the police. Any defence or sane discussion of homosexuality is against the law.“
Historical analogies are dangerous territory, especially when the necessary and even elementary scholarship is lacking. Needless to say that I oppose any form of abuse of human right against Jews, LGBTs, Palestinians or anyone else. However, I also oppose the emerging lame culture of sound bites and empty slogans in which Fry is, unfortunately, a leading exponent.
Fry, for the obvious reasons, avoids the most necessary question – what is it that led to the dreadful treatment of Jews in the 3rd Reich?  Far from being surprising, he also avoids a similar question when it comes to Putin’s antagonism towards LGBT. And in fact, if we really want to fight oppression, these are the most crucial questions to ask and tackle.  I would argue that the difference between holocaust scholarship and proper history is that holocaust studies are mainly concerned with the study of the suffering (itself) while history attempts to grasp the events that brought the suffering into existence.
The Jews who want to prevent Jewish future suffering must look closely into the repeated circumstances that made Jewish history into a chain of Shoas. They should read Bernard Lazare’s ‘Anti-Semitism, It’s History and Causes’ instead of reading Anne Frank or the Jewish Chronicle. Similarly, gay theoreticians should examine critically what is it exactly that the Russians oppose in the LGBT discourse. Is it possible that the Putin regards LGBT as a form of crude Western intervention?Maybe Stephen Fry should answer this question before he is lobbying again for an international boycott.

If Fry is truly interested in historical analogies, surely he can detect a similarity between his own call to boycott Russia and the famous 1933 Judea call for war against Germany.[1]
I am not impressed with Fry’s historical analogy but may I suggest to the playwright that more than a few historians actually connect between the 1933 Jewish call for boycott against Germany and the Jewish suffering to follow. I am pretty sure that Fry wouldn’t like to be associated as a catalyst in any future suffering of the Russian LGBTs.
Zionists tend to compare their enemies with Hitler – Saddam Hussein, MahmoudAhmadinejad and Yassir Arafat all ended up equated with Hitler.  Fry, the humanist celebrity activist is doing exactly the same to Putin. “He (Putin) is making scapegoats of gay people, just as Hitler did Jews.”   Is it a coincidence that Fry is using the exact Hasbara tactics?
Many agree that Putin’s anti gay policy is problematic and inacceptable; yet, it is the exact Western interventionist philosophy that Fry exhibits in his call for boycott, that actually fuels Russian intolerance and leads to such policy.
Fry says about himself  “I am gay. I am a Jew. My mother lost over a dozen of her family to Hitler’s anti-Semitism. Every time in Russia a gay teenager is forced into suicide, a lesbian ‘correctively’ raped, …the world is diminished and I for one, weep anew at seeing history repeat itself.” I feel for Fry and respect his concern, yet I wonder whether Fry also weeps at Bernard Henri Levy’s call for moral interventionist wars  ‘as a Jew’; When Wolfowitz ‘liberated’ the Iraqi people (as a Ziocon). How does Mr Fry feel when he learns about the repeated crimes committed by the Jewish State in his name? How does he feel when his own people are raping the Palestinian soil, hearts and minds?


Adam Broomberg & Oliver Chanarin’s Holy Bible – in pictures

This year’s Deutsche Börse prizewinners have published a new work, The Holy Bible, inspired by Berthold Brecht’s own annotated Bible. The work is illustrated with pictures from the Archive of Modern Conflict

London-based duo Adam Broomberg and Oliver Chanarin praised for their work War Primer 2, which uses montage to comment on photography’s role in the ‘war on terror’

At first glance, artists Adam Broomberg and Oliver Chanarin‘s new work,The Holy Bible, looks just like an old-fashioned Bible: a black cover with a title embossed in gold. Inside, though, many of the pages of holy writ have been overlaid with photographs that refer obliquely to specific passages or words underlined in red.

A few thunderously violent lines from Exodus – “… lie for lie. Eye for eye, tooth for tooth … wound for wound, life for life” – are illustrated by an image of an atomic bomb’s mushroom cloud. A black-and-white photo of a couple kissing, meanwhile, refers to “My lips … My tongue … my delight” from Psalms. Each time the line “And it shall come to pass” appears (which is often), it is accompanied by shots of circus performers or magicians.

So far, so conceptual, and so in keeping with Broomberg and Chanarin’s previous book, War Primer 2, a reworking of Bertolt Brecht’s original War Primer, in which Brecht matched photographs of war and conflict to a series of his own short poems. War Primer 2, which puts Brecht’s original texts against images from the war on terror won the 2013 Deutsche Börse photography prize last night and was hailed by judges as a “bold and powerful” reimagining.

With The Holy Bible project, though, the choice of both text and images is altogether more problematic and may be seen by some as wilfully provocative, indeed blasphemous. The phrase “arrows drunk with blood” (Deuteronomy 34:32), for instance, is accompanied by a graphic photograph of the blood-soaked corpses of two young women. A shocking image of Holocaust concentration camp victims, their bodies piled in a heap, is linked to the words “princes of the congregation” (Joshua 9:15) . Then, there is Broomberg and Chanarin’s appropriation of the already infamous photograph of a Palestinian child dressed as a suicide bomber which, here, is linked to the lines “As is the mother, (so is) her daughter” (Ezekiel 16:44).

Elsewhere, there is a pornographic portrait of a naked young man with an erection and others of couples having sex, as well as photographs of suicide victims, Nazis in uniform, deformities and disfigurements. All of the photographs come from the Archive of Modern Conflict, a vast private collection of found photography housed in London. Broomberg and Chanarin’s bible will perhaps come as no surprise to those who have followed the trajectory of their politically-fuelled, often provocative, work thus far. Should it travel beyond the borders of contemporary art, though, where this kind of appropriation and re-contextualising is common practice, it will almost certainly offend Christians of every hue.

