Devvy Kidd Is Wrong!

Sharia Law Is Not The Enemy…

Devvy Kidd is an intelligent, incisive, and talented writer who stays at the vanguard in the fight to preserve freedom.  Her articles are well researched and widely read.  She is a lead writer for the NewsWithViews internet page which is and has been a potent force against the cloud of oppression that threatens our nation.

Nevertheless, I take issue with her recent column entitled “Plotting for America to Be Ruled Under Sharia Law is Sedition”.

The NewsWithViews website is theologically Dispensational.   The intention of its owner and its excellent cadre of writers is honorable.  But, like most of our media, there is a dangerous and detrimental side that concentrates on symptoms, omits essentials, and directs our attention away from real danger. 

Islam and Sharia Law are being skillfully used to create conflict and fear.  Fear and strife weaken the ability of a society to resist the despotic intentions of the elite globalists.  Islam is a heretical religion but like all religions it demands exclusivity making it an enemy to the prevailing United States religion of humanism.  The percentage of Muslims in the United States population is tiny compared to professing Christians but because it is a full orbed religion with a legal system and a vibrant world view it is growing rapidly.

Like Christianity, Islam has different theological factions.  Most Muslims are not militant.  They seek to live under Sharia law because they understand that law forms the religious base of society.  If Sharia law can be demonized and forbidden, the entire religion of Islam will quickly follow.   They have seen this occur in United States of America where human law has been allowed to supersede the overarching law of God making us a nation of flaccid professing Christians who live under and support a government controlled by Satanic forces.

The world is engaged in a religious war.  Christianity has been almost defeated in the United States but Islam is still alive and promoting Sharia law rather than the sinful laws of the elite power structure.  Since religion is changed by changing the law, antinomian Christianity was unable to stem the advance of humanism.  It lost the battle without a fight.  Islam’s Sharia law is a strong impediment to the advance of the pagan world order and every effort is being made to destroy it. 

Devvy has fallen for the propaganda that makes Sharia law an enemy and written an article that creates fear and loathing for a religion that is an ally in the fight against the elite globalist agenda.  Christianity and Islam are god centered religions.  Talmudic Judaism is a humanistic religion.  Like the United States, Zionist, neo-Israel has a pagan government that regularly defies God’s Commandments.

Devvy provides a link to Publius Huldah’s Blog.  Ms. Huldah contends that our rights come from God and it is “the purpose of civil government to secure the Rights GOD gave us.”  She lists a number of rights that are God given and before copiously excoriating Muslims asserts that “God means for us to enjoy life!  Healthy food, wine and strong drink (in moderation); attractive dress for women, the marriage relation between man & woman, prosperity, and liberty!”

This is rubbish!  God is not our bartender, He does not furnish blessing at our demand.  We are His servants not He ours.  Peace, freedom, and prosperity are results of obedience to His Law.   The Bible is not a book about human rights; but a documentation of the results of obedience and disobedience.  It is a book about obligation; our obligation to obey the Creator of the Universe.  In response to our obedience God promises us blessings.  Obligation first; blessing second.

Our adversary is a cunning, elite, nihilistic, cabal that is using deception, torture, murder, theft, and mass destruction to gain control of the entire planet.  They have no allegiance to an overarching morality; where their power reins, their word is law.  Their behavior provides an excellent example of human nature in its unrestrained form.  It is not new but another in the thousands of replays that history records.

Attempts to resurrect the United States Constitution are passé.  In 2002, powerful congressman Henry Hyde responded to Ron Paul with this statement:  “There are things in the Constitution that have been overtaken by events, by time. Declaration of war is one of them…. Inappropriate, anachronistic, it isn’t done anymore.”  Unfortunately, congress began the process and President Obama has finished it.  The civil liberties outlined in the Bill of Rights have been superseded by laws and Executive orders that expose most of our population to false arrest, torture, and extraordinary rendition.

Heretical Dispensational theology is the platform for the NewsWithViews Website and their  Christian writers often produce an aberrant description of the Will of the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. NWVs elevates Talmudic Judaism and the neo-Pharisees from enemies of the Faith that Jesus railed against to leaders that are revered and preserved.  It distorts the Christian religion willed to us by the Reformers and by denying the validity of the law destroys the ability of Christianity to impact the social order.

The Talmud is an historic compilation of the thoughts of Rabbi’s; it is humanistic and often conniving.  Zionist Jews place the Talmud in a position similar to that of Mary in the Catholic religion but instead of being the Mother of God the Talmud is the father of the devil.  It puts the opinions of the Rabbis above the Word of God.  It affirms the superiority of the Jewish race.  It condones sinful behavior, allows God’s Law to be broken, and builds the ego of those who revere it.  In “Judaism’s Strange God’s” Michael Hoffman writes “The Talmud is such a heap of rubbish, and Judaism is so harmful to Judaic people, that it is difficult to find any good whatsoever in it.”  He goes on to describe the reverent regard given to Talmudic scholars by the Orthodox Jewish community.

Paul Craig Robert’s recent column contained a 2001 Pakistani interview with Osama bin Laden Bin Laden denied having anything to do with the 9/11 attack. He said, “I have already said that I am not involved in the 11 September attacks in the United States. As a Muslim, I try my best to avoid telling a lie. I had no knowledge of these attacks, nor do I consider the killing of innocent women, children, and other humans as an appreciable act. Islam strictly forbids causing harm to innocent women, children, and other people.”  This was a Pakistani interview.  Bin Laden was speaking to fellow Muslims.   We can decide not to believe him but we know our media lies to us and there is a good chance Osama is truthful.  His profession of honesty is far and away better than the rampant prevarication in our society!

The source material for Devvy’s article could have come directly from the propaganda machine of Judaism’s Zionist faction.  The same humanistic Zionists that have debased our morals with filthy movies, destroyed our culture with multi-culturalism, banished Christianity with the ACLU, attacked patriots with the Southern Poverty Law Center, fed us distorted and propagandized news through ownership of television stations, radio stations, newspapers, and book publishers;  the same group that surrounds and controls our government leaders and was the source for the warmongering Project for the New America Century (PNAC).  These are rabid humanists who seek to use our nation to invade Iran and stamp out the Muslim religion.  

It is not a Godly group, not a group that might accept Jesus as the propitiation for their sin.  Not a group that God would bless.  These are Christ haters; men and women who would crucify Jesus again today.  Their prayers cannot be heard by the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.  His ears are only attuned to the Name of His Son.  He does not hear prayers in the name of another.

No, my Christian friend, Sharia law is not the enemy.  Islam is an ally against humanistic world government.  Talmudic Jews are prominent in the elite cabal that seeks control of the world. Dispensational support for humanistic Judaism is Satanic.

There are few, if any, Christian heads-of-state in today’s world.  I was surprised to read of one such leader and of his eloquent prayer of repentance.  This is the prayer of Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni on the fiftieth anniversary of their independence from British rule:

“Father God in heaven, today we stand here as Ugandans, to thank you for Uganda. We are proud that we are Ugandans and Africans. We thank you for all your goodness to us.”

“I stand here today to close the evil past and especially in the last 50 years of our national leadership history and at the threshold of a new dispensation in the life of this nation. I stand here on my own behalf and on behalf of my predecessors to repent. We ask for your forgiveness.”

“We confess these sins, which have greatly hampered our national cohesion and delayed our political, social and economic transformation.”

“We confess sins of idolatry and witchcraft which are rampant in our land. We confess sins of shedding innocent blood, sins of political hypocrisy, dishonesty, intrigue and betrayal.”

“Forgive us of sins of pride, tribalism and sectarianism; sins of laziness, indifference and irresponsibility; sins of corruption and bribery that have eroded our national resources; sins of sexual immorality, drunkenness and debauchery; sins of unforgiveness, bitterness, hatred and revenge; sins of injustice, oppression and exploitation; sins of rebellion, insubordination, strife and conflict.”

“These sins and many others have characterised our past leadership, especially the last 50 years of our history. Lord forgive us and give us a new beginning. Give us a heart to love you, to fear you and to seek you. Take away from us all the above sins.”

“We pray for national unity. Unite us as Ugandans and eliminate all forms of conflict, sectarianism and tribalism. Help us to see that we are all your children, children of the same Father. Help us to love and respect one another and to appreciate unity in diversity.”

“We pray for prosperity and transformation. Deliver us from ignorance, poverty and disease. As leaders, give us wisdom to help lead our people into political, social and economic transformation.”

“We want to dedicate this nation to you so that you will be our God and guide. We want Uganda to be known as a nation that fears God and as a nation whose foundations are firmly rooted in righteousness and justice to fulfill what the Bible says in Psalm 33:12: Blessed is the nation, whose God is the Lord. A people you have chosen as your own.”

“I renounce all the evil foundations and covenants that were laid in idolatry and witchcraft. I renounce all the satanic influence on this nation. And I hereby covenant Uganda to you, to walk in your ways and experience all your blessings forever.”

“I pray for all these in the name of the Father, Son and the Holy Spirit. Amen.”

Are you listening America?

Pillar of Impotence

In the past week, the people of Gaza have been subject to some serious Israeli attacks. Some Hamas leaders and militants have been murdered and many more Palestinians –  innocent civilians, babies, kids women and elders – have lost their live. Yet, Gaza is celebrating with the Hamas leadership never more popular.

So here is an interesting anecdote that deserves our attention. During the recent clashes Gazan militants launched more than 1500 rockets at Israel. These rockets caused rather limited damage with more than six Israeli fatalities. Militarily at least, this is far from a great achievement. And yet the Gazans are celebrating. Would Israelis be happy to learn that 1500 of their rockets had had such limited effect? Would any western army accept such a result at such a cost? The answer is a categorical NO. But the Palestinians are ecstatic, why, because they know they have won the battle and are now set to win the war. They won the battle, not because they killed six Israelis – actually they would have won it without hitting one single Israeli. They won it because they managed to deliver a message to Israel, world Jewry and the whole world.

For many years I have argued that the Palestinian war of the rockets should be seen as sending a message: Israelis! You are on stolen land! You took our houses, villages, cities, fields and orchards. You pushed us into the desert. You surrounded us with barbed wire. You starve us and you kill us simply to suit your political ambitions. So this rocket is a message to you all. Think about us and then look at yourself in the mirror. Enough is enough!’

For more than six decades the Israelis have dismissed this message. They surrounded themselves with ghetto walls and have sealed their skies with an Iron Dome. However, with Tel Aviv now under attack, Israel and Israelis have been confronted with their original sin.

In the last two days, the entire Israeli media has admitted the colossal defeat of the so-called Operation Pillar of Cloud. Just yesterday, the Israeli right wing Ynet wrote  “Hamas stood up and won almost all fronts…. Hamas has managed to turn focus on Gaza, it made it into the centre of the political discussion.” It seems that the most hawkish Israel government ever, has failed to beat either Hamas or the Palestinian spirit. The Palestinians are stronger than ever while the Jewish State has been exposed as an impotent manic-depressive collective driven by a neurotic and impotent leadership.

If Zionism was ever there to counter Jewish diaspora ghetto paralysis, just to ensure that ‘never again’ Jews would be ‘led like lamb to the slaughter’, Netanyahu, Barak and Liebermann have proved in the past week that paralysis is inherent to Jewish political culture. Like all bullies, they are obsessed with power, but when they meet defiance, their vile paradigm instantly collapses.

