Wednesday, November 27, 2013


Well that escalated quickly. Having broken above $900 yesterday to new record highs (and a 100% gain in a week), the crypto currency is not looking back now. On what is higher than average volume this morning, Bitcoin just broke above the magic $1000 level for the first time (at $1025). Meanwhile, the BTC China "arb'd" rate is around $950 for those playing at home; and Litecoin has just topped $26 (from $4 a week ago!)
Bitcoin tops $1,000, Zerohedge

Already bought some.

Ironically, when they stop denominating it in ponzi like "federal reserve notes" then you'll know it's beginning to be incorporated into people's lives as a currency. 

Tuesday, November 26, 2013

Interesting whistleblower... I'll have to research her perspective.

Apparent perspectives on the war in Afghanistan

I guess you probably think in terms of "strategic objectives" like: "That peasant over there may have bombs or guns, therefore we'll go police them and try to win some hearts and minds and stuff.  And eventually they may even have a democracy and a central bank, like America." 

But that's not much of an overall "strategic objective" and the way a world incorporated in "American"/bankstering petro/narco/weapons dollars actually works.

So I start writing about opium and the average American begins scratching their head because they think that the Afghan war was meant to be "won" by Team America. Or that a bunch of humanitarian clowns in Washington and their financiers in NYC are just bumbling and stumbling their way to "....never been witnessed before in the history of Afghanistan..." amounts of poppies being grown.  For the average American it would seem that Bush, the humanitarian clown valiantly fighting terrism while looking for WMDs and Osama, just happened to fall into a field of poppies along side the yellow brick road of the Wizard of the Fed after his poppy was president. 

Interesting perspective. The irony being that it was probably Bush's perspective too.  Going with his gut again, etc.  That man could probably have an ELF weapon pointed as his head and think that it was the voice of God telling him to go to war.  But at least he would honestly hug the troops when they came back.  Mainly because he honestly believed in it all and the war on terrism in general.

That's all well and good.  But that ignorant and stupid perspective, touching as it may be, doesn't have much to do with "strategic objectives" of Talmudists in general and the price of the narco and petrodollars of their private banking cartel, in reality.  Leave it to Americans to get themselves killed over a reality show led by their entertainer in chief, I guess.

Since October 2001, opium poppy cultivation has skyrocketed.   The presence of occupation forces in Afghanistan did not result in the eradication of poppy cultivation. Quite the opposite.
The Taliban prohibition had indeed caused “the beginning of a heroin shortage in Europe by the end of 2001″, as acknowledged by the UNODC.
Heroin is a multibillion dollar business supported by powerful interests, which requires a steady and secure commodity flow. One of the “hidden” objectives of the war was precisely to restore the CIA sponsored drug trade to its historical levels and exert direct control over the drug routes.
Immediately following the October 2001 invasion, opium markets were restored. Opium prices spiraled. By early 2002, the opium price (in dollars/kg) was almost 10 times higher than in 2000.
In 2001, under the Taliban opiate production stood at 185 tons, increasing  to 3400 tons in 2002 under the US sponsored puppet regime of President Hamid Karzai.   ....
It is worth recalling the history of  the Golden Crescent drug trade, which is intimately related to the CIA’s covert operations in the region since the onslaught of the Soviet-Afghan war and its aftermath.
Prior to the Soviet-Afghan war (1979-1989), opium production in Afghanistan and Pakistan was directed to small regional markets. There was no local production of heroin. (Alfred McCoy, Drug Fallout: the CIA’s Forty Year Complicity in the Narcotics Trade. The Progressive, 1 August 1997).
The Afghan narcotics economy was a carefully designed project of the CIA, supported by US foreign policy.
As revealed in the Iran-Contra and Bank of Commerce and Credit  International (BCCI) scandals, CIA covert operations in support of the Afghan Mujahideen had been funded through the laundering of drug money.
  Spoils of War