“The book includes some images that are undoubtedly violent and shocking,” says Chanarin, “We did debate whether or not to shy away from these images, but, after all, they exist within the archive and elsewhere, even if we don’t like to look at them. The artist, Thomas Hirschhorn, has argued that images of destroyed bodies need to be looked at. It is our duty to look at them. We also see the inclusion of these types of images in our bible as an antidote to the way in which mainstream media is horribly controlled and sanitised. In fact, our illustrated bible is broadly about photography and its preoccupation with catastrophe.”

Alongside Jeremy Deller, Broomberg and Chanarin are arguably the most politically engaged artists working in Britain today“We are more interested in the world than the art world,” they told one interviewer recently. They first collaborated as photographers while working for the groundbreaking Colors magazine in the early 1990s, where post-modernism practice and reportage existed in an uneasy alliance, and have worked together ever since. Whereas War Primer 2 questioned the role of contemporary photography “in the images generated by both sides of the so-called war on terror”, the subtext of The Holy Bible is power. Broomberg describes the project as “drawing a parallel between a holy book that is so linked with power and photography, a medium that possesses this extraordinary, often unscrutinised, power.”

Once again, the starting point for the project was Brecht, whose own personal bible they came across in his archive while researching War Primer 2. It has a photograph of a racing car stuck to the cover. “The curator let us look more closely at this sparingly illustrated book,” says Chanarin, “and we realised that, when Brecht had run out of notebooks, he’d paste clippings from the popular press into it, and make small annotations. We can safely say this planted the seed of the project.”

The other perhaps more important touchstone for the project is the essay that provides the afterword: Divine Violence by the Israeli-born contemporary philosopher Adi Ophir, which draws a direct parallel between the violence of the bible and the violence of “the modern state … a multi-apparatus that strives to control everything it contains and to contain everything it can control.” Broomberg says: “We chose the bible because we were in communication with Adi and his text morally and politically shaped the project. The bible is his main concern and his reading of it – that the book is a parable for modern governance and its relation to catastrophe or punishment – rang true with our understating of the world but also of photography and its relation to power, to war, to catastrophe.”

Broomberg, who grew up in South Africa and attended what he calls “a right wing Zionist-based school” as a child, adds: “The Bible has informed my life, but when I read Adi’s essay, it blew my mind as a political reading of the book. Until then, I had never looked at it in that way. His contention is that the book is so linked with power that it is a parable for, and indeed a model of, modern governance.”

Are they worried that the book might, like the Bible itself, take on a life of its own? “Well, if you you actually read the Old Testament from cover to cover you notice very quickly that God reveals himself through acts of catastrophe, through violence, “says Chanarin, “Awful things keep happening, a flood that just about wipes out most of his creation, the destruction of Sodom and Gomorra. We constantly witness death on an epic scale and the victims hardly ever know what they have done to deserve such retribution.” He adds, “I do hope people make the connection between Adi Ophir’s reading of the Bible and our project and to the fact that the camera has always been drawn to these themes, to sites of human suffering. Since it’s inception it has been used to record but also participate in catastrophic events.”

Broomberg concurs: “The Bible itself could be considered highly offensive and provocative. All we’re doing is equating its violent project with the violent project of photography. We also hope this helps reactivate the text – we haven’t seen many people reading it of late.”

Stand Up Comedy about Religion

Posted on October 6, 2013 by 

Newspaper forced to apologize over anti-Semitic clue in crossword puzzle

  • Tribune Media Services newspapers printed a crossword clue where the three-letter answer for Shakespeare’s ‘Shylock’ was ‘Jew’
  • In response the Anti-Defamation League asked the paper to print an apology and refrain from using clues that perpetuate negative Jewish stereotypes
  • The paper issued an apology and promised not to print the clue again


A Chicago-based newspaper syndicate issued an apology to the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) after being accused of publishing an anti-Semitic crossword clue.

Tribune Media Services printed a clue asking for a three-letter word meaning Shakespeare’s ‘Shylock’ from Merchant of Venice. The answer, ‘Jew.’

In response the ADL quickly issued a statement urging the paper to print an apology and refrain from writing future puzzle clues the perpetuate negative cultural stereotypes.

Tribune Media Services issued an apology for printed a crossword clue in which the three-letter answer of 'Shylock' was 'Jew.'Tribune Media Services issued an apology for printed a crossword clue in which the three-letter answer of ‘Shylock’ was ‘Jew.’ Seen here Al Pacino portrays Shakespeare’s Shylock in the 2004 Merchant of Venice film

In a press statement issued shortly after the puzzle’s publication, the ADL reprimanded the syndicate for ‘perpetuat[ing] classic anti-Semitic stereotypes of Jews as evil and money-hungry,’ and asked they print an apology.

In his letter Abraham H. Foxman, the National Director of the ADL wrote, ‘Perhaps the puzzle authors were unaware of the use of Shakespeare’s Shylock character throughout the years as a vehicle for antisemitism.’

He continued, ‘Selecting Shylock to elicit the answer ‘Jew’ demonstrates cultural ignorance and an extreme lack of sensitivity. Even if done inadvertently, such a linkage perpetuates classic antisemitic stereotypes of Jews as evil and money-hungry.’

Abraham H. Foxman, director of the Anti-Defamation League, asked the newspaper to issue an apology for the crossword clue Abraham H. Foxman, director of the Anti-Defamation League, asked the newspaper to issue an apology for the crossword clue

In Shakespeare’s play Shylock is a money lender, who when the character of Antonio defaults on his loan, demands a pound of flesh from him.

The newspaper printed an apology for the clue, according to a report from The Jewish Press.

The public apology, which was printed in the Sunday papers, came from managing editor Mary Elson.

Elson wrote, ‘The puzzle should not have been distributed with that clue, and we apologize for the offense it caused. The issue has been discussed with the creators and editors involved, and the clue will not be used again in a Tribune Media Services crossword,’ according to a report by Arutz Sheva.