Speech can provides us with an insight into what we most lack. Speech can reveal that which we prefer to keep hidden. But speech is also often rather misleading,  there to shape our lies into a truthful narrative. But it is these ‘true lies’ that provide an access to the fearful-self. It is these ‘true lies’ that reveal the unconscious. So, when, for instance Jewish ‘anti’ Zionists preach to us about Jewish ‘humanism and universalism’ they are obviously lying yet are they not also expressing a yearning for such an ethos to really exist in their own culture? Similarly, when Israel refers to itself as ‘The only democracy in the Middle East’ it this not  because Israel would really love to be such a true democracy? In other words, often, when we speak we demonstrate what we most lack i.e. that which we miss and desire, yet we cannot admit this to ourselves. When Netanyahu decided to designate his latest massacre as a Pillar of Cloud, he actually tried to disguise from himself and his people the fact that in reality, he is actually an impotent, and the cloud is actually one big duvet of lies, there only to conceal his  shame.

Israel and the Israelis love to talk about their ‘power of deterrence’ –  Israeli actions, there to deter Palestinians and Arabs from even contemplating the possibility of challenging the Jewish state.  In fact, the entire Israeli foreign and military policy can be realised with reference to that power. Israel likes to see itself at the core of its neighbours’ anxiety. This explains the Israeli fascination with the accumulation of nuclear bombs and other WMDs. It explains the policy towards Iran and it also explains its brutal attitude towards the Palestinians.

Israelis are obsessed with ‘deterrence’ only because, deep down, they are aware of their own vulnerability. Israelis are fanatical about ‘deterrence’ because they know that when push comes to shove, they themselves are actually powerless. They are now exposed for what they are: a fragmented society dominated by egotistic hedonism. Israelis know that their underbelly is very soft indeed.

Israeli collective melancholia must be realised in the light of their inevitable encounter with their true nature. As Ynet admits, they have been defeated in almost every possible respect. As a society, they have been caught naked and their imaginary collective bond has proved to be a farce. In spite of Israel’s mighty, sophisticated army the Hamas leadership, together with the people of Gaza, remained defiant. In spite of relentless air raids, and till the very last moment, Hamas kept firing their rockets reminding Israelis what life in Gaza is really like. When it seemed that the IAF had done its worst (but achieved so little), the Israeli government called on its 75.000 reservists, hoping against hope that such a move would bully Hamas into surrender. Again they were wrong. Ismail Haniah made things very clear when he invited the Israeli reservists to try their luck and enter the strip. Israel was caught with its trousers down – and believe me, the vision of their collective genitalia was not a pretty sight!

‘Unconscious is the discourse of the other’ says Lacan. The fear of impotence is not the fear that you may not be up to much in bed, it is actually the unconscious nightmare that everyone around you is saying behind your back that you’re not up to much in bed. Israelis not just now admitting their impotence to themselves, they are also aware of now being seen as a bunch of arrogant, cowardly and helpless barbarians.

By the time it became clear that the Pillar wasn’t even semi-erect and the Cloud couldn’t cover even that embarrassing truth, Netanyahu, Barak and Liebermann as well as the whole of Israeli society realised that nothing was left of Israel’s power of deterrence – for the Palestinians have lost their fear.

The Sovereign Man Is The Real Prisoner

According to establishment officials, the concept of the Sovereign Man philosophy is a direct threat to the authority of the State. Depending upon your perception of reality and the degree of legitimacy for government, given to the prevailing order, fundamental inalienable rights of the individual may vary widely. In the extreme, government statists consider most if not all natural rights as capricious and arbitrary, if conflicts challenge the dictates of the regime. This unending and interminable struggle to defend undeniable individual basic rights drives bureaucrats to use unconscionable measures to coerce citizen compliance.

An illustration comes from the FBI’s Counterterrorism Analysis Section in their publication, Sovereign Citizens – A Growing Domestic Threat to Law Enforcement.

“The FBI considers sovereign-citizen extremists as comprising a domestic terrorist movement, which, scattered across the United States, has existed for decades . . . Sovereign citizens do not represent an anarchist group, nor are they a militia, although they sometimes use or buy illegal weapons. Rather, they operate as individuals without established leadership and only come together in loosely affiliated groups to train, help each other with paperwork, or socialize and talk about their ideology. They may refer to themselves as “constitutionalists” or “freemen,” which is not necessarily a connection to a specific group, but, rather, an indication that they are free from government control. They follow their own set of laws. While the philosophies and conspiracy theories can vary from person to person, their core beliefs are the same: The government operates outside of its jurisdiction. Because of this belief, they do not recognize federal, state, or local laws, policies, or regulations.”

Such sentiments demonstrate that civil liberties have no place in the realm of federal law enforcement. Authoritarians assume that government automatically possesses authenticity because it claims to hold a monopoly of force within the society. Rational and balanced observers of the history and government abuses, especially to their own citizens, must conclude that arrogant superiority, manifested by magistrates and constables, has caused untold atrocities and suffering.

Resistance to unchecked governance through punitive social control and mind manipulation is the theme of arguably the most significant television series ever filmed, The Prisoner. The episodes of this 1960’s British cult production are not simply offbeat entertainment, for it deals with some of the most pronounced maltreatments and psychological torture in a society of distorted reality.For those not familiar with the program,

“Patrick McGoohan plays a man who resigns from a top secret position and is abducted from his London home. He finds himself in a beautiful village where everything is bright and cheerful – the people, their clothes, the buildings, the flowers. But despite this rosey exterior, the village serves a sinister purpose. People are forcibly brought there in order to have their valuable knowledge protected or extracted. Everyone in the Village is assigned a number instead of a name – the Prisoner is Number Six. Chief interrogator and administrator is Number Two, but he isn’t the boss – an unseen Number One is the boss.

Failure is not tolerated in the Village, and most episodes feature a new Number Two, though some are privileged to return for a second chance to break Number Six and discover why he resigned.

The Prisoner struggles to keep this information from his captors and to find out which side runs the Village and where it is. He strives to discover the identity of Number One, and above all, he attempts to escape.”

The global culture has changed in the forty-five years since No. 6 engaged in his existential struggle to preserve his dignity as a Sovereign Man. By any objective standard the attitudes and conditions in the world toward respecting the self-worth of the individual has descended into a new Dark Age of totalitarian despotism.

The always thoughtful and often profound John W. Whitehead of the Rutherford Institute penned an exceptional essay,The Prisoner: ‘I Am Not a Number. I Am a Free Man!’

“Fundamentally, however, The Prisoner is an epistemological exercise that focuses on the concept of reality, both in the subjective and objective sense – that is, can we really know anything about anything? Is reality a mere social construct? Since society creates any knowledge that people may possess, does this mean that human beings are simply products of the given social setting from which they are manufactured? As Steven Paul Davies notes in The Prisoner Handbook (2002): “Thinking for yourself is not necessarily thinking by yourself.” And as Number 2 warns Number 6 in the episode entitled “Once upon a Time”:

Society is the place where people exist together. That is civilization. The lone wolf belongs to the wilderness. You must not grow up to be a lone wolf.

Therefore, the ultimate goal of those in power is conformity to the constructs of society. This means both figuratively and literally eliminating the lone wolf, the individual. Modern psychiatry defines “normality” as conformity. This “measuring of the human psyche by psychologists,” as Davies puts it, has seriously affected how we live our lives and how we view nonconformists. Media representations of “normality” have become the criteria that society uses to evaluate its members. The concept of normality has become subjective as our views have changed to meet societal demands. The individual, as the term was once defined, is becoming passé. As McGoohan commented in 1968:

“At this moment individuals are being drained of their personalities and being brainwashed into slaves. The inquisition of the mind by psychiatrists is far worse than the assault on the body of torturers.”

The context of comparing and contrasting society and the individual has lost much of its academic substance. The “concept of reality” is routinely scripted by the elitist system that operates as the all-pervasive and all-powerful Number One. The Village of pleasant and polite appearance is essentially a penitentiary of human bondage and servitude. Heed the lesson that conformity under a coercive courtesan court is doomed to strip the majesty of their human spirit and substitute a remorseful sense of ruin, for the zombies that swallow the anguish of state discipline.

 

The relevance of the plight of the prisoner holds true for all of humanity. In a video clip from the broadcast, , the purpose – “an international community, a perfect blueprint for world order”, is the essence of the gruesome quandary that faces every living person in this age of the macabre New World Order.

The Sovereign Man is the natural order of the created universe. The Illuminati plan for total dominance, seeks to eliminate individuals by the billions. Replacing the noncompliant is essential to their annihilating agenda. The selected and remaining few, will adopt the technocratic transhumanist transformation into a demented version of Nietzsche’s Gnostic Superman.Bureaucratic minions administer punitive retribution with a sense of urgency, since the Patriot Acts allows for unmerciful treatment of “domestic terrorists”. So says the FBI . . . The fear that grips the establishment rests upon the public awareness that “The government operates outside of its jurisdiction”, also stated by the G-men. However, the recent reinstatement of the unconstitutional NDAA dictum should alarm all men of good will.

As Kurt Nimmo reports on Infowars,

“This pernicious law poses one of the greatest threats to civil liberties in our nation’s history,” writes Brian J. Trautman. Under AUMF, “this law can be used by authorities to detain (forever) anyone the government considers a threat to national security and stability – potentially even demonstrators and protesters exercising their First Amendment rights.”

If this is the real world, the Village of tranquil incarceration seems tame by comparison. The Prisoner program concludes in its search to unmask Number One, with the music of the Beatles – “All You Need Is Love” – playing on in the background. Such hallowed harmony falls upon deaf ears, when it comes to the overseers of theglobal gulag.

Sovereign individuality is basically the noble quest to fulfill your life as a unique and sacred human being. Superseding natural law with wicked Transhumanism rejects God as our creator and master. Personal responsibility and respect for a moral and lawful order is consistent with an accountable and meaningful life.

Subjecting the masses to a techno-maniacal imprisonment destiny is pure evil. That “perfect blueprint for world order” is a master plan for total enslavement. Dissent against such illicit sanctions is necessary to prevent the threat of human extermination by the functionaries of the NWO.

No law is valid without the consent of the people. Logic dictates that slavery by forced conduct and mental conformity, through cultural perversion, is a behavioral assault on human dignity. The Sovereign Man is effectively the conscience of society that oppressive government deems to be an enemy of the state. Under such governance, the state becomes the enemy of the public. Are you your own Number 6, with the need for redemption, or are you simply another jailer inside a prison of your own construction?

Be Seeing You . . .

Stop the Tyranny of World Government

Bring Back Freedom…

Are we the victims of a conspiracy?  Yes, we are.  Were our Founders victims of nefarious influences from Europe?  Yes, they were.  Are Talmudist Jews seeking to destroy Christian America?  Yes, they are.  Is Judaism at war with Christianity?  Yes, it is.  Has our government been bought and paid for by forces that seek to weaken it and meld it into world tyranny.  Yes, it has.  Is “Illuminati” an apt description of this world’s encompassing evil?   Yes, it is.  Do bankers like David Rockefeller and the European Rothschild families conspire for world domination?  Yes, they do.  Can we indict the Vatican for contributing to the world’s evils? Yes, we can.

The plot for world domination progresses slowly.  The defunct League of Nations was the first contemporary ploy.  It failed but another war created the United Nations which has stuck around and filtered its influence into the world’s legal codes.  NAFTA, GATT, and CAFTA were followed by international business consolidations that made big corporations bigger and destroyed the thousands of small businesses that were no longer able to compete.  Then our government set the stage for exporting American manufacturing capability to Asia and decimated the culture by opened the gates to both legal and illegal immigration.

The Project for the New American Century (PNAC) made the United States an international military weapon to be used and consumed in forcing several small and defenseless nations into the power fold.   The economies of China and Russia are still active but eventually they will be subjected to financial trauma like Japan and the United States.

The objective is total world hegemony through centralized power.