Friday, November 22, 2013

Bill Still on JFK the Fed Myth, Oswald, the Knoll, two spotters

SSM and Judaism

Marriage is an exclusively religious institution in Israel, with separate religious authorities for Jews and Muslims, Christians and Druze. For Israeli Jews, marriage policy is dictated by the Chief Rabbinate, which is under the exclusive control of the Orthodox—and firmly opposed to gay marriage. Since the country has no civil marriage, gay couples seeking to marry within the borders of Israel are out of luck (as are any Jewish Israelis seeking a non-Orthodox marriage ceremony).
This arrangement—whereby marriage is in the control of the Orthodox rabbinate—is part of what Israelis call the status quo: an understanding between secular and religious Jews regarding the balance between religion and state. The status quo affects not only marriage, but also the education system, family law, supervision of kosher restaurants, and the opening of shops and public transportation on shabbat.
Altering the status quo, particularly concerning something as delicate as marriage, is the third rail of Israeli politics. This is not only because of the power and importance of ultra-Orthodox parties in the Israeli political system, but also due to a fear that changing the status quo would lead to the encroachment of secular values upon the religious—and vice-versa. Among Israel’s many political parties, only Meretz—a left-wing, social democratic faction—proposes to upend the status quo entirely by separating religion from state and legalising civil marriage.  Slate
The irony is that:
 ...the Talmud will allow homosexual congress with young boys and here is the evidence that it does, photographically reproduced directly from the Steinsaltz Talmud (and this is probably why publication of the volumes of the Steinsaltz Talmud was stopped midway through publication and dropped completely. It’s now out of print, in favor of redacted translations such as the recent Artscroll/Schottenstein edition).
    If the reader were to ask a rabbi about the uncensored text of Sanhedrin 54B, after the rabbi recovered from his shock that you even were aware of it, he’s likely to fob you off with the oft-heard claim that this Talmud passage was “just Rav's opinion in a debate with Shmuel.” What he is not likely to reveal to you is that the post-Talmudic codifier of Judaic law, Moses Maimonides, confirmed that Rav’s ruling about sex with a boy less than nine years old was the correct one — the adult is exempt from liability for having sex with a boy less than nine years of age. (Maimonides’ decision in favor of Rav’s depraved ruling may be found in Issurei Biah 1:14). Moreover, the text of BT Ketubot 11b and of Sanhedrin 54b photographically reproduced from the Steinsaltz Talmud on the previous page, fully support the halakha that the age of nine is the key factor in determining when sex with a boy is permissible. Judaism’s halakha, as derived from the “sages” of the Babylonian Talmud, amounts to a free pass for Talmudic child molesters.  (Judaism Discovered: A Study of the Anti-Biblical Religion of Racism, Self-Worship, Superstition and Deceit by Hoffman, Michael (2008-08-10))    
Why you'll probably never get anywhere with people that are taught tribalism and a siege mentality from birth, to the point that they'll typically seem to defend their perceived tribe no matter what it does:
Talmudists are taught that nonJudaics by their very biological and spiritual nature are irrevocably “Jew” haters. ...the essence of anti-Goyism is passed to Jewish children with their mother’s milk, and then nurtured, fed and watered carefully into a full-blown phobia throughout their lives...Their attitudes are then perfectly formed. They know whom to hate...They want their children to hate the Goyim...They want to deny the humanity that links all people...Anti-Goyism is a foundation of the Orthodox and Hasidic philosophy and way of life.”
   The Talmudist smiles, shakes hands, offers conviviality and seemingly friendly words —and this includes alleged support for hot button conservative family values issues wherein they “join” Christians in giving the appearance of condemning homosexuality and abortion — all of this is a calculated ploy to win time and gain a definitive edge over gentiles, until the power of the synagogue and the Sanhedrin are total. If the synagogue and the Sanhedrin should establish supremacy over the West, and they are well on their way to doing so, the pseudo-humanitarian and pseudo-conservative camouflage will vanish, and all gentiles save the masonic variety will have the status of Palestinians: to be killed, tortured or imprisoned at will, without fear of prosecution, meaningful protest or even much notice being taken of their liquidation.
   Nothing can ameliorate the ultimate status of gentiles in halacha. Their status can be temporarily ameliorated for the sake of gaining opportunistic advantage, but beneath that expedient, the gentile is always viewed as another Esau, forever locked in battle with the Holy People of Judaism.
   The objection may be raised that this teaching that Judaics are always and invariably hated by gentiles is limited only to the most retrograde bearded rabbi in some back alley shul in Mea Shearim. Au contraire, this rabbinic concept is full-blown within the West’s political, cultural and social avant-garde, as reflected in the repartee of the most “progressive” and “elite intellectuals” in the West:
The most discussed political book in France this autumn is Ce grand cadavre à la renverse (literally, ‘this big corpse lying on its back’), by Bernard-Henri Lévy ...He is only one of the most sophisticated proponents of the present-day widespread conservative Jewish rejection of any attempt to explain historical events by material or political causes. This rejection of analysis is central to the religious attitude toward the Holocaust, or Shoah (that is, the Nazi massacre of the Jews understood in religious terms). For the defenders of this contemporary religion, it is wrong to seek material explanations for events that must remain ‘incomprehensible’ in their magnitude...Any explanation other than eternal and recurrent hatred of the Jews may even be denounced as anti-Semitism....This is consistent with the position that there can be no explanations for anti-Semitism other than the eternal nature of anti-Semitism itself. Above all, there can be no causes for which Jews themselves, in this case the State of Israel, might be in some way responsible.
    Bernard-Henri Lévy is promoting these notions of hardly in the minority when it comes to recurrent and eternal, irrational hatred of blameless Judaics. The “given law” of Halacha hi beyoduah she’Eisav soneh l’Yaakov is threaded throughout our news media and U.S. government policy. It undergirds the neocon Right and the Zionist left. It is the staple fiction of the western intelligentsia as well as the mainstream churches.

Note that there's a huge difference between the racism or ideologies of tribal supremacy typical to the Talmudists (goyim), Islamists (dhimmi, provided the Shia and Sunnis haven't killed each other already) and Nazism (lesser races) though.  "Conservative" Christians and "neocons" are usually utterly blind to Jewish forms of supremacy but not Islamic or nationalist/Nazi forms.  So those that are educated know about the "dhimmi" concept promoted by some Islamic factions but not the concept of "goyim" promoted by some Jewish factions.  Etc.

Interpretations about the goyim/dhimmi/lesser races and factions among supremacists vary, i.e. if all the millions of Muslims truly believed in "dhimmi" status and the establishment of Sharia then the world would look different than it does.  Or if all Jews truly believed in the ideology of racism and supremacy promoted in the Talmud and to some degree in the Torah, then the world would look different than it does.

But it is all part of the reason that the world looks as it does: 

I guess this partially explains why Chicago is so screwed up. It's as if he's mentally disabled.

Top 100 Black Mob Violence Videos #64: Sarah Palin

That's great.

The Washington Times reported yesterday that Nuclear Regulatory Commission workers watch porn instead of cracking down on unsafe conditions at nuclear plants.
That’s not an isolated problem …
(Regulators Watch Porn and Literally Sleep with Industry They’re Supposed to Rein In … Instead of Protecting the Public, Zerohedge)

Comment on Banksterism

It doesn’t matter what Congress does or doesn’t do, so long as they stay within the boundaries and don’t begin having enough power or influence to get themselves assassinated:

When the Federal Reserve Act was passed, the people of these United States did not perceive that a world banking system was being set up here. A super-state controlled by international bankers and industrialists…acting together to enslave the world…Every effort has been made by the Fed to conceal its powers but the truth is–the Fed has usurped the government. –Louis McFadden, two assassination attempts
I have two great enemies, the Southern Army in front of me and the bankers in the rear. Of the two, the one at my rear is my greatest foe. Corporations have been enthroned, and an era of corruption in high places will follow. The money power of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until the wealth is aggregated in the hands of a few, and the Republic is destroyed. –Lincoln, Greenbacks and one assassination attempt
“The bank, is trying to kill me, but I will kill it!” “You are a den of vipers and thieves. I intend to rout you out, and by the eternal God I will rout you out.”
“I sincerely believe the banking institutions having the issuing power of money, are more dangerous to liberty than standing armies.”
“Paper is poverty… it is only the ghost of money, and not money itself.”
–Andrew Jackson, one assassination attempt
Kind of ironic that these are the dead presidents on the ponzi these days, huh? Even sheeple like Moseley should notice a pattern at some point.

Wednesday, November 20, 2013

Metabunk 11/20 2

[quote="AluminumTheory, post: 76596, member: 1800"]
Obama can do fine with or without a teleprompter.
He handled himself well in all but one presidential debate.[/quote]

He needed help:

Mainly because he was lying, as usual.