In their complaint the ADL attested that Shylock (played her by Patrick Stewart), a Jewish money lender in The Merchant of Venice, has been used a negative Jewish stereotype for yearsIn their complaint the ADL attested that Shylock (played her by Patrick Stewart), a Jewish money lender in The Merchant of Venice, has been used a negative Jewish stereotype for years

The Tribune added that it, ‘is very sensitive to racial or cultural references in the content we distribute and regret that this slipped through,’ The Jewish Press reported.

Foxman responded in kind, commending the Tribune for their ‘swift action in response.’

‘They have made clear to us that they understood this was an offensive stereotype, and that the Shylock clue should never have made it into the puzzle,’ Foxman said in a statement.

The ADL also received an apology from the crossword editor of the Los Angeles Times, another national outlet that printed the crossword, the statement attests.

The paper apologized for using 'Shylock,' portrayed here in 1989 by Dustin Hoffman, in the puzzle and any offense they causedThe paper apologized for using ‘Shylock,’ portrayed here in 1989 by Dustin Hoffman, in the puzzle and any offense they caused

However, in an interview with Tablet Magazine, Barry Edelstein, Shakespearean expert and Artistic Director of the Old Globe Theater in San Diego, argued against the merits of the ADL’s complaint on theatrical grounds.

Edelstein, who is currently directing his third production of Merchant of Venice this summer, told Tablet, ‘As a Jew and not any kind of an expert [on anti-Semitism], I think this is a case of the ADL and Foxman defining anti-Antisemitism down.’

‘I just don’t agree that this crossword puzzle clue rises to the level of noxious anti-Antisemitism.’

Edelstein cited moments from the play supporting the veracity of the crossword clue, including that at one point Shylock takes to center stage and speaks the line ‘I am a Jew.’

‘I just don’t find it offensive,’ Edelstein said to the online magazine, ‘in fact, I find it kind of innocuous. If the answer had been ‘bloodsucker’ then that’s a different case. But this seems to me, if you’ll pardon the Shakespeare line, ‘a tempest in a teapot.”

Sarah Silverman considering Christian prostitute role in upcoming Seth MacFarlane western

The comedian may be the next to join a star-studded cast that includes Amanda Seyfried and Charlize Theron

Seth MacFarlane, king of offensiveness satire, is currently casting his undoubtedly irreverent western, “A Million Ways to Die,” which already has big names like Amanda Seyfried, Charlize Theron and Liam Neeson attached to it. And the Hollywood Reporter has the scoop that the bawdy Sarah Silverman might join the cast — playing a Christian prostitute.

From THR:

” ‘A Million Ways to Die’ follows a cowardly sheep farmer (MacFarlane) who chickens out of a gunfight and sees his girlfriend (Seyfried) leave him for another man. When a mysterious woman (Theron) rides into town, she helps him find his courage. But when her outlaw husband (Neeson) arrives seeking revenge, the farmer must put his newfound courage to the test.

Sources say Silverman would play the town’s well-worn prostitute, who engages in all sorts of lewd activities but refuses to have sex with her fiancé (Ribisi), believing that as Christians the couple should wait until marriage before lying down together.”

A Jewish ‘Christian prostitute’?

Sarah Silverman may take the role in a new film opposite controversial Oscars host Seth MacFarlane

Sarah Silverman attends a San Francisco gay pride parade. (photo credit: CC-BY Piyush.k, Flickr)

Sarah Silverman attends a San Francisco gay pride parade. (photo credit: CC-BY Piyush.k, Flickr)

The actress and former bed wetter is in talks to play a God-fearing sex worker in a new comedy: The role, as described by the Hollywood Reporter, is a “well-worn prostitute . . . who engages in all sorts of lewd activities but refuses to have sex with her fiancé . . . believing that as Christians the couple should wait until marriage before lying down together.”

The part would be in “A Million Ways To Die in the West,” the second film by Seth MacFarlane, who angered some viewers last month with his Jewish jokes (among even more controversial bits) at the Oscars.

In addition to MacFarlane, the film will star Charlize Theron and Liam Neeson. The story revolves around a cowardly sheep farmer and his romantic troubles.



Very strong humanist worldview with standup comic acting like a bigot in order to (very weakly) poke fun at prejudice, with very strong anti-Christian and anti-religious attitudes and elements such as woman says her Catholic boyfriend believes “Jesus is magic,” female comic says she’s a Jew who would kill Christ again, and female comic obscenely makes fun of the song “Amazing Grace” by holding the microphone next to her private parts and her rear end, as well as some references to homosexuality and a few politically correct moments; 52 obscenities (including many “f” words, two strong profanities, two light profanities, blasphemous jokes about Jesus and God, some racial epithets, and strong, brief sexual talk; no violence depicted but two black men look menacing at woman who says the “N” word and talk about Hitler killing Jews, and Jews killing Christ; strong, crude verbal references to sex; no nudity; no alcohol; no apparent smoking of cigarettes but woman smokes something out of a bong backstage; and, strong miscellaneous immorality and potentially offensive material such as strong racist elements in a weak attempt to be funny and outrageous, jokes about the Holocaust and female comic says, “When God gives you AIDS, make Lemon-AIDS.”


SARAH SILVERMAN: JESUS IS MAGIC is mostly a filmed concert of one of standup comic Sarah Silverman’s lewd shows. It is an extremely obscene and offensive show that weakly pokes fun at everything, including minorities and Christianity.


SARAH SILVERMAN: JESUS IS MAGIC is mostly a filmed concert of one of standup comic Sarah Silverman’s lewd shows. The movie opens, however, with a fictional prologue where Sarah talks with two friends, who describe all the projects they are doing. Jealous, Sarah lies and tells them that she has a one-woman show that very night, and the friends cajole her to let them watch backstage. After they leave, Sarah sings about trying to write a whole show and arrange a performance in one day. That night, she performs her standup routine, which includes many crude ethnic jokes.In this concert film, Sarah Silverman tries to make fun of ethnic prejudice by acting like she’s an ignorant, conceited bigot herself, but it mostly comes across as just offensive. This is doubly true because she often uses foul language. The few clean and innocent jokes turn out to be the funniest ones, but they are very few. Silverman also mocks Christianity several times, saying at one point that her Catholic boyfriend believes that “Jesus is magic.” She even makes jokes about Jews killing Christ, admitting that she’s Jewish and saying “I’d do it again.” Her act also includes some Holocaust jokes. The worldview Silverman presents is a sarcastic humanist one poking fun at virtually everything, including herself. She is an equal opportunity offender.