Tremendous progress toward world government has been made without substantially changing the everyday lives and freedoms of the citizens of the Free World.  The United States Constitution has been trashed by allowing a foreign born president to remain in office and write despotic laws that legalize holding citizens without trial and without legal representation.  Few, if any, citizens have disappeared from our streets but the legal framework for removing them is in place and facilities to house them have been built.

The entire power structure of our nation, the media, both political parties, and all of government, conduct their affairs as if the massive lies that undergird our policies are unassailable.  They support the veracity of the government story on 9/11 and honor our troops as if they were fighting for our freedom.  They support the presidency of Barak Obama as if his birth in Hawaii is unquestionable. They live and conduct their affairs on a platform of lies.  Congressman Ron Paul, the last vain political hope, has let his constituency down by prematurely discontinuing his campaign and his son, Rand has done the unthinkable by endorsing Romney.   Dr. ”No” will be followed by Dr.”Maybe”.  Wiled pragmatism runs amuck!

Military force is the last phase in the progress of enslavement; it is now being used overseas and will soon be used domestically.

Americans have been living in the midst of a revolution and most of our citizens have not noticed.  Until now, it has not been mostly peaceful.  There have been large protests. Thankfully we have been spared the anarchy of angry, insane rebellion the characterized the French and Russian revolutions.

Nevertheless, preparations are being made to forcibly quell serious resistance by using the United States Army and blunt force will surely accompany the final enslavement.  There may still be resistance but barring unforeseen intrinsic rebellion in the power structure it will be quickly stamped out and the land of the free will become a massive slave plantation.

Christians cultivated and allowed humanism to grow in our nation and being the weed that it is, it has forced out righteousness.  When our Constitution was crafted our nation was populated by Christians. But the Framers encoded rights for all religions allowing evil to take root and flourish.  Christianity has lost the battle; we are under the control of pagans and the Sovereign God has ordained our captivity!

I am a Christian and if God gives me the Grace to remain steadfast my life along with all others who resist a divine revolutionary world government will be in danger.  Paul Craig Roberts writes,   “Human Rights attorneys tell me that as the US Constitution is no longer observed by the executive branch, that I can’t speak freely according to my Constitutional rights, the First Amendment and all, without running the risk of being arrested.”  The religion of humanism has wiped out the very law that allowed it to exist. Laws protecting homosexuals strike at the heart of Christianity.  We no longer enjoy freedom of religion, free speech, free assembly, or the ear of a tyrannical government.  The inevitable tyranny of humanism that I have written about over and over again is upon us!

In 2008 President Bush’s policies marred his reputation.  Voters scrambled to replace him with President Obama whose policies have now diminished his repute.  Political hacks are again claiming this election is the most important in our history; that President Barak Obama must be defeated in order to save the nation.  They are wrong.

President Obama is not the problem.  The government is not the problem.  The Council of Foreign Relations is not the problem.  The Rockefeller and Rothschild families are not the problem.  The Jews are not the problem.  The Vatican is not the problem.  The Bilderbergers, the Club of Rome, the Illuminati, and the other power center groups are not the problem.  The problem is that we have forsaken the Creator of the Universe and replaced Him with humanist groups that are attempting to rule His creation.  The problem is our relationship with the sovereign God Who created the world and everything in it.

The powerful world oligarchs seek centralization; God decentralizes by empowering each person He chooses.  He and His perfect Law could guide the creation into righteousness, freedom, and prosperity.

Christians who seek redemption through the political system are idol worshipers.  They are placing faith in the ability of human sinners to produce righteousness.  All have sinned and fallen short of the mark. None can be trusted to bring freedom and righteousness.  Petitioning and idol and supporting human endeavor over the dominion of God is a grievous sin.  Only God can halt the new world order.  He waits on His people to forsake the idols and to seek Him and His forgiveness.

Democrats Delusional Worldview

Democratic politics is a false premise experiment. The foundation of modern liberalism, based upon an erroneous worldview, is a dead end ideology. Compared to the mad NeoCon war-mongering alternative, the fatal attraction of progressives, allures weak minded and desperate people into thinking government can provide solutions. Step back from the false left-right political discussions and focus upon the principles that make up sound and balanced standards for a civil society.

Basic contrasts between Conservatives and Liberals defined by Christian Walker seem plausible.

“At the core of it, Conservatives base their ideology on what they see as reason and logic and it is individualistic by nature, whereas a liberal’s ideology is based on emotion and ideals and is collective by nature. A liberal is interested in curing society’s ills by social engineering. A conservative is interested in curing society’s ills by individuals exercising their own choices to better themselves. Because of this, conservatives view centralized power with deep suspicion. Liberals on the other hand see centralized power as an opportunity to affect great change for good.”

The central precept that separates and differentiates democratic politics from traditional conservative advocacy rests upon moral doctrine. However, scholars are determined to avoid this requirement with theories such as Realism V. Liberalism. Understanding International Relations Theory, “how the world works IR scholars usually subscribe to one of two dominant theories, realism or liberalism. One, classical/neo-realist thought, is more pessimistic about the prospects of peace, cooperation, and human progress whilst the other, liberalism/idealism, is more upbeat and sanguine about human nature and human possibilities.”Modern Liberalism is based upon the following set of assumptions:

1.Human nature is essentially “good”

2.The fundamental human concern for others’ welfare makes progress possible

3.Sinful or wicked human behavior such as violence is not the product of flawed people but of evil institutions

4.War and international anarchy are NOT inevitable

5.War is a global problem requiring collective rather than national efforts to control it

6.Reforms must be inspired by a compassionate ethical concern for the welfare and security of all people

7.International society must reorganize itself in order to eliminate the institutions that make war likely

The America First foreign policy viewpoint is anti-war and anti-empire. Foreign intervention to make the world safe for democracy is pure poppycock. The premises of democratic liberalism suffer from the illusion that humanity, as a whole, is able to build a global alignment of institutions, treaties and interconnections that can result in international harmony.

The notion, which discredits democratic bias and governmental programs that surround us, is all around. The utter catastrophe of the Obama administration is not simply a failure of a partisan regime. It is systemic of a system that has abandoned time-honored principles.

The inspiring and late Dr. Schaeffer preached the following message back in 1982.

“I want to say to you, those of you who are Christians or even if you are not a Christian and you are troubled about the direction that our society is going in, that we must not concentrate merely on the bits and pieces. But we must understand that all of these dilemmas come on the basis of moving from the Judeo-Christian world view — that the final reality is an infinite creator God — over into this other reality which is that the final reality is only energy or material in some mixture or form which has existed forever and which has taken its present shape by pure chance.”

Can any person argue with sincerity that fundamental improvement in the plight of humanity has improved in the last three decades?

Facing up to the decline in Western Civilization is hard for many people. Most prefer the comfort of illusionary denial. Justin Raimondo offers a cogent insight in TheDemocratic Delusion.

“Rooted in the old-fashioned idea that people are merely the playthings of all-powerful and highly abstract forces, Soviet socialism was a throwback to the reactionary mechanistic doctrines that had ruled the earth and its peoples since time immemorial. Human beings, in this view, are passive lumps of clay whose fate is determined by History, the gods, or, perhaps, the gods of history.”

This looming conflict for the democratic liberal is unsettling, since their beloved governmental authority structure, is their presupposed answer to resolve intrinsic power struggles. After stripping away all the political posturing and propaganda, the Obama cohorts are left with an empty intellectual defense of their pernicious and intrusive tyranny.

LIBERALISM IS A MENTAL ILLNESS – MAXINE WATERS	MICHAEL SAVAGE EXPLAINS THE MENTAL DISORDER LIBERALISM

 

Those who identify themselves as part of the Democratic Party or supporters of liberal policies really do suffer from a mental disease. The Maxine Waters’  illustrates, while caring the bucket for the cause. Move over and watch , Herb Denenberg is giving you a run for top honors.

“You can look at almost any plan and policy of Obama, and more often than not find it runs contrary to common sense and logical thinking. He more often than not does the opposite of what common sense would dictate.”

Apply the following Obama traits to your favorite liberal. Do they also suffer from the same symptoms?

A. NARCISSISTIC PERSONALITY DISORDER. If that’s not enough, consider the Mayo Clinic’s definition of narcissistic personality disorder: “Narcissistic personality disorder is a mental disorder in which people have an inflated sense of their own importance and a deep need for admiration. They believe that they’re superior to others and have little regard for other people’s feelings. But behind this mask of ultra-confidence lies a fragile self-esteem, vulnerable to the slightest criticism.”

B. PATHOLOGICAL LIAR. I think the most obvious disorder to add to all of the above is being a pathological liar. That condition is defined by the Merriam-Webster Medical Dictionary as follows: “an individual who habitually tells lies so exaggerated or bizarre that they are suggestive of mental disorder.”

C. THE TALKING DISEASE. I’ve spoken of another mental disorder, which I don’t think psychiatry has yet named. It is the talking disease. He thinks his words are magical, and that all he has to do is talk to solve problems.

Liberals and progressives want to feel your pain, while inflicting misery from the consequences of their policies. The Manchurian Candidate president champions Marxist pillaging as a badge of pride. The crux of the rationale that drives such plunder is humanism. Dr. Schaeffer warns, “A conservative Humanism is no better than a liberal Humanism. It’s the Humanism that is wrong, not merely the coloration.” The point made is that the liberal sickness infects “so called” conservatives with the integrations of the progressive disease into all levels and stratums of a dependent society.Utopian delusions are the prevalent and dominate political mindset. This infection forbids a serious and substantial contraction of government deficit spending or useless programs. As long as Democrats swallow the social poison of multicultural nirvana, in a futile attempt to create a worldly paradise, the planet is doomed.

The few remaining conventional Democrats bear little similarity with the ultratotalitarian collectivists that currently hold the majority in the U.S. Senate. Abdicating the responsibility of passing a federal budget may seem trivial to the hordes of dependent addicts that vote the liberal/progressive slate. Nevertheless, the results from the next election, the prospect of instituting a sober and comprehensive reform of government is but a pipe dream for wishful escapists.

The final indisputable proof of neurotic perspective is that the electorate may likely vote Barry Soetoro to another term. The reason for such an irrational prospect is that the infected public is plagued by modern liberalism. Is it possible to dialogue with institutionalized progressives? Can cogent arguments penetrate the locked doors in their palatial asylum suites or are they so committed to their medicated state of denial that the destruction of the country is viewed as a mere academic speculation?

Radical Reactionaries understand that co-existence with essentially decadent bottom feeders is a suicidal prospect. America’s collapse is a certainty on much more than an economic level. Political dialogue or activist immersion is a most painful exercise for the average person. The depths of the “Politically Correct” culture disallow a serene separation from federal supremacy. Individual state sovereignty is the only practical response to central despotism. Democrats refused to run a primary challenge to a sitting President in their own party. That error renounced any assertion of the high ground or argument claiming the role of an honest opposition.

The legacy of FDR haunts the socialists that strive to empower the nanny state. H.L. Mencken had it correct, “The New Deal began, like the Salvation Army, by promising to save humanity. It ended, again like the Salvation Army, by running flop-houses and disturbing the peace.”

Still the demographics, especially in several swing states like Virginia and Wisconsin, may rally the government employed or the entitled reliant to rise up the dead and vote for Democrats in November. To these kind of voters, the democratic view of the world, transforms into digging graves for the dynamic producers, who create all the wealth.

The progressive malady that shapes public policy is the ultimate superstition. I am from the government and here to help you.

Postcolonial Theory, Whiteness & Palestine

Postcolonial, feminist and gay studies share many similarities to the extent that some academics regard these fields as theoretically and ideologically complementary. These fields of study are primarily concerned with politics, the structure of hegemony, the oppressed and the mechanism that brings about injustice. It is only natural then, that these realms of thought, primarily concerned with prejudice and injustice, would become key instruments in our understanding of Zionism and Israeli oppression.