[QUOTE]What does the teleprompter have to do with this anyway?[/QUOTE]

When you're reading the words of someone else, that's part of the script that goes along with acting.

[quote]What is so different between Obama's mannerisms in 1990 and today?[/quote]

It's not necessary to try to define some deep change in mannerisms.  It's fair to say that he is an actor.  That he's been trained how to act, etc.  Plus he sometimes gets a little lost without his teleprompter because his words often aren't even his own and sometimes it's doubtful that he even knows that what he's saying is a lie.  ("You can keep your plan.  It's on my teleprompter so it must be true.")

It's not a big deal to say that presidents are liars and actors for most people.  So even if a change in mannerisms could be defined and evidence that he is an actor found in that way, why would that matter to you? 

Metabunk 11/20

Even if that were true there's still the small matter that the military industrial media is linked to getting hundreds of thousands of people killed, while Alex Jones may be rather loosely linked to the death of one TSA agent and so forth. (As was pointed out on Metabunk recently.) So the military industrial media that sandwiches their WMD and "war on terror" memes between ads for Ratheon and Boeing should or better be "demonstrably way better," given how dangerous their lack of investigative reporting and "official sources say" mentality has been to people around the world.

And it's not necessarily true.

Here is an example, the incubator babies hoax that was used to market the original Iraq war:

Then there were the anthrax attacks and other examples. This is part of the reason why people shouldn't be quick to condemn AJ when he immediately assumes that the corporate media is full of ignorant and lazy journalists that would probably do the same "Official sources are now leaking onto us their next marketing campaign for Murder Inc." stuff with Syria/Iran or other important issues if they could.

The rise of the alternative media isn't such a bad thing, even if they're often pretty lazy or sloppy and could use some debunking on trivial and unimportant stories like "Obama is an actor" sometimes too.

It's telling that you apparently don't think that you can debunk narratives and reports in the corporate media, as if they always settle on the truth after they're done with the "Get it first" slop they usually produce with "official sources."

Tuesday, November 19, 2013

Metabunk 11/19

[quote="qed, post: 76260, member: 2370"]Trained by an actor or an actor like Reagan?[/quote]

I had a few paragraphs of a ramble on that.  The basic idea being that it probably would actually be best if the handlers and producers of the Presidential Show by which some aspects of America are being governed (depending on the ratings for each episode) would simply find an actual actor to play the part of the president again.  Put Rove Inc. on the job, etc.? 

Supposedly there were reports of Obama wanting to "go Bulworth" in order to try to begin acting authentic too, a few months ago.  So the idea that he's an actor or has been groomed and trained as an actor can't be debunked, as even Obama realizes the nature of the business he's involved in.  It would be interesting to have better investigative reporting than Jonestown with respect to what the technical details of the process of becoming the entertainer in chief are.  But when the corporate media is busy with asking Obama what his favorite color is and so forth, well...  there you go.  You're left with Jones. 

Ironic that Obama would cite an actor in a movie with respect to going Bulworth or "acting authentic" based on the usual political bull.  The whole concept of "acting more authentic" = oxymoron.  Most people will never get it, especially the fatherless like Obama or the pseudo-fatherless like Reagan.  They have to put acting aside in order to actually BE authentic.  Because with respect to the question of to be or not to be, the answer for actors is to act and not to be.      

Meanwhile, in the background... it doesn't really matter which actor you pick on many of the most significant issues having to do with when it's time for "dude looks like a" Lady Liberty to shake her spear again due to the nature of American ponzi, geopolitics and banksterism.  But political actors are beginning to be a lagging indicator with respect to people getting tired of the theatrical production of more episodes of: "Watch out, there may be WMDs in their underpants!"  The ratings are getting so low at this point that apparently over 90% aren't even willing to enter another theater of war for the show to begin.  Maybe more are finally beginning to see what the price of admission has been in the past. 

We're usually left with entertainment, all the way around.  I would often include Alex Jones and "loose change" aspects of 911 truth and the memes that grow in the cultural petri dish of conspiracy theory culture in that.  Because for all his ranting and raving and acting like a WWF wrestler straight out of the theatrical production of the "NWO" or "conspiracy theories" with Jesse Ventura... he can't actually attempt to deal with the truth based on "It's on record." facts in many instances.  911 being one of those instances.  (I don't even watch or listen to Jones much.  But with the way everything is becoming connected he and/or his perspective winds up showing up in newsfeeds and so forth, it's inescapable.  Now here he is taking up space on Metabunk, instead of focusing on more serious minded "conspiracy theorists"/whistle blowers like Sibel Edmonds or serious minded theorists like Ry Dawson and others.  I wish the alternative media and their investigative journalism was better.  But it isn't, yet... due in no small part to Jonestown and his sloppiness.)  

Sorry for the ramble.  At least no one on this thread seems to be denying that the president is, in fact, an actor.     

Thursday, November 14, 2013

Freedom of Thought Requires Free Media

Interesting thoughts on trends in technology and likely scenarios having to do with its impact on the cultural petri dish.


Three minutes in: "Probably nothing will happen..."

Oh, ok. Lol.

Big ramble of the day... because I felt like processing some thoughts.

 It must be odd... the level of cognitive dissonance it takes for a Christian to support Jewish tribalists (intermarriage is illegal*, etc.) raining down white phosphorous on Palestinian Christians or bombing, undermining and destroying Persian/Syrian civilizations to the detriment of Syrian Christians too.    

In 1947 David Ben-Gurion and the religious parties reached an agreement that included an understanding that matters of personal status in Israel, which included marriage, would continue to be determined by religious authorities. This arrangement has been termed the status quo agreement and has been maintained despite numerous changes of government since.
   ....  in 1953 rabbinical courts were established with jurisdiction over matters of marriage and divorces of all Jews in Israel, nationals and residents. (section 1) It was also provided that marriages and divorces of Jews in Israel would be conducted according to the law of the Torah. (section 2)
   Since 1953 the rabbinate has only approved marriages between Jews in Israel conducted in accordance with the Orthodox interpretation of halakha... 
  Jewish marriage and divorce in Israel is under the jurisdiction of the Chief Rabbinate of Israel, which defines a person's Jewish status strictly according to halakha. The rabbinate's standards and interpretations in these matters are generally used by the Israeli Interior Ministry in registering marriages and divorces.
  Halakhic and biblical restrictions on marriage are applied in Israel. So, for example, a kohen may not marry a convert to Judaism.  --Wikipedia

It must be odd for Christian Zionists to support anti-miscegenation laws, racism and ideologies of racial/tribal supremacy on that level when they're simultaneously being told by the Zionist/mainstream media that they shouldn't do that.