In Brief:

SARAH SILVERMAN: JESUS IS MAGIC is mostly a filmed concert of one of standup comic Sarah Silverman’s lewd shows. The movie opens with a fictional prologue where Sarah talks with two friends, who describe all the projects they are doing. Jealous, Sarah lies and tells them she has a one-woman show that very night, and the friends cajole her to let them watch backstage. After they leave, Sarah sings about trying to write a whole show and arrange a performance in one day. That night, she performs her standup routine, which includes many crude ethnic jokes.Sarah Silverman tries to make fun of ethnic prejudice by acting like she’s an ignorant, conceited bigot, but it mostly comes across as offensive. This is doubly true because she often uses foul language. The few clean and innocent jokes turn out to be the funniest ones, but they are very few. Silverman also mocks Christianity several times, saying at one point that her Catholic boyfriend believes that “Jesus is magic.” Her act also includes some Holocaust jokes. Silverman’s worldview is a sarcastic humanist one poking fun at virtually everything, including herself. She is an equal opportunity offender

Sacha Baron Cohen settles with Palestinian he slandered as ‘terrorist’

A good story. In making the movie “Bruno,” Sacha Baron Cohen maligned a Palestinian interview subject by describing him as a “terrorist.” The characterization was pure racism. The Palestinian sued Cohen and David Letterman, on whose show Cohen repeated the charge, and Cohen has folded.

He had claimed free speech– an absurd defense when libel and misrepresentation are at work. From Al Arabiya, thanks to Max:

A Christian and ‘a peace-loving person’ who lives near Bethlehem in the West Bank, Abu Aita has never been a part of the Al-Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigade or participated in any terrorist activity, according to his court complaint papers.

The Palestinian grocer said he agreed to the interview that appeared in ‘Bruno’ thinking that he will be discussing peace activism with a real journalist, the complaint further read…

On Thursday, Abu Aita’s lawyer Peter Drennan said “the case is settled to the mutual satisfaction” of everyone involved.

Sacha Baron Cohen: a buffoonish ideologue, at Israel’s service

Sacha Baron Cohen’s commitment to Zionism comes out in his characters.


Sacha Baron Cohen’s latest film The Dictator has led to the praise typical of movie reviewers for corporate publications. Baron Cohen, according to most of these reviewers, is something of a maverick: an iconoclastic outsider, an unorthodox entertainer, an erstwhile rebel, a genius provocateur. None of these superlatives is accurate.

What is Baron Cohen, then? Lots of descriptors work: a gifted role-player, an excellent self-promoter, a potty-mouthed prankster, a religious zealot, a white male who uses his privileges of race and gender to exploit people who cannot access those privileges.

There is one descriptor that is too infrequently applied to him: Zionist shill. Plenty of writers have noted Baron Cohen’s ardent Zionism, but few have suggested that his Zionism should cast him in a negative light (“Before ‘The Dictator’ and ‘Borat’, friends recall, Sacha Baron Cohen was a very nerdy, very funny, Israel-oriented guy,” The Times of Israel, 11 May 2012). Even fewer have examined how that Zionism visibly influences his thematic choices and public role-playing.

His commitment to Zionism is troublesome for numerous reasons: it supports the historical and current dispossession of Palestinians, situates him as an advocate of militaristic state power, calls into question his ethical commitments, and places him in Hollywood’s safest political space, that of fealty to Israel, a space in which the title of maverick loses all significant meaning.

It isn’t difficult to find evidence of Baron Cohen’s politics in his invented characters. While there are obvious iterations of Zionism in the dictator, Shabazz Aladeen, tomfoolery on behalf of Israel is also evident in earlier characters Brüno and Borat. Through both characters, Baron Cohen engaged in questionable behavior, what can accurately be called outright exploitation.

With Borat, for example, Baron Cohen named an actual country, Kazakhstan, when the concept behind that movie could have accomplished the same comic purpose with a made-up nation. Even with a made-up nation, however, Borat’s appearance as a stupid, swarthy, sexist Muslim conflated the Third World with pre-modern sensibilities, a feat that could be accomplished only through an unspoken juxtaposition of whiteness and modernity.

Even worse, in showing Borat’s origin at the start of the movie, Baron Cohen ditched the sound stage in favor of a real village in Romania, Glod, whose residents were appalled to learn that the documentary they thought Baron Cohen was filming turned out to be a degrading parody, leaving the villagers divided and infuriated (“We all hate Borat: the poor Romanian villagers humiliated by Sacha Baron Cohen’s spoof documentary,” The Daily Mail, 17 October 2008) . Those who participated were paid a tiny sum for their trouble;Borat grossed more than $260 million.

(Romania, Kazakhstan, what’s the difference, right? If the assumption from which Baron Cohen worked — that to most Americans, Eastern Europe and Central Asia are little more than a swath of backward foreign people — then it only reinforces the malice of naming actual countries and shooting on location, for the point had already been made before Baron Cohen decided to humiliate an entire village.)


With Brüno, Baron Cohen was even more mean-spirited. He searched out a “terrorist” for the flamboyant Brüno to offend. Baron Cohen’s search took him, of course, to the West Bank, where he again used a phony pretext to lure an unsuspecting Palestinian, Ayman Abu Aita, into an interview whose purpose was quite different than what Abu Aita was led to believe.