Without questioning the intellectual validity and the theoretical substance of the postcolonial spectrum of thought, it is clear that some contemporary leading trends within this realm of studies emphasize the role of ‘White male’ and the ‘phallus’ as being at the core of contemporary Western society’s malaise. So the next question is almost inevitable –Where does it leave the ‘White male’? Or more anecdotally, am I, a person who happens to be wrapped in pale skin and is also attached to a white phallic organ, do I bear responsibility for centuries of European genocides? Would my responsibility lessen once I decide to chop my male organ off?  Am I, or any other White male, left with any authentic ethical role?  Or are we biologically doomed to be the epitome of every wrongdoing of the Western society for generations? The astute postcolonial theorist may suggest that ‘Masculinity’, ‘Whiteness’ and the ‘Phallus’ are mere symbolic representations rather than ‘things in themselves’.

Some postcolonial and feminist theoreticians would argue that imperialism, like patriarchy is, after all, a ‘phallo-centric’, ‘supremacist’, ‘White’ ideology that subjugates and dominates its subjects. This is an interesting and even intriguing statement, yet I am not so sure that it is valid or at all relevant to our understanding of Zionism and the crimes committed by the Jewish state. Zionism and Israel are clearly supremacist ideologies, yet is AIPAC’s push for a war against Iran ‘phallo-centric’? Is the Zionist appetite for Palestinian land ‘patriarchal’, or inspired by any form of ‘phallic’ enthusiasm or even ‘Whiteness’? Is the ‘War against Terror’ that left about one and a half million fatalities in Iraq and Afghanistan, ‘phallicly’ orientated or is it the White male again?

Let’s face it, Zionism, Israeli politics and Jewish Lobbying are not particularly ‘phallo-centric’ or ‘patriarchal’. They also have little to do with ‘Whiteness’. Zionism, and Israel are actually primarily ‘Judeo-centric’ to the bone. They are racially driven and fuelled by a particular supremacist culture that is inspired by some aspects of Talmudic Goy hating and some sporadic (and false) Old Testament (false) interpretations. But this is exactly the verdict the postcolonial scholar attempts to prevent us from reaching. It is especially embarrassing because Israelis and Zionists openly draw their inspiration and expansionist enthusiasm from Jewish culture and texts, which they interpret in a very particular self-serving manner.

In spite of the fact that this discourse, in its current form, is pretty much, irrelevant to our understanding of Zionism and Israel, this postcolonial discourse is still, very popular amongst some anti Zionists and in particular, Jewish anti Zionists. The reason is pretty simple; it is effective in diverting attention from the real issues; it disguises the magnitude of Jewish power, Jewish politics, the inherent ‘Jewish’ nature of the ‘Jewish State’ and Jewish intellectual hegemony within the west and the Left in particular. Within the realm of the postcolonial discourse we are not even allowed to mention the ‘J word’, let alone criticise Jewish lobbying or Jewish power structures.

In fact, the postcolonial discourse, allows its acolytes to talk endlessly and passionately about Israel and Zionism without saying anything meaningful. It allows the Left to refer to Zionism as ‘settler colonialism’ in spite of the embarrassing fact that no one actually knows where or what exactly is the Jewish ‘mother state’ is[1]. Postcolonial scholars also encourage us to refer to Israel as an Apartheid state in spite of the fact that Apartheid is a racially driven system of exploitation of the indigenous. The Postcolonial enthusiast would obviously turn a blind eye to the fact that Israel is not interested in exploitation of the Palestinians. It prefers to see them gone. Hence, since it aims to get rid of the indigenous, Israel should be realised as an avid follower of the Lebensraum (Living-space) philosophy. From that perspective at least, Israel should be equated with Nazi Germany rather than with South Africa.

The postcolonial discourse, in its current form, allows its anti Zionist enthusiasts to spin endlessly. They can refer to Israel and Zionism without actually disturbing, hurting or even touching Israelis, Zionists and Jewish political structures. The postcolonial theorist is basically engaged in an attack on an imaginary phantasmic construction that has zero relevance to Zionist ideology or Israeli politics whatsoever. It is basically an advanced form of an intellectual onanism.

Like Rabbinical Judaism and Stalinism, the postcolonial discourse is extremely intolerant towards dissent and criticism. It surrounds itself with a defense wall, operates as an intellectual ghetto. In fact, it also invented political correctness just to police and curtail, by means of self-censorship, any freedom of expression.

Arab and Palestinian Postcolonial Scholarship

One of the most influential postcolonial thinkers was Palestinian- American literary theorist Edward Said. Said’s polemic, Orientalism (1979) was a deeply profound attempt to grasp the West’s vision of the Orient, the colony and Islam. The term Orientalism, as coined by Said, covers three interrelated meanings. First, it names the academic study of the Orient. Secondly, it is a form of deliberation that constitutes the Arab as the ‘other’.  Thirdly, it is the structures that maintain Western domination over the Orient.

Being an outstanding creative intellect, Said engaged in a vast examination of a multitude of Orientalist discourse. His writings refer to political and historical texts as well as literature and media. Said obviously realised the immense importance of cultural criticism and cultural studies.

Confusingly, some of Edward Said’s Palestinian and Arab successors seem to oppose the very field of study Said championed.  For example, as much as Said was immersed in deep cultural examination and discourse analysis, Palestinian activist and academic Ali Abunimah  the following.“We should be very clear in condemning explanations which try to blame a culture or a religion for a political situation.“ Abunimah basically believes that culture doesn’t explain ‘anything at all’. It seems to me that Abunimah, who often integrates the term ‘Orientalism’ into his political statements and , is apparently unfamiliar with the intellectual core of Edward Said’s thought and methodology.

Ali Abunimah is not happy at all with my reading of the conflict. This is understandable and totally legitimate and furthermore, he is not alone. Other exiled Palestinians seem also to be very concerned. Their outrage at my argument that Israel is not a European style colonial state implies that they fear the end to a discourse in which they have invested so much. Some of those Palestinians were very happy to add their names to the list of book burners who demanded my disavowal.  This was indeed a very sad turn – futile, yet, at the same time both revealing and predictable. Though those Arab and Palestinian scholars criticized my work for being ‘racist’ without providing a single racist comment by me, it was disappointing to discover that, it was in fact their writing that was actually saturated with biological determinist comments and peppered with blunt racism.

Recently we came across a  of cultural BDS leader Omar Barghouti exploring some ‘postcolonial’ ideas. He for instance, insisted that “the white race is the most violent in the history of mankind.” This is an outrageous sweeping generalization especially since , Barghouti surely knows that Zionism is Judeo-centric and has very little to do with Whiteness. It is not the degree of ‘Whiteness’ that constitutes the racist element within the Israeli legal system, it is rather the ‘degree of Jewishness’ that makes an Arab Jew privileged in comparison to a Palestinian with a very similar skin colour. Omar Barghouti is studying in a ‘Zionist’ Tel Aviv university (while asking the rest of us to boycott the same university). Seemingly, he has internalised the Zionist academic postcolonial jargon and has integrated and implemented some biological determinist and racist ideas into his pro-Palestinian political thinking.

And Omar Barghouti is not alone. Assad Abu Khalil, AKA The Angry Arab, is another postcolonial enthusiast who also engages in a similar racially driven approach. In his blog post White Man and Paul Newman, Angry AbuKhalil writes “the White Man is not a racial category–or it is not merely a racial category but also a political and epistemological category.” Not only does Angry Arab agree that the ‘White Man’ is partially a racial category, he even goes as far as linking skin colour with a political stand and even epistemology.[2]

Of course, I realise that being an Arab academic in a Zionised American or British university is a tough mission. I guess that for some time the postcolonial discourse was the only possible template that allowed a criticism of Israel and Zionism. But the time is ripe to move on. We’d better now call a spade a spade.  It is time to call Israel what it is, namely “The Jewish State”. The time has come to ask what the Jewish State is all about and what is the true meaning of the Jewish symbols that decorate Israeli tanks and airplanes? The time has come for us to grasp that the Jewish Lobby is a primary threat to world peace.

But can we do it all while being thought-policed by the rigid boundaries of the postcolonial realm?  Can we talk about Jewish identity politics while some prominent Palestinians activists attempt – to block any discussion on Jewish culture & power?  My answer is yes we can, and we’d better make every possible effort to liberate our discourse from the Judeo-centric postcolonial grip.

Whiteness, The Jew & The Queer

In the last few weeks I have wondered why Omar Barghouti attacks the ‘White race’? Is it really necessary? Couldn’t he just refer to the ‘West’, America, Orientalism or the ‘British Empire’? Why does Angry Arab fight the White man? Is it really an elementary political category?  Does the introduction of racial categories and biological determinism serve the Palestinian cause or Arab liberation?  I decided to jump into the water and immersed myself in some contemporary texts about whiteness and postcolonial theory. I thought that it may help me to understand the emergence of such thoughts.

Following the recommendation of my friend and musical partner Sarah Gillespie, one of the first texts I picked was Richard Dyer’s ‘White’. Dyer is a respected film scholar and a leading writer on the topic. It didn’t take more than five pages before I stumbled upon a very interesting passage that opened my eyes. In the next few lines Dyer speaks about his childhood friendship with a Jewish pal and the impact it had on him.

“The key figure here was a Jewish boy at school, whom I’ll call Danny Marker. I used to visit him and his family in Golders Green, a Jewish neighbourhood of London. I knew by then that I was a homosexual and I envied Danny and his family-they too were an oppressed minority, whom, like queers, you could not always spot; but, unlike us, they had this wonderful, warm community and culture and the wrongfulness of their oppression was socially recognised. I now believe that there are intellectual and political problems with making and analogy between Jews and queers, between ethnic and sexual discrimination, but I am trying to say how it felt then. I envied Danny’s ethnicity and wanted to be part of it, indeed, felt at home with it.”  (White, Richard Dyer,  White Pg 5)

In The Wandering Who, I wrote extensively about the clear ideological and theoretical continuum between Zionism and other marginal thoughts. I explored the deep ideological similarity between Queer theory and the Jewish national aspiration. On the one hand we notice a legitimate and reasonable call against injustice – the Zionist and the Queer theorist demand to become ‘people like other people’ a call obviously understood and supported by many. But on the other hand, we also detect another forceful demand – to maintain and preserve uniqueness and differentiation. As one can imagine, the humanist call for equality can easily clash with the forceful self-centric, clannish demand for preservation (especially when celebrated on the expense of others).

However, Richard Dyer explores here another special affinity between the queer and the Jew. As a homosexual he expresses a clear and innocent envy of his Jewish schoolmate’s social landscape. Dyer notices that in spite of being oppressed, the Jews have managed to form a “warm and wonderful community and culture.”  Dyer’s feeling at home within the Jewish family nest may explain why Tel Aviv has become a Gay capital. It explains why some prominent Queer activists feel so strongly and positively about the Jewish State, Zionism, Jewish culture and Jewishness in general. But it also may explain why some Arab and exiled Palestinian secular academics, feel some affinity to the Jewish dominated anti Zionist postcolonial nest. Operating as an intellectual ghetto, it may also retain some Jewish characteristics, it is probably a ‘warm community’ as Dyer describes it. It may even be that some Palestinian postcolonial secular academics would feel more comfortable in Tel Aviv University than in Al-Azhar University in Gaza.

I obviously understand it and I am far from being judgmental. But am I naïve to expect Palestinian activists and intellectuals to ensure that the, ‘wrongfulness of Palestinian oppression’ be widely and ‘socially recognised’ by the masses, rather than by a few postcolonial Jewish Anti Zionists? It is time for our discourse to leave the ghetto.