Not to mention the issue of "separation of religion and state" by which some Jewish tribalists and racists attack American Christians so that they can't have so much as a nativity scene based on any form of local community, on local public property and what not.  But if Christians were involved in supporting and establishing an entire "Christian state" just like they are supporting a "Jewish state" with foreign aide and support, then apparently they could have their nativity scenes?   

Apparently if anyone wants to "establish" their religion (including marriage laws) and impose it on others then they should convert to the political cult of Zionism.  Then you don't have to worry about hurting someone's feelings with a nativity scene.  In fact, then you can get out a bulldozer and level their house without being concerned that they'll be crying themselves to sleep over an imposition of religion.
Although... one would think that an "imposition" of Talmudic forms of religion might hurt someone's feelings, given that their house just got bulldozed.  So where are the "see you in court" lawsuits of Talmudists over that imposition or "establishment" of religious beliefs? 

It's interesting that Richard Cohen* probably just made the mistake of thinking that everyone else had a "conventionally" Jewish mentality with respect to interracial marriage too.  Oops.  Now he's in trouble.  Because ironically, the dumb "goyim" don't necessarily have the "It makes me want to gag." reflex that he projected onto them... but he still has that reflex.

All you have to do is look at the establishment of that tribal mentality in Israel, where they're still trying to police marriages.  Duh.  Or listen when a tribalist/Talmudist says to Anthony Weiner, "You married an Arab." As if marrying a beautiful Arab woman is some sort of a great insult, etc. 

Duh.  You're often not going to understand what's going on around you in the news without understanding Talmudic ideologies or their secular versions based on a mentality of racial superiority.

*Here’s more evidence of the trend: Richard Cohen of the Washington Post standing up for Romney’s superior Jewish culture argument in a column called “For Israelis and Palestinians, a difference beyond question.” Cohen is a liberal Democrat, but his column exposes the chauvinistic thinking about Jews and Israel that underlies even “liberal” considerations of the issue. Again, the guy might as well be a neocon. The neocons were all Democrats a while back.
Cohen’s putdown of Palestinians scarcely acknowledges the occupation and says nothing about the destruction of the educated elites that Israel achieved with the Nakba. I simply don’t understand how American liberals can get away with this sort of racial contempt about countries half the world away. Oh and what about all the Palestinian businesses destroyed? What about brilliant young men like the late Ibrahim Abu-Lughod, forced to follow through on their studies in foreign countries?  Link

Note that if Palestinians were able to incorporate themselves in elite networks in America based on tribalism then they'd own a lot of patents and probably begin to think of themselves as racially superior in some way too.  Just think if they began to be put in charge of creating money out of nothing by the goyim or began being able to lend tribe members money at zero percent interest, etc.

Apparently people think that there's actually some biological cause for what is happening other than perceptions and perhaps dispositions.  Meanwhile, back in reality...  the main reason that there is disparity is the ideology of Talmudism/tribalism and ethnic/racial supremacy vs. some deep problems with Islamic ideologies and modern Islamic cultures too.  And that's generally all it amounts to.  There's no real difference in the physical structure of brains or some sort of "This little bit of DNA did it." that's the explanation for all of this.

Not to mention that those supposed racial structures of the brain or that supposed "This little DNA string is real important or somethin'." are always one romantic relationship away from being shredded when people of different "races" have sex with each other.  Duh.

Yet another ramble though... one thing that does tend to be important is skin color, due to the psychological effects of perceptions about being "dark"/evil or "fair"/just.  Which ironically, is really quite unfair to darker skinned people... and pretty dumb.  But even if it's stupid and there's no justification for it, it leads to huge results anyway and mass "perceptions are reality" for most people.  But even there, the answer is sex and romance.  (Although people can have a child with black skin within one generation, or even twins... one with black/evil skin from the "dark ages" and one with "enlightened" fair/just/good skin.  It's pretty silly.  I guess the fair twin would be superior to the dark twin, huh?  Silly. But that's the way people tend to be with respect to their perceptions, as light combined with fine or more symmetrical features tends to = good for them.  Enlightening, huh?)  

Wednesday, November 13, 2013

I might think more about this later.

The terminated policies are a feature, not a bug. Obama never should have said what he did, because it was a lie and he knew it.

Single payer, here we come!

You realize that the federal government is going to borrow debt/money into existence from an international cartel of bankers in order to pay for that, right?  And they ultimately control the money/debt. Therefore the government won't be able to "afford" to redistribute much wealth in reality, as everything shifts around and toward the .001% due to the fact that they've already given away the power of the government to create money. 

This will be the case no matter what you do to try to make healthcare affordable or to try to get people "covered" in ponzi.  Plus now everyone is going to think that Obama's "socialism" failed thanks to "We are all socialists now." Newsweek and so forth.  He's not a socialist but people think he is.  Republicans are not capitalists but people think they are.  So socialists and capitalists will continue to take the blame for the banksterism of the Democrats and the Republicans.  As the ponzi continues to come back on more and more Americans they'll blame socialism or capitalism... or the person on food stamps because their job has been outsourced or the upper middle class of "rich people" (Papa John has too many swimming pools, etc.) that actually create pizza or wealth in reality (unlike the .001% or political operatives of banksters like Soros).

It's all due to "socialism" or "capitalism"... but apparently you won't blame the prevalence of banksterism and follow the money.  So that's, that...

On a side note, it is true that socialism doesn't work.  Robert Owen followed the American tradition of experimentalism and found that, as have numerous other people.  It's always more disastrous than capitalism (which is already disastrous) unless people are following the advice of Christ to love each other or are overflowing with His Spirit of empathy.  And that's never going to happen when people are ruled by tribalists/Talmudists that hate Christ and others unless He makes it happen by converting a member of their political cult again, as He did with the apostle Paul and so forth. 

Are you going to plan based on miraculous events or make plans based on repeated events that can be observed?