Since the film’s release, Abu Aita has dealt with the vitriol of his neighbors and colleagues who feel he humiliated them through his participation in Brüno’s spectacle (“The non-profit worker from Bethlehem who was branded a terrorist by Brüno,” The Guardian, 31 July 2009). Abu Aita wasn’t paid for his time; Brüno grossed $139 million. (In my book Israel’s Dead Soul I discuss this episode at length.)

Given the material exploitation of people in Romania and Palestine, these characters aren’t just harmless fun, after all.

Shabazz Aladeen — a name that manages to parody Arab and African American cultures — isn’t meant to be harmless. As with other characters, Baron Cohen has made numerous public appearances in character. His favorite tactic with Aladeen is to complain about the Zionists in Hollywood who refuse to grant him awards (“Sacha Baron Cohen to attend Oscars, claims victory over ‘Zionist snakes in Hollywood’,” Haaretz, 25 February 2012). Out of character, Baron Cohen explained to Howard Stern, another ardent Zionist, that “all these dictators blame everything on the Zionists. It’s a great scapegoat” (“Sacha Baron Cohen to Howard Stern: you inspired me,” Jewish Journal, 8 May 2012).

Disturbing connection

There is a disturbing connection to be made between Baron Cohen’s Zionist politics and his willingness to exploit real communities and to bastardize ethnic imagery. Zionism, an ideology that can accommodate liberal and humanistic discourses, cannot be practiced without a concomitant abrogation of the rights of those who are not Jewish, a reality that becomes even more severe when we consider that the vast majority of Palestine’s indigenous inhabitants are Muslim and Christian.

If his ethnic typologies are unoriginal, then his dictator’s complaints about Hollywood Zionists are completely banal. It is a grand tradition among pro-Israel commentators to attribute Arab dislike of Israel to everything but the inequitable practices of Zionism.

As Aladeen indicates, complaining about Zionism is an irrational Arab pastime, one they are brainwashed into by hideous dictators (whose power, of course, has nothing to do with Israeli, European and American meddling); Arab stupidity is so pervasive it totally ignores Israel’s greatness and the many benefits Israel could provide to Arabs if only they were smart enough to listen. Arabs passively accept their destiny. They are programmed culturally to submit to authority. They are not equipped with the intellectual gifts necessary for democratic modernity. There is nothing to do but colonize them.

The conflation of Zionism with proper multicultural modernity has a long history in American film, particularly in movies that endeavor to oppose racism. In Hollywood’s anti-racism, criticism of Israel falls into the same category as white supremacy, a point illustrated inAmerican History X when one character holding a camcorder implores another to share some of the things he has learned about race in America.

After the usual complaints about lazy minorities and declining Western values, the speaker rants, “And I hate Tabatha Soren and all her Zionist MTV fucking pigs telling us we should all get along.” American History X uses the scene to make a point about anti-Zionist activists, suggesting that they are not very different than neo-Nazis. The speaker even mispronounces “Zionist” in case viewers are unclear that cultured, educated people do not find Zionism distasteful. The proper democratic citizen does not contest Zionism; doing so puts him or her in the company of obese, unkempt skinheads.

Baron Cohen reinvigorates this dubious history when his dictator travels the country ranting about Zionists. Who but a jackass would keep company with the cartoonish Shabazz Aladeen?

The first rule of good satire is to ridicule sites of entrenched power, not to reinforce them. Racial satire is even trickier, for many a would-be satirist has used the cover of humor to buttress racist paradigms, something Baron Cohen does when he satirizes groups of people that are elsewhere victims of his troublesome politics. That’s the difference between Dave Chapelle, a brilliant satirist and stand-up comedian, and Baron Cohen, a buffoonish ideologue.

Sacha Baron Cohen is not a maverick. He is an apparatchik of Hollywood’s most profitable brand.

Steven Salaita’s latest book is Israel’s Dead Soul. Follow him on twitter @stevesalaita.

Ann Widdecombe: Christians are the butt of bad jokes

Gentle mockery or sharp satire aimed at Christians and their leaders has been replaced by abuse of Christianity itself

The Daily Mail

Fuck me, this must have come as a right fucking slap in the chops for Mia Farrow, after spending years accusing her live in lover, Film Director  Woody Allen of being a nonce – Which he is.

Here’s what I wrote about the couple in my article,  Celebrity Paedophiles:

Woody Allen is a vile man in every sense of the word. It is well known that while he was ‘married’ to Mia Farrow (Rosemary’s Baby, Carrie) he began an affair with Mia’s and the music conductor, Andre Previn’s adopted Daughter Soon Yi Previn.

The official story is that Allen and Soon YI didn’t begin the affair until she was 17 yrs old. Farrow, who was also once married to Frank Sinatra, only found out about the affair when she discovered naked photos of her daughter, allegedly taken by the self confessed neurotic, Allen.

Allen, who remains on the Celebrity A List insists that he did nothing wrong. Since Allen was never legally married to Farrow despite their 12 year relationship producing a son as well as 2 adopted children, the celebrated film director is quite correct in the eyes of the law.

After all, Soon Yi was not underage and neither was she Allen’s daughter, adopted or otherwise. Course it could be said that, morally, Allen was very wrong. However, many people believe that the ‘official’ story is not the true story.

In fact, according to the website the official story couldn’t be further away from the murky reality. Certainly, there has to be a reason that the Court’s placed such heavy restrictions on Allen concerning him seeing his children. The following is taken from the Biography Chanel website:

After his separation from Mia Farrow, they started a long public legal battle over their three children. The case was finally won by Farrow and Allen was denied visitation rights with Dylan O’Sullivan Farrow and could only see his biological son Satchel, now ‘Ronan Seamus Farrow’, under supervision. Moses Farrow aka Misha chose not to see his father.