I guess that in order to achieve such a goal, we must transcend the decaying postcolonial discourse or else completely revise it. We must drift away from any form of marginal ideology.  We must be able to deconstruct Jewish texts and Jewish cultural discourse with the same vigor that Edward Said deconstructed the European canon, whether it was Charles Dickens or Lord Balfour. We actually better locate the issue of Palestine at the forefront of the battle for a better world, humanity and humanism.

We should engage in an inclusive, open intellectual debate that welcomes all oppressed (queers, gays, Arabs, Muslims, people of colour and so on) and oppressors too. At the end of the day, with 50 million Americans living in deep poverty watching 30.000 drones fly over their heads, Gaza is now in Detroit, Newark and Philadelphia. Our solidarity with Palestine can now become a true force of genuine empathy. We don’t now just put ourselves in the shoes of the Palestinians, we actually wear them. We all strive for the same liberty. We are one.

[1]  If Israel is the Jewish ‘Settler State’ we better be informed at last where is the Jewish ‘mother state’ for colonialism is defined by a clear material, cultural and spiritual exchange between a mother and a settler states.

[2] It would be wrong not to mention professor Joseph Massad of Columbia University. Following his Mentor Edward Said, Massad also writes  about the role of colonialism, its structure, its impact  and the scars it left behind. Like Barghouti and Abu Khalil, Massad also refers occasionally to skin colour. Yet, unlike Barghouti and Abu Khalil, Massad seems to be far more careful and astute. Rather than falling into the banal biological determinist trap, he seems to critically refer and examine the role of skin colour from structural, social, cultural and political perspectives.

Stealing From God

Insurance Without The Policy…

On C-Span Chris Hedges interviewed Alain de Botton about his book “Religion for Atheists”.    Alain de Botton was new to me but Chris Hedges has paid a price for standing with his convictions and has used his considerable literary talents to project shreds of truth to power.  The title of the book attracted my attention.

Both Hedges and de Botton are smart, well read, and well educated; both bring forth considerable erudition on a variety of subjects.  Alain de Botton described the secular world as having voids in several places citing ethics, community, structure, institution, art, and education.  In these deficient areas de Botton proposes that atheists avoid the doctrine but use the product of religion to fill the voids.

Botton approaches the Word of God with the same disdain used by many Christians; he is the arbiter, he does the picking and choosing; like a child eating the frosting from a freshly baked cake all he wants is the sweetness.  This is, of course, blasphemy and God treats it the same way a mother treats her little frosting thief.

The need that Botton expresses is obvious to a sentient person but escapes the turgid, atheistic intellectuals who regularly claim divine qualities.  Every child is born with an innate desire to be the lord of its universe.  Removing a baby from its mother’s breast before its stomach is full will result in an irritating tantrum.  That totalitarian characteristic will continue as long as the child’s scream is able to control its surroundings.  In some adults the scream may be silent but the control is still evident.

Christians are an independent lot.  There are very few Indians in the Christian tribe – lots of chiefs but few Indians.  This competition for leadership is exacerbated by the prevalent practice of usurping God’s authority by acting as arbiter of His Word.  Christians seldom approach the Bible with true reverence. He is the Creator, we are His creation, born in sin and unable to overcome the screams of our infancy we cannot live successfully until we obey His overarching word.

In spite of Libertarian opinion to the contrary, human power will always tend to be tyrannical.  For those who doubt, a review of human history will prove my point.  We are members of a species that has a history of theft, murder, mayhem, and tyranny.  The common man has enjoyed scant periods of freedom in the history of our world.   We need government because we are sinners who given the proper opportunity would tyrannize our fellows.  We all think we are right, that our opinions are righteous and above reproach.  Because we are often wrong but never in doubt, God did not create us to govern ourselves and there is no human being, however brilliant and wisdom filled, that has the proper perspective to govern his fellows – only God can do that!

The late Rousas Rushdoony pointed to the fact that God’s Ten Commandments have gradually been replaced by the Ten Planks of Communism. These secular, collectivist tenets are now encoded in our law replacing the Biblical based legal system brought from Europe by our Founders.  The Christian Church should have been a bulwark against this wicked tsunami but without legal standards it was unable to resist.  We are beginning to experience the totalitarian chaos and suffering that is the inevitable product of a God hating system.

Christopher Hedges is the son of a Presbyterian minister.  He was gifted with a brilliant intellect and received an excellent education.  From Loomis Chaffee School in Windsor, Ct. he earned a degree in English Literature from Colgate followed by a Master of Divinity from Harvard and an honorary doctorate from Unitarian Starr King School in Berkeley, California.  Raised in a home immersed in a Christian religious denomination; initiated to higher education at a Baptist College, and intellectually honed at a Divinity School noted for its flawless academics, Hedges was able to resist orthodox Christianity, take a fling at Unitarianism and spend fifteen years working at the New York Times.  One would be hard pressed to find a more salient example of progressive religious humanism.   Nevertheless, if his owlish round glasses are a symbol of wisdom, they have a large degree of authenticity.

Vehemently against the Iraq War Hedges publically condemned the press coverage.  In a speech at Rockford College in 2003 he said, “We are embarking on an occupation that, if history is any guide, will be as damaging to our souls as it will be to our prestige and power and security.”  The Jewish owned Times reprimanded Hedges and shortly thereafter he left the Paper, joined a think tank and began writing on his own.

Chris Hedges approaches religion as a divine arbiter of truth.  Christian churches throughout the world are full of people who use the same technique.  The result is an individualized humanistic religion that deifies the person and defies God.

Evangelical Christians make up the bulk of American Christianity but few understand the importance of being chosen.  When the creature chooses the Creator it is a humanist transaction; when the Creator chooses the creature it is a Divine calling.

One of my readers responded to an article about the devastation Jewish leaders have inflicted on the United States with this statement: “Perhaps if we were to expand just a bit, we might come to examine how the notion of being “chosen” by God is the ultimate form of collectivist thinking and can only lead to the destruction of the individual by considering him a part of a group, possessing nothing that exists above and beyond what he was born as, and giving him his worth only by being a member of it. Not only does it elevate some, it must demonize all others and creates an eternal state of enmity and conflict between groups, destroying the natural harmony and spontaneous order which develops naturally between men when they consider each other as individuals, each unique and possessing the same rights and liberties granted them by our Creator.”

Being chosen is intrinsic to the foundation of Christianity.  The God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob always does the choosing.  This essential tenet has been lost to the Dispensational cult and has become the illegitimate property of the Jews.  I understand that many present day Jews are not related to the Twelve Tribes but that is another subject.  What is important is that God chose Abraham and created a nation and a people from his progeny.  He promised to be their God and to bless them if they would obey His Commandments.  Not only did they fail to obey His commandments but they condemned His only Son, replaced His sacred Torah with the Talmud, and assiduously defied His rule. At the Diaspora God made a final break with them and henceforth the claims to being chosen by those who are not Christians are bogus.

One of the reasons for God’s rejections of the Jews is the humanistic arrogance that crept into their claim of being chosen.  God’s chosen people are ordered to lift up the Triune God of the Bible.  He is great and we are His servants.  Our ways are not His ways and righteousness is a product of His Word not of our thought.  Christians are God’s chosen people.  Being chosen changes the heart and sets us apart.  We are His ambassadors and His Word is our guide.  The spirit of the chosen is a spirit of humility.

When I began to watch the Hedges/Botton interview I thought it might be an unusual instance where both participants were Gentiles. However, it turned out that Alain de Botton comes from a very interesting Jewish family.  His Grandmother, Yolande Harmer (1913-1959), was born to a Turkish-Jewish mother in Alexandria, Egypt, she ascended socially to the court of King Farouk and was recruited to spy for nascent Israel. Her seductions were so successful that a town square in Jerusalem bears her name.  Alain’s father, Gilbert de Botton (1935-2000), was raised by his mother’s parents since both his mother and father were consumed by their vocations.  He was a brilliant man who caught the attention of the British and French Rothschild families and was selected to establish their operation in Zurich.   Eventually he became President of Rothschilds in New York.  Feeling he should be on his own the Rothschilds urged him to start his own business. (Jacob Rothschild provided financing and retained 40 percent of the business.) In 1983 he formed Global Asset Management, a multinational asset management firm.   As with many Rothschild associates he became fabulously wealthy.

It is difficult to find information on Alain’s mother who is apparently still alive.  Her maiden name was Jacqueline Burgauer; now Jackie de Botton. There is some information that suggests Alain considers her a high maintenance member of the family.

The Bible contains large sections of genealogy which ultimately result in the birth of the Christ. Meticulous genealogy is also kept by leading Jewish families because of the importance placed on their work.  Alain has a Sixteen Century relative,  Abraham de Boton (1560-1605), who was a famous rabbi and Talmudist.  If you open the page you will find that his teacher is listed on the page and if you open the teacher’s page you will find that teacher’s teacher is recorded, etc.  Talmudic scholars are important parts of Jewish history and carefully records are kept.  This substantial cultural foundation that Jews so meticulously maintain is the exact opposite of the policies they have successfully promoted in the United States of America.   Study of the Talmud is considered more important than study of the Torah.

As is sometimes the case, the participants in this interview were more interesting than the interview itself.  Several reviewers commended Alain de Botton’s outstanding literary ability.  His first book “Essays In Love” was a best seller and got glowing reviews. One reviewer included this metaphor as an example of the content.  “There is an Arabic saying that the soul travels at the pace of a camel. While most of us are led by the strict demands of diaries and timetables, the soul, the seat of the heart, trails nostalgically behind, burdened by the weight of memory…. The camel became lighter and lighter as it walked through time, it kept shaking memories and photos off its back, scattering them over the desert floor and letting the wind bury them in the sand, and gradually the camel became so light that it could trot again and even gallop in its own curious way – until one day, in a small oasis that called itself the present, the exhausted creature finally caught up with the rest of me.”

Alain de Botton is great writer on whose heart the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob may be tugging!

The New World Order Zeitgeist

The “spirit of the times” for the New World Order worshipers is essentially anti-God sentiment. There is no longer an issue if the NWO is real. It operates as the dominant social matrix that engulfs the planet. Look around and the only cogent explanation for the absurdity that inflicts universal suffering rests upon an admission that humanity is evil to the core. Once religions recognized redemption and accepted that salvation as a divine gift. However, since the age of humanism and the supposed death of a supreme being, the planet has entered into an asylum of insanity and collective anguish. A detail examination of Humanism: Philosophy of the New World Orderdefines the parameters of the heterodoxy from all human history.

First: Religious humanists regard the universe as self-existing and not created.

Second: Humanism believes that man is a part of nature and that he has emerged as the result of a continuous process.

Third: Holding an organic view of life, humanists find that the traditional dualism of mind and body must be rejected.

Fourth: Humanism recognizes that man’s religious culture and civilization, as clearly depicted by anthropology and history, are the product of a gradual development due to his interaction with his natural environment and with his social heritage.

Fifth: Humanism asserts that the nature of the universe depicted by modern science makes unacceptable any supernatural or cosmic guarantees of human values.

Sixth: We are convinced that the time has passed for theism, deism, modernism, and the several varieties of “new thought.”

Seventh: Religion consists of those actions, purposes, and experiences which are humanly significant.

Eighth: Religious humanism considers the complete realization of human personality to be the end of man’s life and seeks its development and fulfillment in the here and now.

Ninth: In place of the old attitudes involved in worship and prayer the humanist finds his religious emotions expressed in a heightened sense of personal life and in a cooperative effort to promote social well-being.

Tenth: It follows that there will be no uniquely religious emotions and attitudes of the kind hitherto associated with belief in the supernatural.

Eleventh: Man will learn to face the crises of life in terms of his knowledge of their naturalness and probability.