What can be observed of socialism historically:
Community experiment in America (1825)

In 1825, such an experiment was attempted under the direction of his disciple, Abram Combe, at Orbiston near Glasgow; and in the next year Owen himself began another at New Harmony, Indiana, U.S., sold to him by George Rapp. After a trial of about two years both failed completely.
The word "socialism" first became current in the discussions of the "Association of all Classes of all Nations" which Owen formed in 1835[6] with himself as Preliminary Father.  During these years his secularistic teaching gained such influence among the working classes as to give occasion for the statement in the Westminster Review (1839) that his principles were the actual creed of a great portion of them.

At this period, some more communistic experiments were made, of which the most important were that at Ralahine, in County Clare, Ireland, and that at Tytherly in Hampshire. The former (1831) proved a remarkable success for three-and-a-half years until the proprietor, having ruined himself by gambling, had to sell out. Tytherly, begun in 1839, failed absolutely.

By 1846 the only permanent result of Owen's agitation, so zealously carried on by public meetings, pamphlets, periodicals, and occasional treatises remained the co-operative movement, and for the time even that seemed to have utterly collapsed. He died at his native town on 17 November 1858.  --Wikipedia
Socialism = abject failure. 

We don't need to try it or experiment with it again.  Technology isn't going to change forms of consciousness that the historical record shows that only empathy or Jesus (the empathy of God) changes. 

Technology is merely a matter of technique. 

Something else to research... wonder if this is true.

AlaricBalth's picture
And Hungary rid themselves of its central bank. "According to a report on the German-language website “National Journal,” Orbán has now moved to unseat the usurers from their throne. The popular, nationalistic prime minister told the IMF that Hungary neither wants nor needs further “assistance” from that proxy of the Rothschild-owned Federal Reserve Bank. No longer will Hungarians be forced to pay usurious interest to private, unaccountable central bankers. Instead, the Hungarian government has assumed sovereignty over its own currency and now issues money debt free, as it is needed. The results have been nothing short of remarkable. The nation’s economy, formerly staggering under deep indebtedness, has recovered rapidly and by means not seen since National Socialist Germany." August 2013
And the ECB's response: FRANKFURT (Reuters) Oct 9, 2013 - The European Central Bank has warned Hungary against tampering with central bank independence and pushed it to take the ECB's opinions more seriously.
Wed, 11/13/2013 - 08:30 | 4149391 DigDeepDown
DigDeepDown's picture
Wow did that truly happen? Inspirational.. too bad we're stuck with not having our own currency (per country) in Europe :(
Wed, 11/13/2013 - 08:39 | 4149436 AlaricBalth
AlaricBalth's picture
You won't be hearing about this from the MSM
Hungary Sheds Banker Shackles

ZH started covering last year.
Wed, 11/13/2013 - 09:02 | 4149524 Oldwood
Oldwood's picture
But that is because their banks and thereby bankers were not too big to fail. Ours on the other hand, are far too important to the survival of our "system" of theft and debt slavery. Forward I say! Progress towards the inevitable!

Tuesday, November 12, 2013


[quote="Pete Tar, post: 75240, member: 481"]I assume you meant 'selectiveness' not seductiveness.
How does SPLC pull apart social fabric by highlighting civil rights issues?
Mynym seems to think their work is void because it doesn't highlight the work of the evil Zions.[/quote]

It's not all void.  Sometimes they do good work.  But apparently their own workers know that their work is often void or just a fund raising and marketing gimmick designed for progressives, that's probably why they walked out and protest sometimes.

The point is that the SPLC is partnering with the DOJ and the DHS even when they can't put two words together about the ideologies of racial supremacy promoted by Chabad and others.  (The CEO of SPLC now sits on the DHS Working Group on Countering Violent Extremism)  

At a wider level, there tends to be one "hate group" that wants to police all others or lead the charge for immigration everywhere else but then:  "Uh, but I want my own tribal homeland or somethin'."

Something like:
"Give me your tired, your poor...  heck, just send the wretched refuse and the trash!"
"Uh...  I need my own homeland with my own race.  No refuse allowed!"  --Emma Lazarus, Zionist

That's hardly a satire of people that tend to have a tribal/Talmudic mentality.  Apparently in their minds everyone else or every other tribe should hardly be allowed to have an identity (hate!!!).  Or everyone else probably needs to be told their immigration policies... but when it comes to their own tribal identity, the borders are closed and being in a tribal "hate group" isn't an issue.  As apparently it's not hateful to think of yourself as a chosen tribe, fit to police or rule the goyim based on laws that don't apply to your own tribe.

I'm actually a big believer in love and marriage dissolving race and hate, myself.  So all Jews in Israel should be free to marry whoever they want and there should be more immigration there.  In fact, we should all go there and become activists for immigration and free ponies and rainbows.  Not to mention working with their national security apparatus to police their tribalism more than the borders. 

I'm all for love, romance and marriage because it will shred racism and tribalism, naturally.  So here's an idea, every Israeli should have to marry a Palestinian by law.  And there you go... a problem that might ignite the world in flames, solved in a romantic way.  Make love, not war, etc.  But if that really is just romantic dreaming, then it's time to recognize the tribe that wants to form and the way it will naturally begin trying to police all others.

[quote]Somewhat ironic considering of course that the evil Zions have featured heavily as imagined protagonists in all fascist movements.[/quote]

Nazis and Zionists got along well enough to have a "Transfer Agreement" and so forth. Given that they were in agreement due to being racists and totalitarians that wanted to police others, perhaps that shouldn't be surprising.  Note that the Jewish scholar who published that information was disowned by his own mother.  Tribalism. 

Also, the general racist evils of Zionism or the practices of people with a tribal/Talmudic mentality in general are not imaginary.  It's a documented fact that many Jewish factions have been and continue to be racial and tribal supremacists.  That's simply history or a matter of reading their own writings.  It's also a historical fact that the reaction of fascist "reactionaries" to Jewish tribalism is usually equally tribal.  And that's not even all that historical, as it's already playing out in Greece again after Lloyd Blanfein and Goldman Sachs were finished with things there.  What's the general reaction of organized Jews to fascist reactionaries?  A more sophisticated form of tribalism based on a collective or tribal identity that will probably just through fuel on the fire as they seek to protect themselves from anti-semitism again.  Hopefully the vicious circle won't eventually lead to headlines like "Jews Declare War on Greece" if the Golden Dawn actually comes to power there more and so forth.  What's the "reaction" of reactionaries when a tribe or a race "declares war" on them?  It's an escalation in tribalism again.  Again. Again...  people like to say "never again" but it would probably be helpful if they tried to understand what took place in the first place. 