And if further proof were needed, the website published the court findings in even greater detail:

In June, 1993, a court awarded custody of Moses, Dylan and Satchel to their mother, Mia Farrow, denying custody to their father, Woody Allen. Moses, who was then 15 years old, and unwilling to visit with his father, was not required to do so. Supervised visitation was ordered for Satchel, who was then five, for two hours, three times per week. Visitation between Mr. Allen and his daughter, Dylan, then seven, was to commence within six months, unless it interfered with therapeutic treatment or was “inconsistent with her welfare.”

With the consent of both parties, a psychiatrist, Dr. Donna Moreau, was engaged as a neutral evaluator to make recommendations with respect to visitation. In her report of August 16, 1994, she concluded that Mr. Allen’s severance of his sexual relationship with Ms. Farrow’s daughter, Soon-Yi Previn, was an “absolute precondition for even beginning to think of the possibility of contact” between him and Dylan. She asserted that Mr. Allen was blind to the effect his affair had on Dylan.

Course, it could be claimed that the old saying, ‘Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned’ could be applied in this instance. However, the fact that Farrow had the children’s names changed, which effectively wipes out all traces of them being associated as their fathers, is drastic, even by Hollywood standards.

Moreover, according to her biography ‘What falls away’, Frank Sinatra offered to have Allen’s legs broken when he learned of the affair with Soon Yi.

Amongst the many, extremely serious charges that levels at Allen, is the claim that the affair with Soon Yi began when she was 14 and he was 49. The website further claims that Farrow walked in on Allen masturbating over a photo of 7yr old Dylan.

Now it has to be said that those two claims alone are extremely libellous if there is no truth to them, never mind the other equally depraved things the website alleges Allen to be guilty of. And rightly so.

However, I would imagine that the reason Allen hasn’t sued is that use Police and court papers to back up their claims:

The Mia Farrow-Woody Allen relationship first exploded in January 1992, when Farrow found photos of her adopted daughter, Soon-Yi Previn, posing naked in Allen’s New York City apartment. Later that year, in August, Allen was accused of molesting and sexually assaulting his 7-year-old adopted daughter, Dylan, at Farrow’s Bridgewater home. 

Initially, the complaint was filed with New York authorities, but they took no action. Paul Williams, a Caseworker of the Year for New York City’s Human Resources Administration, tried to bring the case to Family Court (against the orders of his superiors) and was fired for “unethical conduct.” Seven months later he was reinstated as a supervisor, a position he still holds.

In early August 1992, Allen held a press conference at a New York hotel where he admitted that he was the subject of a child abuse investigation. The investigation in question related to an allegation that the repulsive little man had sexually assaulted Dylan. The website reported the matter thus:

On Aug. 4, 1992, a babysitter claims she saw Allen kneeling in front of Dylan, who was sitting on a couch in the den of the Bridgewater home. Dylan was wearing a dress, but no underpants. She stared blankly at the TV screen. The babysitter told authorities she noticed that Allen’s head was between the girl’s legs, very close to her crotch.

Over the course of the following 13 months, Dylan would tell her mother, psychologists, doctors, social workers and police that Allen touched her – with the tip of his right index finger – several times that day.

After the couch incident, the child’s account has Allen taking her up to the master bedroom and into a crawl space for some father-daughter time to play with a train.

“He put his finger in my vagina. He made me lay on the floor all ways, on my back, on my side, my front. He kissed me all over.”

“ I didn’t like it,” she continued. “Daddy told me not to tell and he’d take me to Paris, but I did tell.”

Police found hair fibres in the crawl space consistent with Allen’s, but forensic specialist Dr. Henry Lee, chief of Connecticut’s state crime laboratory, believes the evidence could not conclusively place Allen in the attic.

“We found hair in the attic, but what does it prove?” Lee says. “It doesn’t necessarily prove guilt.”

The pampered, over indulged film director then apparently tries to get out of being questioned by police. When that fails, Allen tries to put conditions on the interview:

Woody Allen would rebuff efforts by Connecticut state police and Paul Williams of New York to interview him. Just a few weeks after the Aug. 4 incidents, Allen tried to set preconditions for an interview with the state police. One of the preconditions was that any statements made by Allen could not be used to impeach him. The state police did not comply.

These people really do not live in the real world do they? However, the delaying tactics appeared to have a limited success because Allen was not formerly interviewed until the following new year:

Then on Jan. 6, 1993, Allen appeared at the state police barracks in Litchfield for a three-and-a-half-hour interview. He denied assaulting Dylan. He denied ever having been in the crawl space.

But Allen did say he might have reached into the crawl space on occasion, either to grab one of the children or to give them a soda. State police reminded Allen that to reach into the crawl space, he would have had to enter a small closet first. Allen vehemently denied entry to the crawl space.

But when state police told Allen they had taken fingerprints from the crawl space, he said it was possible that his prints would be found there. State police characterized Allen’s statements as inconsistent.

Hmmm. Swiftly moving on. With the interview not going Allen’s way, the notoriously tight fisted 2ndgeneration Polish Jew had no choice but to dip in to his substantial fortune to try to buy his way out of trouble:

During the Allen investigation, Maco (state’s attorney for Litchfield County) received a warning from a high-ranking state police official.

“He [Maco] was told,” says a retired officer, “that the Allen people were hiring private detectives to try to get some dirt on us.”

One of their key targets was Sgt. John Mucherino, a primary investigator for Maco. They wanted to know if Mucherino was a drinker or a gambler, if he had any marital problems.

Allen’s private detectives were compartmentalized, hired by different lawyers and subcontractors working for him, police say. The private detectives included former FBI and Drug Enforcement Administration agents, even former state cops who were friends with Mucherino…

… The prying took its toll on Maco. “It was after that that I saw a big change in him,” says investigation team member Frank D’Amico, a retired police officer. “He was tense for a long time. He just took more precautions with everything he did.”

“ They were just trying to disrupt the case. We all know today, in light of O.J.(Simpson), that if you have nothing to go on, you go after law enforcement.” 

D’Amico says the Allen team played a number of dirty tricks. Other law enforcement officials suspect that they had something to do with the false rumour that a top police investigator on the Allen case was trying to sell a videotape of Dylan to the tabloid media.