Twelfth: Believing that religion must work increasingly for joy in living, religious humanists aim to foster the creative in man and to encourage achievements that add to the satisfactions of life.

Thirteenth: Religious humanism maintains that all associations and institutions exist for the fulfillment of human life.

Fourteenth: The humanists are firmly convinced that existing acquisitive and profit-motivated society has shown itself to be inadequate and that a radical change in methods, controls, and motives must be instituted.

Fifteenth and last: We assert that humanism will: (a) affirm life rather than deny it; (b) seek to elicit the possibilities of life, not flee from it; and (c) endeavor to establish the conditions of a satisfactory life for all, not merely for the few.

 

This list of humanism mindsets leads to a hubris and superior conceit that rationalizes a death cult of the New World Order. The video  is a disturbing example of smug egotistical proponents of global hegemony advocating Marxist top down coercive rule.The immature disciples of a New Age or The Third Wave of Alvin Toffler grovel to worship an alien creed because they refuse to recognize their own intellectual defects. The domination of the New World Order is no coincidence. The humanist prefers their cult beliefs to revealed scripture. Their disdain for religious doctrines requires a substitute. Their alternative is a worldly political structure that promises human perfection, while delivering global enslavement. Freedom and individual liberty has no room in the humanist milieu.

The humanists are destructive enablers. Often they are ignorant dupes of a far more sinister cabal of wicked despots, but they share in the responsibility of their evil deeds. These global demons revere the dark side. Their allegiance is to the hellion system of satanic perdition.

 

The next video,  is a frightful expose of the true nature and ominous threat to all humankind. The New World Order is really a religion that adores demons. The promise of humanistic fulfillment, as a reward, for blind obedience to the malefic global governance is contrary to all of lessons history and ethical conduct.

Linda Kimball presents the following viewpoint in Progressive Satanic revolt: from “nothingness” to worship of Satan.

“Since evolution implies continuous change, becoming, and/or progress, “Christian” heretics claim that immutable (unchanging) truths do not exist, therefore there is nothing immutable in the Bible or the Church….or for that matter in Americas’ Declaration of Independence, Constitution, Bill of Rights and Rule of Law. All are subject to change, for in that satanic monism conceptually dissolves the living, transcendent Christ into nature, everything becomes imaginatively infused with impersonal divine spirit, power, intent, determinism (fate), and motion. Thus claim heretics, religion itself lives and evolves, and “must in fact be changed.”

“Christian” change-agents further claim that all religions and belief systems are true because the satanic divine-force suffuses and energizes all things. By extension of this perverse reasoning, Gaia is alive, and Gnosticism, Satanism, Wicca, Theosophy, and Sharia are true. This is syncretism (moral relativism), the uniting of good and evil, truth and lie, the holy and the unholy. R.J. Rushdoony writes:

“Now syncretism is destructive of the human mind, of rationality…(A) man who wants to unite good and evil…has lost the capacity for clear thinking. His mind is darkened, clouded, fuzzed over, and incompetent….Man, by presuming to be god, has by that act destroyed the possibility of true thinking; from so radically false a premise, no valid conclusion can follow.”

This sums up the failure of the Zeitgeist that claims so many fools and unleashes so much agony. Rejecting immutable truth and personal responsibility for temporary gratification is a hallmark of humanism. Rejection of a created cosmology breeds a mental illness that identifies with all that is foul within our nature. The eternal struggle to tame our caustic traits in order to atone for our errant behavior is dismissed by the humanist as folly.

The political, economic and social distress that is destroying national sovereignty and eliminating social cultures for a worldwide-integrated technocratic paradigm is the very definition of hell on earth. Utopians have always made their ambitions known, but in the case of this NWO model of global gulag, the means to enslave all cultures and economies is rapidly advancing under the framework of the interdependence doctrine.

Restraint and self-admonishment is not relative. Moral conduct is not evolutionary, but is based upon principle and immoral precepts. Ancient religious teachings share the same fundamental moral values even in this era of rapid change. Abandoning core commandments for the thrill of continuous process is like swallowing hemlock to combat the pains of selfish appetites.

When the humanist seeks to replace everlasting penance with the satisfactions of life, they are promoting the sacrilege that man is the measure of all things. Therefore, the ultimate deception that the humanist accepts is the satanic enticement that global governance is the wave of the future and the fulfillment of human evolution.

For those who reject the existence of God much less His almighty authority, it becomes problematic for them to explain the Devil worship that characterizes the upper echelon of the New World Order elites.

“The New Age movement is a revival of occult mysticism which teaches that every human being can tap into their inner christ consciousness and become their own god. Yet because these people haven’t studied history to find the roots of what they follow, they do not understand its true principles.”

The same may not be said about the top of the NWO pyramid. They know that Satan exists because they are serving Lucifer. Such a statement is heresy to the humanist because acknowledging that Beelzebub is a real entity denies the central canon of humanism. However, for the highest level of the agents and aspiring demons, that coordinates the globalist plan for extreme human bondage; understand the essential spiritual conflict that confronts our souls.

Is this a Zeitgeist that free men and women can attest and support? How can anyone give freely his or her allegiance to this New World Order, when the entire axiom of intent, is to elevate the Devil to the throne of God?

Philosophically the humanist craze is intellectually unsound. Notwithstanding, the popular emergence of praising the refutation of the bulk of understanding from previous millenarians, the humanists delight in their anti-God hatred. Their inability to perceive that the controllers of the NWO scheme actually expound satanic adoration just adds to their defective belief system.

It should be manifest to anyone with the ability of objective thought and the skill to assess the evidence, that humanism cannot create a paradise on earth. The global conflict that engulfs the world is a spiritual battle. The Devil is the embodiment of the New World Order and anyone who obeys depraved dictates serves the Prince of Darkness.

Zionist Immoral Intervention

Alan Dershowitz is whining again, this time on the pages of the Jerusalem Post.   Apparently The Friends Seminary of New York which assigned its students to read my papers and invited me to attend a class,  has made it clear to Israeli ethnic cleanser apologist that he was not welcome in its premises.

Dershowitz Admits Defeat

In short, Dershowitz admits total defeat. The Quaker school that was “unwilling to cancel Atzmon’s appearance” made it clear to the Zionist supremacist that he was unwelcomed.

This is not the first time Dershowitz is hurt by me being welcomed while he is spitted out. Yet, I am puzzled by the fact that Dershowitz is so keen to share his humiliation with the public. Normal people tend to hide such an embarrassing developments.  Dershowitz may have well developed a close affinity to himself being a victim. This tendency is indeed symptomatic within the Jewish identity discourse and Jewish culture. It is there to stop self-reflection.  Rather than looking in the mirror Dershowitz celebrates self-pity hoping to buy some empathy amongst his supportive Jewish crowd. It reminds me an old Jewish joke. Whydon’t Jews drink? Because it numbs the pain. Dershowitz, is not going to hide or let the pain fade, he would actually make it into his flag.

According to Dershowitz whom Noam Chomsky and many others regard as a ‘remarkable Liar’, the headmaster of the Friends Seminary, has broken his solemn promise to him, to bring him along to present the anti Atzmon argument.

1. Dershowitz insists that the headmaster of the seminary agreed to:
2. Speak at an assembly to the students about the “evils of anti-Semitism”.
3. Assigned Dershowitz’  essay to the students who were assigned my essay
4. Invite Deshowitz to address the students

Dershowitz suggests that the Seminary broke those 3 promises. “Apparently”, according to Dershowitz,  “the students who were at the assembly have confirmed that the speakers only made things worse. The teacher who invited Atzmon talked about what a great musician he was. The headmaster was defensive about how his words were manipulated and justified bringing Atzmon based on Quaker principles.”

It doesn’t take a genius to realise that my work is compatible with Quaker philosophy – I preach peace and tolerance.  Yet, I wonder how long is it going to take to Dershowitz to accept that my work is supported by some of the greatest humanists of our time, while he, has managed to buy himself a horrendous reputation of a compulsive liar and a defender of a genocidal State. How long will it take for Dershowitz, ADL and AZZs  to accept that calling me an ‘anti Semite’ or a ‘holocaust denier’ is counter effective. First, because I am not. Second,  because it only proves that Jewish culture has lost its capacity to engage in any process of self reflection or productive exchange.

By now it must be clear to my detractors that all those Jewish smear campaigns against myself and The Wandering Who only achieved one thing. They proved how valid my criticism of Jewish identity Politics is.

Dershowitz is deluded enough to believe that the real reason behind his rejection was “pressure from hard-left members” within the faculty.  He is obviously wrong. Dershowitz ideology and manners are incompatible with humanism let alone Quaker philosophy. There is no room for Dershowitz in any pluralist or tolerant institute and not because of his supremacist or racist views, but because the elder Zionist is an opponent of elementary freedoms and human rights.

As one would expect, Dershowitz reverts to the usual Zionist pressure.

“Unless I am invited to address the students inside the school, I will appear outside the school, where I will hand out my essays to those students who are willing to read them and will address those students who have an interest in hearing a response to anti-Semitism.  I am also considering inviting parents, students and other members of the Friends Seminary community to an event, in a venue outside the school, where these issues can be discussed openly and candidly.”

I am perplexed, if Dershowitz is so convinced by his argument, why wouldn’t he debate me? Is he afraid? Probably and he has a good reason. However, Dershowitz offer is indeed an amazing development, the notorious supremacist offers some free Zionist supplementary teaching for Quaker youngsters. This must be ideal, the students will be able to enjoy both worlds. They will encompass the true meaning of peace in the morning and then learn how to justify a Zionist massacre just before they go to bed.  lol

Dershowitz ends his daily drivel saying, “the Friends Seminary, like other elite schools around the United States, teaches our future leaders.” For once, I agree with Dershowitz. This is exactly why the Quaker institute assigned a humanist paper by myself while Dershowitz and his paper were not allowed entry.

To read The Primacy of the Ear, the paper that was assigned by the Quaker faculty click here.

Nihilism: Why America and the West are Committing Suicide

“So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.” Genesis 1:27, KJB

For fifteen hundred years, Christendom and then later Protestant America, had followed St. Augustine (AD 354-430) in affirming that as all men are the spiritual image-bearers of the transcendent Triune God then it logically follows that each person is a trinity of being– of soul, spirit, and body:

“The essence of the human is not the body, but the soul.  It is the soul alone that God made in his own image and the soul that he loves….For the sake of the soul…the Son of God came into the world….” (Incomplete Work on Matthew, Homily 25, Ancient Christian Devotional, Oden and Crosby, p. 153)

In Biblical thought, the body is inert matter organized and vitalized by the soul.   A human life is a soul which informs inert matter, thus a body without a soul is no more than a disorganized mass of cells that would quickly deconstruct, said Pastor Louis Pernot in a sermon delivered at the Temple de l’Etoile in Paris.  (“Body, Mind, and Soul,” Nov. 28, 2010)

The noblest part of the soul is spirit (the heart).  Spirit is immortal and self-aware.  It can will and think and is freely responsible for what it thinks, wills, and does.

Spirit is the unique property that distinguishes soul from matter. In Biblical thought, spirit allows man to spiritually transcend the natural dimension in order to access the supernatural dimension, thereby allowing him to enter into a personal relationship with the Spirit of God.   Through this relationship, man’s conscience is cleansed over time, thus enabling him to more perfectly orient the manner of his existence in this world in preparation for eternity.

In Christian thought, a person is a spirit and personality is the total individuality of the spirit. Without spirit there is no person.

Pastor Pernot notes that the key to individual liberty in the temporal sphere is man’s spiritual liberty contrasted against a genetically programmed animal-like orientation.  Animals do not have spirits, which are linked to intelligence, imagination, sensitivity, self-consciousness, reflection and the capacity for truth and moral goodness.