My question is, where did this sort of "death spiral" come from originally?  True, everything goes down and descends into racism and tribalism and so forth later.  But what is often at the root of all this racism and evil?  With respect to that, imagine this headline or scenario in the corporate media from the beginning:  "All Jews Want to Kick Lloyd Blankfein's Ass"  or "Judea Declares War on the Blankfein's Idea That He's Doing God's Work"  Etc.   But that didn't happen.  And notice how Blankfein started trying to put a little rainbow in front of himself and came out in support of same sex marriage and so forth, probably in order to appeal to progressives.  Next thing you know Blankfein is going to start trying to sell hopium and change for Obama Inc. again.   Similarly... with respect to the SPLC, imagine if members of black nationalist or supremacist groups wanted to create organizations that were progressively (just look at this little gay rainbow and not the money, etc.etc.) beginning to be partnered with power structures in the DOJ or the DHS and so forth.  Would it be a good idea to turn a blind eye to the ideologies of racial and tribal supremacy of some of the members of their supposedly happy and gay organization just because they put a rainbow out in front of the same old crap?  I wouldn't say that their work would be void.  They might wind up doing good work fighting other racists sometimes. But it would still ultimately be a pretty fake organization that shouldn't be allowed to merge with the DHS or the DOJ.  

Note that if you say that the Nation of Islam or Islamic factions shouldn't be able to form partnerships with the DHS, then the same thing applies to Talmudic factions and the tribal mentality that tends to typify them.   (I could be wrong but I can't find where the SPLC lists Chabad as a hate group and so forth.)  

Monday, November 11, 2013

I would like to write about different factions and issues but few are as influential and salient as Zionism.

Maybe someday everyone will be home and not in war zones.

Well, at least the war with Syria/Iran has been prevented again for now.  So chalk one up for us, Anonymous and the internet in general...  influence that is only growing, I might add.  So if you've hitched your wagon to central banking and the corporate media while the internet is decentralizing everything, well. 

But stopping the war with Syria/Iran for now is no thanks to people that frame all criticism of AIPAC and Talmudists as being anti-Semitic.  (And anti-Saudi or anti-Qatari too, no doubt.)  I shouldn't say stopping another war.  As it's just been put on a simmer and the Israelis are still running bombing campaigns and so forth anyway. 

Israel is incensed that the Obama administration confirmed a recent Israeli airstrike on Syria's coast, The Times of Israel reports.

Late Wednesday night a Syrian base in the coastal area of Latakia — which held Russian-made surface-to-air missile systems — was destroyed.

The immediate speculation was that Israel was involved, but that wasn't certain until an unnamed White House official confirmed it to CNN.  Link
  So apparently they didn't really need AIPAC to try to get the US to find WMDs in Assad's underpants, after all. 

We're still paying for the missiles in foreign aide.  But at least they've begun fighting some of their own wars instead of trying to false flag or lobby Americans into war again.

But again...  this is no thanks to you (Don) and others that can't see through the charade of all resistance to putting Israeli interests before those of Americans (other than dual citizens) being the equivalent of "antisemitism" and therefore, racism.  We should either annex Israel and all be dual citizens so that we all have equal representation in our government with respect to going to war or no one should be.  If over 90% of the American people could have disagreed with the scheduled war with Syria/Iran and we still went ahead with it (openly instead of covertly) anyway... that would have been something.  

I think the Israelis and their agents in the U.S. must have scared themselves with the anthrax attacks and the fact that anyone that bothers to research it knows that poor Collin Powell/"Here take this vial of it to the U.N. because Al Qaeda met with Iraqis in Prague or somethin'." scenario was utterly botched.  Etc. Even if the corporate media won't investigate and might as well act as an asset for the Mossad, apparently the internet cannot be controlled yet.

Anyway...  support the veterans, stop trying to find WMDs in their underpants and stop going to war for Israel.  Or if you want to find some WMDs and a rogue nuclear weapons program, then look for those that the Israelis stole from America. 

Debt, the first 5,000 years.

Saving this from censorship.

[quote="Pete Tar, post: 75070, member: 481"]So it's only fascism if it's aligned or part of the current structure, but it can't be fascism if it's opposed to it?
His opposing a current power structure doesn't mean he wouldn't impose his own version of it with his own in-group if he could.
(speculation only and not saying he would).[/quote]

Given the philosophy that Jones has laid down over the years he would discredit himself if he tried to partner with the DOJ or the DHS to create "hate speech" or "hate groups" lists like the SPLC does and so forth.  He already has a record, so no one would listen to him anymore if he violated his own First/Second Amendment principles. 

With respect to speculation, given that the SPLC was apparently created by Talmudists perhaps it's not surprising that their way is to centralize power over all other tribes or "hate groups" while apparently failing to mention the racial supremacy typical factions of the "in group"/tribe they may tend to identify with.  (E.g. Chabad.)  [ex]“…If a Jew needs a liver, can you take the liver of an innocent non-Jew passing by to save him? The Torah would probably permit that. Jewish life has an infinite value,” he explained. “There is something infinitely more holy and unique about Jewish life than non-Jewish life.”— Chabad-Lubavitch Rabbi Yitzhak Ginsburgh in “Jewish Week,” the largest Jewish publication in the United States, April 26, 1996.[/ex]  Etc. I can find no record of the SPLC condemning Chabad or listing Zionists along with other tribal/racist hate groups that want their own nations based on perceptions of race or tribe.

I could be wrong.  But it seems that what progressive dupes of the SPLC seem to be trying to see in Jones based on shadows and fact free "speculation" could be seen in the Southern Poverty Law Center, if anywhere.  Speculation only, I'm not saying that the SPLC might have the same Talmudic mentality as many Jewish Bolsheviks that weren't really crying themselves to sleep over the poverty of Russian peasants after they helped centralize power and wound up starving millions of them to death.  (Given the history of those with a Talmudic mentality the SPLC probably just wants to help win a war on poverty while paying themselves $300,000 in compensation and partnering with the DHS to try to police every form of tribalism or every hate group but Chabad, right?  Or not.)    All speculation only, not saying that they might begin to impose their version of a power structure to police all other tribes but their own in group if they could.

Anyway, can anyone here do a better job of framing Jones as a totalitarian or fascist?  You take Jones as an apparen Constitutionalists and I'll take the SPLC and the way that they've begun working with the DOJ and DHS to try to police everyone but their own in group/tribe and so forth.  It should be easy given that the SPLC supposedly wants to give everyone free ponies to poop happy and gay rainbows of tolerance and love everywhere, right?  