The state police immediately began an internal affairs investigation of this trooper, who was cleared. Former Chief State’s Attorney Austin McGuigan said the allegations had to affect “the investigator’s ability to do his job.”

“ The investigation closed down for about 10 days,” Maco recalls. “About this time, I was told there was a campaign to disrupt the investigation and discredit the investigators, being orchestrated out of New York.” …

Two months later, the case that had seemed so watertight for the prosecution took an ominous turn for the worse. In his quest to avoid any accusations of any wrong doings leading up to trial, Maco had inadvertently shifted the advantage to Allen. In America, money really can put you above the law:

Woody Allen proclaimed his innocence on the steps of Yale University in March 1993. A panel of experts from Yale, headed by paediatrician Dr. John Leventhal, concluded no abuse had taken place.The conclusion itself was an anomaly. The standard practice in the field is to state whether the subject’s behaviour is consistent with having suffered sexual abuse.”Concluding guilt or innocence is not the role of a mental health team – that’s for the court,” says Dr. Diane Schetky, an associate professor of psychiatry at the University of Vermont, co-author of the widely used textbook Child Sexual Abuse and co-editor of Clinical Handbook of Child Psychiatry and the Law

Maco had commissioned the Yale study with instructions to determine whether Dylan was a viable witness who could stand up in court. He said that enlisting Yale’s assistance was the biggest mistake he made in the case.

“Regardless of what the Connecticut police wanted from us,” Leventhal said in an April 1993 deposition, “we weren’t necessarily beholden to them. We did not assess whether she’d be a good witness in court. That’s what Mr. Maco may have been interested in, but that’s not necessarily what we were interested in.”

Yale, Maco says, “took the case and ran away with it. I gave their report very little weight.”

An examination of the Yale report and court documents shows:

· The Yale team used psychologists on Allen’s payroll to make mental health conclusions. “That seems like a blatant conflict of interest; they should have excluded themselves,” Schetky says.

· Custody recommendations were made even though the team never saw Allen and any of the children together. “I’d sure want that information,” Schetky says.

· The team refused to interview witnesses who could have corroborated the molestation claims.

· The team destroyed its notes. “I don’t know why they would,” Schetky says. “They shouldn’t have anything to hide, unless there’s disagreement.”

· Leventhal, the only medical doctor on the team, did not interview Dylan. “How can you write about someone you’ve never seen?” Schetky asks.

· The night before Leventhal gave a statement to Farrow’s attorney, he discussed the scenario with Abramowitz, the head of Allen’s legal team, for about 30 minutes.

· The team interviewed Dylan nine times. For three consecutive weeks, she said Allen violated her sexually. In several of the other sessions, she mentioned a similar type of abuse. When Dylan did not repeat the precise allegation in some of the sessions, the team reported this as an inconsistency.

The nine interviews were “excessive,” Schetky says. “The danger is the child feels like she’s not believed if she’s asked the same questions over and over.”

Leventhal himself later admitted, in sworn testimony in the custody case, that he made several mistakes during the course of the investigation. One of those was his false characterization of Dylan’s active imagination as a thought disorder.

In the Yale report, Leventhal cited what he called “loose associations” by the child. He said she talked about looking in a trunk and seeing “dead heads.” When advised that Mia Farrow had a trunk in her attic in which she kept wigs from her movies on wig blocks, Leventhal acknowledged this was not evidence of a fantasy problem or a thought disorder.

The paediatrician also attempted to categorize Dylan’s banter as “magical thinking,” citing her vivid description of a sunset. However, after being advised that Mia Farrow described the dark sky upon leaving New Haven in the evening as “the magic hour,” Leventhal said he was “less concerned” about the incident as an example of “loose thinking.”

“This guy Leventhal never left his office, never talked to the child, but he gave a wonderful account and said, ‘I exonerate you, Woody,’” D’Amico says. “Boy, I wouldn’t want to carry that flag around – ‘Leventhal says I’m OK.’”

A Yale Spokeswoman says the hospital stands by the report and Leventhal’s national reputation.

On Sept. 20, 1993 state police detective Bea Farleakas and Dylan Farrow sat on the floor of Maco’s office, surrounded by stuffed animals. It was not an unusual scene. Children, sometimes victims, were regular visitors to the office, which is just a few doors from the renowned West Street Grill off Litchfield’s town green.

Joining Farleakas, who was the primary detective in the Allen probe, and Dylan was Michelle Prindle, Maco’s secretary. Dylan handed out the stuffed animals and they played for about an hour.

Maco, D’Amico, and state police Lt. Charles McIntyre looked on as Farleakas, Dylan, and Prindle finished their play session. Maco then got down on the floor, played, and talked with Dylan for about half an hour.

“We talked about kid stuff,” Maco says. “It was like being with my own kid. We were having fun – until the button was pushed. I tried to discuss the incident. I saw her saying to me with her blank stare, ‘This is the last place I want to be. I can’t deal with this. Is this Yale? What are they doing to me?’”…

As far as Maco was concerned, He’d seen enough. As a father with young children himself, he decided to do what he thought was in Dylan’s best interest and decided against going to trial:

… Maco backed off. “I saw complete withdrawal any time I tried to discuss the incident. This was complete withdrawal and regression. At the time she was so fragile and damaged I knew she would not be a good witness. I knew she needed healing. I was not going to interfere with her recovery.”

Days later, Maco held a press conference in which he said state police had compiled enough evidence to charge Allen with a crime, but that he’d decided not to approve an arrest warrant in order to spare Dylan the trauma of a trial.

Allen objected strongly to Maco’s characterization of him as a criminal who would never get to refute the charge in court. So strong were his objections, in fact, that in October he filed an ethics complaint against Maco with both the Statewide Grievance Committee – a lawyers’ disciplinary group – and the state Criminal Justice Commission, which hires and fires prosecutors. While the Criminal Justice Commission exonerated Maco that December, the Statewide Grievance Committee voted 6-5 with two abstentions to investigate Maco for alleged misconduct in his handling of
the case. The vote overturned a ruling by Maco’s local committee, which had found in his favour.