A person is uniquely free because he can spiritually transcend matter to access the supernatural dimension as Paul affirms:

“Now the Lord is Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom” (2 Cor. 3:17)

Man is God’s spiritual image-bearer, and, said the brilliant French economist, statesman, and author Frederic Bastiat,  this is the gift from God which includes the physical, intellectual and moral life:

“He has provided us with a collection of marvelous faculties.   And He has put us in the midst of a variety of natural resources.   By application of our faculties to these natural resources we convert them into products, and use them.  Life, faculties, production—in other words, individuality, liberty, property—this is man (and) these three gifts from God precede all human legislation, and are superior to it.  Life, liberty, and property do not exist because men have made laws.  On the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place.”    (How Evil Works, David Kupelian, p. 8)

Vishal Mangalwadi, India’s foremost Christian scholar observes that the unique concept of man as God’s spiritual image-bearer gave birth to the “belief in the unique dignity of human beings,” and this is,

”…the force that created Western civilization, where citizens do not exist for the state but the state exists for the individuals. Even kings, presidents, prime ministers, and army generals cannot be allowed to trample upon an individual and his or her rights.” (Truth and Transformation: A Manifesto for Ailing Nations, pp. 12-13)

Death of the Western and American Soul

Jesus to Buddha,   “….you took God away from them (and) your espousal of an absence of self is the most unique and fearsome claim you made…You turned from Hinduism because it said there was an essential self, which they called the atman.”    (The Lotus and the Cross: Jesus Talks with Buddha, Ravi Zacharias, pp.59, 67)

Of all Christian doctrines the most difficult to understand is that of creatio ex nihilo (creation out of nothing). This doctrine is the complete opposite of  ancient and modern evolutionary cosmogonies affirming that the universe and even the gods, emerged or evolved out of a pre-existing substance such as  primordial matter or the watery chaos, which begs the question of where the substances came from.

The  Triune God’s miraculous creation has its’ foundation in the fact that He spoke all things into existence from nothing.  Early Church Father Irenaeus comments,

“God, in the exercise of his will and pleasure, formed all things…out of what did not previously exist.”

But if there is no Triune God, then it logically follows that there is no source for life, consciousness, soul, spirit and will, or for human dignity, worth, liberty, and property.  Without God the Father unalienable (God-given) rights are meaningless.   If man is not God’s spiritual image-bearer, then he is less than nothing, a conclusion Buddha reached long before Jesus Christ walked this earth:

“Six centuries before Jesus Christ, the Buddha already knew that if God does not exist, then the human self cannot exist either……Therefore, he deconstructed the Hindu idea of the soul. When one starts peeling the onion skin of one’s psyche, he discovers that there is no solid core at the center of one’s being. Your sense of self is an illusion. Reality is nonself (anatman). You don’t exist. Liberation, the Buddha taught, is realizing the unreality of your existence.” (The Book That Made Your World: How the Bible Created the Soul of Western Civilization, Vishal Mangalwadi, p. 6)

Teaching Monstrous Lies About God

The great Oriental scholar Max Muller observed that monotheism preceded the polytheism and monism of the Veda.  It was Buddha who took the God of monotheism away.   Buddha craved God-like power to reinterpret the order of being— to deconstruct and reinterpret the soul.  Taking power not only requires the murder of God but the teaching of lies.

Telling lies is wrong.  But telling lies about God is a monstrous crime with eternal consequences.

Centuries later, Kant, Hegel, Marx, Darwin, Freud, and Nietzsche, among others, followed in Buddha’s footsteps.    God was taken away, man’s soul deconstructed and lies taught as truth.    Eric Voegelin comments:

“….the order of being (was) obliterated (and reinterpreted) as essentially under man’s control.” Taking control “requires the decapitation of being — the murder of God.” (Eric Voegelin, “Science, Politics and Gnosticism,” p. xv)

In place of man as God’s spiritual image-bearer, the New Man was beast-man, qualitatively no different from a rat, pig, or ape.

Nihilism, or non-belief in one’s own soul, is the logical assumption if the transcendent God does not exist. Nihilism is spiritual, moral, and intellectual suicide, yet for the last two hundred years, Enlightenment atheist humanists—-rationalists, materialists, positivists and their modern naturalist counterparts such as occult New Agers and Trans-humanists—-have been moving the West and America closer and closer to Buddha’s denial of the soul.

Beginning with Kant, soul was separated from body.   Man was a machine.   Soul hovered somewhere in the vicinity.    This did not go far enough for Enlightenment nature philosophers however.  Lester Crocker explains:

“There existed in the eighteenth century a widespread desire to equate the moral with the physical world…”  What was desired above all was “total integration of man in nature, with refusal of any transcendence, even though it was admitted that (being God’s image-bearer) gave him certain special abilities and ways of thinking.  The important thing, as La Mettrie, d’Holbach and others made clear, is that he is submitted to the same laws; everything is response to need—mechanically… like a tree or a machine.   Man merely carries out natural forces—without any freedom whatsoever—in all he does, whether he loves or hates, helps or hurts, gives life or takes it.”  (Monsters from the Id, E. Michael Jones, pp. 5, 7)

Nietzsche declared the death of the Triune God and reinterpreted soul as an aspect of body, but it was Marxist materialists who attempted to scientifically re-engineer human beings after the fashion of Buddha’s programmatic nihilism said Mangalwadi.

After seizing control of Russia, they utilized mind-conditioning techniques such as propaganda and re-education with emphasis on Darwinism as well as mind-altering drugs, electro-shock therapy, terror and other brutal measures to,

“…liquidate all expressions of individual identity in favor of an impersonal collective, communal consciousness.”   (The Book that Made Your World, p. 74)

With B.F. Skinners’ behaviorism there is neither God nor soul.  Human beings are chemicals  turned into psychochemical machines determined by environment, chemistry, chance, and cultural conditioning.

With Richard Dawkins nihilism, metaphysical “thinking” memes plant thoughts in the grey matter of psychochemical organisms that are fatalistically determined by DNA.

Cognitive scientist Daniel Dennett, one of the Four Horsemen of Atheism, claims there really is no you, that soul, spirit and will are illusions caused by chemical interactions in the brain while his partner in nihilism, naturalist Tom Wolfe proclaims,

“Sorry, but your soul just died.”   (The Spiritual Brain: A Neuroscientist’s Case for the Existence of the Soul, Beauregard and O’Leary, p. 4)

After World War II  reaction set in against the eclipse of the unseen dimension by materialist and positivist simplifiers.   Seeing the writing on the wall, Mortimer J. Adler, the guiding hand behind The Encyclopedia Britannica predicted that belief in the unseen dimension would soon be considered orthodox science.  (The Seduction of Christianity, Hunt and McMahon, p. 107)

Sure enough, scientism, evolution, theosophy, spiritism, Vedanta monism and shamanism mingled, giving rise to occult science.   Whereas the metaphysical program of materialist scientism outwardly denies anything nonphysical and supposedly confines itself to physical laws, occult scientism deals with spiritual laws and metaphysical forces believed to govern the physical.    Building off of Darwin’s materialist theory of evolution, Teilhard’s spiritual theory teaches that after millions of years of evolution an impersonal god has emerged from matter.  Whereas Christianity had de-divinized nature, Teilhard’s theory trumpets its’ re-divinization.  The stage was set for the return of the gods and goddesses.

 Buddha’s Nihilism Comes to America

In no Western thinker has Buddha’s nihilist doctrine been more clearly expressed than in Nietzsche’s ecstatic utterance, “God is dead.”   God is dead in the hearts of modern Westerners:

“…and it is as true of the atheists and Satanists who rejoice in the fact, as it is of the unsophisticated multitudes….Man has lost faith in God and in the Divine Truth that once sustained him; the apostasy to worldliness that has characterized the modern age since its beginning becomes, in Nietzsche, conscious of itself and finds words to express itself.  God is dead…”   (Nihilism: The Root of the Revolution of the Modern Age, Eugene Rose, p. 60)

Prior to the turn of the century, God was already dead in the hearts of America’s ‘elite’ progressives, and upon the arrival of Swami Vivekananda at the Parliament of Religions in Chicago in 1893 the ‘elites’ eagerly embraced him:

“He was immediately lionized by high society in Boston and New York.  Philosophers at Harvard were mightily impressed.   Many wealthy high society types and intellectuals reverted to the Buddhist idea that self is an illusion.   They constituted a ‘… hard core of disciples who supported him and his grandiose dream: the evangelizing of the Western world by….Vedantic (monistic) Hinduism.”  (Orthodoxy and the Religion of the Future, Fr. Seraphim Rose, p. 21)

Vedanta Societies were established in America and Europe for the purpose of injecting Vedantic ideas into the bloodstream of the West and America.  Among those who helped disseminate Vedanta monism were Aldous Huxley, Christopher Isherwood, Somerset Maugham, and Teilhard de Chardin.

The Sixties witnessed a whole series of Indian gurus make their mark on the student generation.  Popular culture was introduced to any number of  nature- beliefs, from Vedanta monism, Zen Buddhism, pantheism, panentheism, reincarnation and karma to belief in a vague immanent ‘force,’ World Soul, Gaia (Mother Earth) and Teilhard de Chardin’s Omega Point:

“…..de Chardin believed that humanity could achieve a form of Godhood or a high level of spirituality called the Omega Point.  This was an evolutionary process that everyone could attain through discipline and dedication to the path of enlightenment.” (Reflections of the Omega Point, Frank Tipler, )

The exciting new spirituality discouraged belief in the Biblical God and promised followers that by dedication to the path of enlightenment they would attain godhood through the merging of their souls with the cosmic universe.  Through guided imagery, Tantric sex, kundalini yoga, hypnosis, possibility-thinking, dream-work, past-life regression, mind-altering drugs,  rhythmic music,  and spiritistic practices such as channeling,  initiates could be raised to new levels of consciousness, develop psychic powers, release their souls from their bodies through astral projection and merge their consciousness with the void.

In his article, “Confronting Neo-Paganism in the Culture and the Church” Dr. Peter Jones reports that many of the architects of the new spirituality, 

“…. such as Aldous Huxley, Joseph Campbell, and Huston Smith were converts of Vedanta …..Contemporary architects… call themselves ‘Cultural Creative’s,’ ‘Progressives,’  ‘Evolutionaries,’ ‘Integral Spiritualists,’  ‘Interspiritualists’ or ‘Transtraditional Spiritualists.’   It is doubtless true to say that the key New Age leaders and their present disciples all claim some form of Vedantic enlightenment.”  (truthexchange, Apr. 12, 2011)

It is already the case that for increasing numbers of contemporary believers the death of God has made it impossible for them to affirm the existence of the human self thus they actively seek the annihilation of their souls through drugs, Tantric sex, yoga, and meditation.  As with Buddha and contemporary Hindu gurus some initiates are trying to merge their individual consciousness with the void.

 Perverted Christianity

Jesus to Buddha:  “Wherever the worship of the living God has been perverted, it has always been the result of a departure from my Word….when my people cast aside the Word, the absolute is lost.  Pollution in worship is the result.”   (The Lotus and the Cross, pp. 74, 77)

Perpetuating the lies of his predecessors, spiritual evolutionist and Vedanta prophet Ken Wilber, a Mahayana Buddhist from a Christian background, teaches “integral spirituality.”  A popular author whose teachings have been avidly studied by world leaders, politicians (i.e. Bill Clinton and Al Gore), scholars, writers, artists, musicians, spiritual teachers and pop culture icons, Wilber combines evolution with the world’s nature religions, morals, and Eastern and Western philosophy so as to establish a universal spirituality.