[quote]There were corporate and state structures before fascism was instituted in Germany. So it was once an 'outsider' view.[/quote]

Fascist leaders emerged from socialist parties because fascism is the heretical branch of socialism.  So it's not as if they were civil libertarians before but then once they got power they turned into fascists and socialists.  The historical record shows that they were always totalitarians and always had a tribal mentality, just like the Talmudists that they tended to enter into racist dialectics with.  (Best to leave them both to debate who the chosen or supreme race is and go out and so something useful in life, seems to me.) 

Given the facts about fascism it's likely that your unsupported speculations about Jones will always remain just that.  But if there are some facts that support theories about Jones being "in many ways" a fascist or his being a fascist in the "doesn't mean he wouldn't be one in the future" world of hazy hopium and change, then have at it.  Because so far I could probably do a better job of arguing that the SPLC has totalitarian goals.

Standard progressive view of Alex Jones turns into the material of satire where one is supposed to believe that civil libertarians are seeking to centralize power like fascists or progressives.

[quote="Pete Tar, post: 75070, member: 481"]So it's only fascism if it's aligned or part of the current structure, but it can't be fascism if it's opposed to it?
His opposing a current power structure doesn't mean he wouldn't impose his own version of it with his own in-group if he could.
(speculation only and not saying he would).[/quote]

How would that be possible if he wants to keep power and guns decentralized?  In what possible scenario would Jones be able to centralize power unless he totally changes his political philosophy and therefore discredits himself? 

So far we seem to have a progressive theory that just because he stands in opposition to the DHS that "Doesn't mean he wouldn't actual join with them to try to begin creating lists of people guilty of hate speech while trying to take their guns.... in my vivid imagination."  Meanwhile back in reality it's generally progressives, the SPLC and other Zionists or dual citizens trying to use terrorism and hatred as an excuse to centralize power over others.  And they're prone to violating the First and Second Amendments, not Jones.

[quote]There were corporate and state structures before fascism was instituted in Germany. So it was once an 'outsider' view.[/quote]

They became more powerful and tribal/racist due to Darwinian pseudo-science combined with their collective reaction to the work of the international bankers and eventually the tribalism/racism behind "Judea Declares War on Germany" too.  The same thing is happening in Greece because Goldman Sachs and Talmudists ignited some fires there but the traditional reaction of Jews is to blame anti-Semitism while failing to hold Jews accountable for anything.  Ironically Jones doesn't have anything at all positive to say about the Golden Dawn, so that's another reason to note that it's unlikely that he is a fascist. 

A fascist could be looked on as a person that rejects claims about being a chosen or superior race and instead says something like:  "No, we are the chosen tribe."

But like Jones, I don't have any use for claims of tribal supremacy and so forth either way.  What were the reasons that Jones and I are supposedly like fascists, again?  We should go through them within more of a factual framework instead of relying on "theories" that seem to be based on a progressive worldview.  (Sorry to take the hopium.)

With respect to the claim that fascists necessarily supported traditional gender roles (?????), therefore Jones is "in many ways" like a fascist:[ex]Konrad Heiden (1945, p. 235) went further and described homosexuality as being pervasive and indeed institutionalized within the S.A. movement and its predecessors: “The perversion was widespread in the secret murderers’ army of the post-war period and its devotees denied that it was a perversion. They were proud, regarded themselves as ‘different from the others,’ meaning better.” This is perhaps not surprising, since so many of the leaders of the S.A. were open homosexuals…
(American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 87, No. 5, Mar., 1982
Sexual Taboos and Social Boundaries
by Christie Davies :1057-1038)

Later in the 1930s, the régime levelled similar accusations against the army Chief of Staff, Werner von Fritsch, who would not comply with nazi policies, against Catholic clerics in order to bring the Church into disrepute so that its influence in education and the youth movement would be reduced, and against branches of the independent youth movement. The pragmatic position of certain nazis in power seems evident from the fact that Röhm was not the only homosexual in the nazi movement, and that before his liquidation homosexuality seems to have been tacitly tolerated in the SA and the Hitler Youth.
(Medicine, Male Bonding and Homosexuality in Nazi Germany
by Harry Oosterhuis
Journal of Contemporary History,
Vol. 32, No. 2. (Apr., 1997), :187-205)[/ex]And so forth.  I suspect that you're going to need some rather elaborate theories to try to incorporate historical facts into some of the crackpot theories that have been proposed here about the nature of fascism and why it emerges.

Theoretical perspectives on the facts:[ex]Why was it then, since we were completely non-party, that our purely scientific Institute was the first victim which fell to the new regime? 'Fell' is, perhaps, an understatement for it was totally destroyed; the books from the big library, my irreplaceable documents, all the pictures and files everything, in fact, that was not nailed down or a permanent fixture was dragged outside and burned. What explanation is there for the fact that the trades union buildings of the socialists, the communist clubs and the synagogues were only destroyed at a much later date and never so thoroughly as our pacific Institute? Whence this hatred, and, what was even more strange, this haste and thoroughness?The answer to this is simple and straightforward enough—we knew too much.It would be against medical principles to provide a list of the Nazi leaders and their perversions. One thing, however, is certain—not ten percent of those men who, in 1933, took the fate of Germany into their hands, were sexually normal...
(The Memoirs of a Sexologist
(New York: 1954) pp. 429 ff)