Susan Levine of Litchfield, a member of the local grievance committee, recalls the deliberations over Maco’s actions.

“We ruled that even though Maco was close to the line, he didn’t cross it,” said Levine, who is also the top borough official in Litchfield. “We were very surprised when state-wide overturned it. Why empower local grievance committees and then take away the power? If Maco had acted inappropriately, that’s the way [our] ruling would have gone. Maybe they just wanted to see Woody Allen.”

Levine’s comments were echoed by Superior Court Judge Raymond Norko, who characterized the State-wide Grievance Committee’s actions as “star driven, sloppy, and careless.”

One of the members of the state-wide panel, Bridgeport attorney Daiga Osis, had been an opponent of Maco in a vigorously contested arson case in Bridgeport – the burning of the Town Fair Tire store on Boston Avenue in the 1980s. Osis had argued an appeal against Maco and lost.

“The name of the prosecutor did not concern me; I have no personal relationship with Maco,” Osis says. But she cast what could have been the deciding vote in the 6-5 decision to investigate Maco. Hiltz, a retired state police lieutenant, called her action “sour grapes” and “payback.”

“I did nothing illegal, unethical, or immoral,” Maco says. “I’ll go anywhere to defend that.”

These days, Maco awaits the final word from the Statewide Grievance Committee, which could vote to remove him from his job. Maco says he has rejected offers of a settlement from the Allen camp, which would require him to apologize for his accusatory statements.

He credits his family with the support that has enabled him to endure. “I’ve gained strength from Nancy Lou, from my son and of course, from Mom and Dad. Whatever strength I have comes from them.”

In one particularly intense period, his son Frank Jr., then 9 years old, pulled him through. Allen had branded Maco dishonest and a coward during press conferences after Maco’s announcement that he was closing the case.

“Frank saw the news article, and all I could do was tell him that given the nature of my business, I’m sure I’ve been called a coward and dishonest before, but I don’t think I’ve ever been called both of those at the same time,” Maco recalls. “He laughed, but then he had some fear for my job, so he assured me he had a friend, another young boy whose dad was in the insurance business. He said, ‘Don’t worry, Dad, I’m sure we can always get you a job in insurance.’”

No doubt, at this point Allen was feeling extremely smug. With the case of sexual abuse now dropped, the tiny in stature, tiny in mind director appeared to assume that he had been found not guilty… Which is consistent with the mind set of all of these fabulously wealthy sick fucks. They simply have no concept of right and wrong and the only person whose feelings matter is their own.

With that in mind, Allen launched a custody bid for his 3 children and as we now know, he should have quit while ahead. The case judge certainly saw through him and promptly blocked him from seeing the children.
Course the arrogant arsewipe, hadn’t helped himself by admitting that he hadn’t stopped for a second to consider how his children would feel about their father having sex with their sister.

Mind you, he was also hampered by all the medical reports that were used in evidence against him. All agreed that Dylan was extremely traumatised by him and like his biological son Satchel/Shamus, was absolutely petrified at the prospect of having to spend time with their father.

Moreover, as I have already said, legally Allen hadn’t broken the law by sleeping with Soon Li, (Having had his claim that his step daughter hadn’t slept with him until she was over the legal age upheld). However, since he had been playing Dad to her since she was 8 yrs old some of the medical witnesses’ in the case saw things quite differently:

Dr Welner’s comments: Considerable attention has been devoted to the terrible consequences of incest on the victim. What about its impact on the victim’s siblings? Incest is almost always furtively perpetrated, or is unknown to uninvolved siblings.

It would also appear to be the case, that the self obsessed paedophile had not taken into account the fact that Mia Farrow would be giving evidence. Her testimony was probably the most damming of all. The following is how reported on Farrow’s evidence:

“He developed a sick obsession with the child that lasted until he was ordered by the court to stay away from her”…

Allen ignored his own child with Farrow, a boy called Satchel, Farrow says, but would hunt Dylan down when he visited and fondle her. Lying on bed half-nude watching TV, he would stick his thumb in her mouth and so terrorized the child she would scream, “Hide me!” to her siblings, and run away from him.

Farrow acknowledges she was wrong to stay with Allen for so long in light of his behaviour to her children. She kicked him out when she discovered the famed nude photos of Soon-Yi and learned Allen had been sleeping with her for months.

But until then, she accepted his assurances he was getting therapy to combat his obsession with Dylan and relied on professionals who assured her things would change.

Allen deceived her, Farrow says, and she accuses him of an “unfathomable, uncontrollable need to destroy everything good and positive in his life, so he tried to destroy my family.

“ For him to have sex with one of my children, a child he had known as my daughter since she was 8 years old, was not enough: He had to make me see, graphically, what he was doing”…

And here’s journalist Peter Marks report on the case:

Mia Farrow testified yesterday that her 7-year-old daughter, Dylan, was so distraught over the relentless attention of her adoptive father, Woody Allen, that she frequently screamed, “Hide me! Hide me!” when he came to visit her, and twice locked herself in the bathroom to keep away from him.

In her second day of testimony in a custody trial in State Supreme Court in Manhattan, Ms. Farrow portrayed Mr. Allen as a father so obsessed he would “wrap himself around” the girl as they watched television, often ignoring his other children. And she described the child as almost immobilized by the attention Mr. Allen showered upon her…

“He would creep up in the morning and lie beside her bed and wait for her to wake up,” Ms. Farrow testified, as Mr. Allen sat a few feet away in the courtroom, scribbling notes and tearing pages from a legal pad. “I thought it was excessive. I was uncomfortable all along.”

She said that on some occasions she saw Mr. Allen with “his head in her stomach or her crotch” and that Dylan had described to her