According to the chief psychiatrist at Nuremberg, Douglas M. Kelley, only two of the twenty-two major defendants were without 'vices'...
(Journal of Modern History,
Vol. 47, No. 2, Jun., 1975
Psychohistorical Perspectives on Modern German History
By Peter Loewenberg :239)[/ex]  Actually that last reference was referring to a fact or a bit of gossip, depending on your perspective.  So back to the facts, if the Nazis were generally a bunch of conservatives that supported traditional gender roles then why didn't they have any problem with homosexuality and non-traditional forms of sexuality being practiced in their ranks?  Not only did they not have a problem with it, they defended it:  [ex]...the brown-shirted S.A. never became much more than a motley mob of brawlers. Many of its top leaders, beginning with its chief, Roehm, were notorious homosexual perverts. Lieutenant Edmund Heines, who led the Munich S.A., was not only a homosexual but a convicted murderer. These two and dozens of others quarreled and feuded as only men of unnatural sexual inclinations, with their peculiar jealousies, can.
An organization, however streamlined and efficient, is made up of erring human beings, and in those years when Hitler was shaping his party to take over Germany’s destiny he had his fill of troubles with his chief lieutenants, who constantly quarreled not only among themselves but with him. He, who was so monumentally intolerant by his very nature, was strangely tolerant of one human condition—a man’s morals. No other party in Germany came near to attracting so many shady characters. As we have seen, a conglomeration of pimps, murderers, homosexuals, alcoholics and blackmailers flocked to the party as if to a natural haven. Hitler did not care, as long as they were useful to him. When he emerged from prison he found not only that they were at each other’s throats but that there was a demand from the more prim and respectable leaders such as Rosenberg and Ludendorff that the criminals and especially the perverts be expelled from the movement. This Hitler frankly refused to do. "I do not consider it to be the task of a political leader," he wrote in his editorial...
(The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich: A History of Nazi Germany by William L. Shirer
(Simon and Schuster) 1990 :120,121-122) [/ex]

What was the list of other things that make "paleoconservatives" or Jones and I "in many ways" like fascists or Nazis, again? 

I have little use for simplistic stigma words but if they are to be used then there's probably more of an argument that American progressives are "fascists," given their increasingly toxic brew of nationalism in the name of national security combined with the way they're promoting corporatism in the name of trying to give people healthcare. There again, I don't have much use for the game of pin the tail on the Nazi.   That's a complex issue (Including the way it came to be in a dialectic with other forms of racial supremacy and tribalism in Zionism.) that can't be reduced to stigma words.

Friday, November 08, 2013

SPLC ramble...

Not worth posting and probably needs more research as far as the culture at the SPLC possibly being shaped by people with a Talmudic mentality.  Probably something along those lines, though.

[quote="JeffreyNotGeoffrey, post: 74471, member: 1607"]SPLC identifies hate groups.[/quote]

Curious, they don't include many Jewish factions or Chabad and so forth.  I checked their lists.

Note some Jewish ideologies of supremacy and "hate":[ex]The difference between a Jewish and a non-Jewish person stems from the common expression: 'Let us differentiate'. Thus, we do not have a case of profound change in which a person is merely on a superior level. Rather, we have a case of 'let us differentiate' between totally different species.

This is what needs to be said about the body: The body of a Jewish person is of a totally different quality from the body of [members] of all nations of the world... The difference of the inner quality [of the body] is so great that the bodies would be considered as completely different species. This is the reason why there is an halachic difference in attitude about the bodies of non-Jews [as opposed to the bodies of Jews] 'their bodies are in vain'. An even greater difference exists in regard to the soul. Two contrary types of soul exist, a non-Jewish soul comes from three satanic spheres, while the Jewish soul stems from holinessChabad[/ex]  There again, it's not clear how many people that have a Talmudic mentality work at the SPLC.  But sometimes it almost seems like people that consider themselves Jewish like to set themselves up to arbitrate all ideologies of supremacy, tribalism and racism... perhaps in order to avoid looking at their own ideologies of tribal supremacy.  Logs and specks again? 

[quote]They never advocate anything being done to said hate groups except to expose them and possibly get them to lose outside funding.[/quote]

Note the status of funding at the SPLC: 
[ex]What has infuriated the SPLC’s liberal critics is their suspicion that Morris Dees has used the SPLC primarily as a fundraising machine fueled by his direct-mail talents that generates a nice living for himself (the SPLC’s 2010 tax filing lists a compensation package of $345,000 for him as the organization’s chief trial counsel and highest-paid employee) and a handful of other high ranking SPLC officials plus luxurious offices and perks, but that does relatively little in the way of providing the legal services to poor people that its name implies.
CharityWatch (formerly the American Institute of Philanthropy), an independent organization that monitors and rates leading nonprofits for their fundraising efficiency, has consistently given the SPLC its lowest grade of “F” (i.e., “poor”) for its stockpiling of assets far beyond what CharityWatch deems a reasonable reserve (three years’ worth of operating expenses) to tide it over during donation-lean years. But even if the SPLC weren’t sitting on an unspent $256 million, according to CharityWatch, it would still be a mediocre (“C+”) performer among nonprofits.
...Morris Dees [founder of the Southern Poverty Law Center] won a judgment for a black woman whose son was killed by Klansmen. She received $51,875 as settlement. Mr. Dees, according to an investigation by the Montgomery Advertiser, pulled in $9 million from fund-raising solicitation letters that featured a particularly gruesome photograph of the grieving mother's son. Mr. Dees, who pays himself an annual salary of $275,000, offered the grieving mother none of the $9 million her son's death made for him.  Link[/ex][quote]I don't see how labeling people for hating other minorities, women, and tha gayz is itself hateful or anywhere near as bad as the garbage that Alex Jones spews.[/quote]

It's fine and supposedly the SPLC even does good work sometimes.  But it's not as if SPLC is totally good or Alex Jones is totally bad and should be put on a terrorist list by some SPLC lawyer trying to market their fight against hatred and "poverty."  If they're trying to do something about poverty while running a "non profit" then perhaps they could cut back on their $300,000 in compensation. 

Thursday, November 07, 2013

A Muslim Student Challenges Ravi Zacharias


[quote="Bemused to Death, post: 74275, member: 2808"]
If this fascist creep isn't playing out, what is playing out instead that supports the lack of concern or denial of the present state of affairs?[/quote]

I think there is evidence that the banker's ponzi and the psychological effect of their record amounts of debt/money flowing around "fiscal cliffs" has a lot to do with a growing sense of unease.  Prominent CIA agents have said that they're now turning their attention to the economy as the greatest threat to national security. 

But no one is really doing anything about it, as far as getting the government to issue a fiat currency debt and interest free for the sake of "We the people...".   (Ciancia probably believed in a gold standard. Real.  Dumb.  That would be like the Tea Party trying to pay off all the debt/money being created by bankers and then wondering why they don't have enough money in the end.)

Given that people are dumb one should probably expect more record ammo purchases by the DHS and perhaps more cases like Ciancia too...  as record amounts of ponzi keep colliding with the world and forming "NWO" governments full of "special interests" created by the ponzi and for the ponzi.  If people had more control over their governments and could see that the government had their best interests at heart (and not the special interests/corporations formed out of ponzi) then they would be less likely to feel alienated.