A panentheist, Wilber imagines that the entire universe is God evolving from matter through billions of years toward de Chardin’s ‘Omega Point.’   Having evolved from primordial soup beast-man now evolves toward total god-consciousness, and in this way, the imaginary god is in process of becoming while evolution becomes conscious of itself.

A form of Christianized-Vedanta monism is already here, said Dr. Peter Jones:

“Evolutionary Christianity” is producing the longed-for and much-prophesied synthesis, namely, the union of science and spirituality…. Evolutionary Christianity is a variant of Wilber’s ‘Theory of Everything’, a worldview of (Vedanta monism) that claims to explain everything through the notion of human evolution into a non-dual divine. Michael Dowd, the ex-Evangelical now evangelist for evolution (agrees) with Bishop’s Spong’s post-theistic Christianity (and) declares supernatural other-worldly religion will die out for a post-metaphysical natural religion.”

Jones adds that Evolutionary Christianity is an online gathering place for:

“….evangelical theistic evolutionists, ‘progressive’ Emergent Christian leaders, radical post-theistic Christian liberals, Christian non-dual mystics, pro-homosexual ministers, radical religious feminists, and recognized evolutionary scientists. Some are deeply influenced by Pierre Teillard de Chardin, and pagan “geologians” such as Thomas Berry and Brian Swimme.”

Emergent Church Pastor Rob Bell for example, enthusiastically endorses Ken Wilber and claims to be reinventing Christianity as an Eastern religion while evangelical leader Leonard Sweet uses quantum physics to ‘scientifically’ prove that God is ‘in’ everything.   Not surprisingly, Sweet cites Teilhard de Chardin as “20^thcentury Christianity’s major voice.”   (Normalizing Necromancy: Tempting the Church to Talk with the Dead, Worldview Weekend, 1/23/12)

Nihilism underlies all permutations of the ‘new’ spirituality, whether Evolutionary Christianity,  Hinduism, Gnosticism, Mythology, Jungian Depth Psychology, the Perennial Philosophy, Interfaith, Trans-humanism, Wicca, Scientology, Goddess worship,  or the spiritual ‘gay’ agenda,  for there is no form of the new spirituality that is not naturalistic.   All are equally God-less;  none have a source for life, consciousness, and soul, hence all are merely different expressions of nihilism.

Welcome to the Theater of the Absurd

For over two hundred years, nihilist philosophies have been working their way through our culture, embedding themselves, often unconsciously, within our psyches.   This means that not only is the way we see ourselves and America colored by nihilism, but to the degree that our minds have been polluted are we immobilized by apathy, the spiritual emptiness that says in reaction to our peculiarly twisted, degraded culture, “Why bother?’

The strangely twisted atmosphere of our age is the “death of God” made tangible and it is Nietzsche who describes our meaningless, disordered, ugly, atonal, brutal, upside-down climate of nothingness:

“We have killed him (God), you and I! …But how have we done it?  How were we able to drink up the sea? Who gave us the sponge to wipe away the whole horizon?  What did we do when we loosened this earth from its sun? Whither does it now move?  Whither do we move?   …Do we not dash on unceasingly?  Backwards, sideways, forwards, in all directions?  Is there still an above and below? Do we not stray…through infinite nothingness?  Does not empty space breathe upon us?  …Does not night come on continually, darker and darker?”  (Nihilism: The Root of the Revolution of the Modern Age, Eugene Rose, p. 108)

Such is the theater of the absurd in which there is neither up nor down, male nor female, right nor wrong, true nor false, normal nor abnormal because the living God is dead, and while America and the West drift aimlessly in “infinite nothingness” nihilism progressively dissolves the foundation of soul, mind, worth, morality, family, and individual liberty.

America and the West are swirling ever downward in a spiraling vortex issuing into a void of outer darkness…..hell.

Choose Life that You May Live

As the new spirituality forcefully sweeps over and across America it effects a counter-conversion of souls.  This means that in turning away from the Triune God comes the reversal of conversion in which the soul ceases to live from the spirit and begins to live with the life of the body.  The disordered passions thereby revived absorb the life of the person who spiritually dies resulting in the natural man of 2 Tim. 3:3. (St. Tikhon, Works II, as quoted in Political Apocalypse: A Study of Dostoevsky’s Grand Inquisitor, Ellis Sandoz, p. 120)

“….. I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing, therefore choose life, that both you and your descendants may live; that you may love the Lord your God, that you may obey His voice, and that you may cling to Him, for He is your life…”   Deuteronomy 30:19-20

The Second Person of the Holy Trinity, the Word become Flesh, Jesus Christ the Physician came to heal the spiritually sick.   But whoever rejects the Physician and his own soul, whether through indifference or outright denial, rejects His prescription, hence destroys him or herself.

Destruction however, does not mean annihilation of the soul.   The soul though immortal, said St. Augustine, nevertheless suffers a kind of death when the living God forsakes it:

“…in that penal and everlasting punishment….the soul is…said to die because it does not live in connection with God (meaning that) though man does not cease to feel, yet because this feeling is neither sweet… nor wholesome (but) painfully penal, it is (called) death rather than life.”  (St. Augustine’s City of God, Chapter 2, Of that Death Which Can Affect an Immortal Soul, and of that to Which the Body is Subject)

From Great And Good To Great And Powerful

A Nation Without Morality And Compassion…

The imposition of tyranny is often accompanied by divine overtones: creation of artificial enemies, suppression of dissent, and destruction of competing divinities.  As American freedom gives way to the lawless power of the new world order elite, Christianity is beginning to feel the legal sting.  Abortion has become a permanent part of our society and now laws are in place to enforce homosexuality and make the Christian Bible illegal. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton gave a speech before the United Nations promoting worldwide acceptance of Lesbian, Gay, bisexual, and transgender behavior, equating its status with religion.  President Obama has ordered the United States Army to encourage this anomaly and ambassadors to foreign nations are promoting it as well.  Read more here.

The antinomian tragedy that afflicts Western Christianity has come home to roost.  While Christians argue over Scripture and prattle about the Holy Spirit, our secular government passes laws that outlaw the Faith of our Fathers. Religions are by nature exclusive and can only exist together when they are not taken seriously.  Humanists deify reason and secular perception, they take their beliefs seriously and since they occupy positions of power they are encoding law that supports their religious system.

Human beings were not created to govern themselves.  Born in sin, children are the epitome of selfishness. With different perceptions and different likes and dislikes every child seeks its own satisfaction.  Left to themselves children will fight until the fittest overcomes and a small tyranny is created.  This is a microcosm of the human condition.  Freedom is impossible without obedience to the overarching Law of God.

The United States of America had Christian underpinnings.  The Pilgrims and Puritans brought a serious form of Christianity to the shores of New England.  It flourished but it was not long before the university bred antinomianism of Jacob Arminius found its way to the new world and the seeds of flaccidity were planted; behind this intellectual heresy loitered the childish demand for human hegemony.  The invariable involvement of the God of the Bible in choosing His servants was ignored and replaced with a human option.   Hugo Grotius, another Dutch academic, was also associated with this rebellion.  His writings on deriving international law from natural law are still in use today.  Read here.  Intellectual brilliance does not prevent childish adults from rebelling against God by overruling His Word

We are being governed by human reason.  As the Christian religion placidly allows itself to be humanized, marginalized, and denuded, the inevitable result of the new enlightenment is becoming more apparent each day.  Power is accumulating in a smaller and smaller cabal, uniformity is being demanded, and dissent is beginning to fall under the wheels of the tyranny bus.  Freedom cannot endure under a government based on and controlled by human reason.

Mercy is an attribute of the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.  Cruelty is an attribute of human government.  When humanism overcomes the church of Jesus Christ the church becomes blinded and cruel.  A blind and cruel church is easily propagandized and manipulated; it will support injustice and brutality that an obedient church would quickly recognize and reject.

Biblical crime is disobedience to the immutable demands of God; humanist crime is disobedience to the arbitrary demands of government.  When the church fails to confront the proliferation of jails with the Biblical alternative of reparations the church gives away God’s power to the devil and can only complain about the cruelty that results.

Brutal policemen and legal injustice are a result of a humanistic legal system.  When policemen enforce wicked law they no longer promote the betterment of society but joining the despotic regime they become an enemy and must then protect themselves against a social order that is no longer their friend and supporter but is now an adversary.

American law enforcement provided a case study in despotism.  Mercy and compassion have vanished.  Without regard for justice, the policeman enforces the letter of the law demanding complete acquiescence.  Protests of innocence result in handcuffs and jail.  Resisting arrest is a crime and innocent citizens who refuse to accept injustice create their own guilt.  Jailors also demand silent submission and if resistance continues they will overpower, physically subdue, and apply torturous restraints that sometimes result in death.  Tasers are used to immobilize combative prisoners, both innocent and guilty, and though they are tortuously painful and not considered lethal, innocent prisoners have been killed.

Policemen are a part of the government.  And since they are supported by both darkly deceived citizens and the courts, they are seldom held accountable even for flagrant violations.

United States of America is an international champion at jailing its people.  We are the world’s greatest incarcerator, beating out totalitarian nations like Russia and China. When God’s absolute standard of righteousness is rejected, personal responsibility is forgotten, and citizens begin to depend upon the enforcement of human law to maintain order; a cancerous, wicked, incomprehensible legal system is a result.  Freedom depends on simple, understandable law and an obedient population.  In the end it is us, the citizens, who determine the character of society.

Many Americans approve of torture.  We twice elected a president that supported it.  We are easy haters and quickly fall for government propaganda that outlines the dastardly deeds of the latest designated enemy. We believe that the unfortunate individuals who fall under the jurisdiction of our legal system deserve to be treated with demeaning cruelty; strutting President George W. Bush and ArizonaSheriff Joe Arpaio are heroes.

Many Americans are against abortion.  Read about it here.   There is a whole industry that has been fighting abortion for several decades.  The objective is to have abortion banned and made illegal as it was before the Roe vs. Wade decision in January, 1973.  The fight to change the legal status of abortion has been useless because too many women are willing to murder their unborn babies.  The murderous spirit that inhabits the hearts of many Americans is the problem, not the legal status of abortion.  It is this same murderous spirit that is at the root of a multitude of sins that are unrecognized and entrenched.  Changing the law would not change the evil hearts of our citizens.  Only repentance will do that.

The homosexual agenda will be thrust on the world because much of the world population is willing to accept sodomy as a harmless action.  In spite of the fact that 70 percent or so of American citizens claim to be Christians abortion and homosexuality have been accepted as permanent parts of our society.  There will be some complain but it will be on a Christian preference basis not a legal one.  The new C.E.O. of J. C. Penney has selected Ellen DeGeneres as company spokesperson.  

The overarching absolutes that sustained American society for a couple of centuries are being eradicated.  They are being replaced with law that enforces opposites.  We will disobey the Laws God gave to Moses because secular statutes require us to do so or, as in ancient Rome, we will be thrown to the lions.

I am not a violent person.  I have never advocated aggressive revolution. However, I am a Christian Reconstructionist and although neither the Founder of Christian Reconstruction the late Dr. Rousas Rushdoony nor I have ever advocated violent revolution according to a recent Homeland Security publication I and other Christian Reconstructionists are potential “Terrorists”.  (Read pages 9 and 10)

Can any of you remember the anguish expressed by humanists that Christians were attempting to inflict their views on society?  Christians did not succeed, humanists did.

This is where we are in America! – Auschwitz is under construction and the lions are growling!

Obama’s War on the Catholic Church

The pathetic attack on religious freedom and the sanctity of individual conscience is a shot heard round the planet. The social desecration that surrounds this immoral culture has a defamed religious czar, named Barack Hussein Obama. Kathleen Sebelius, secretary of Health and Human service is a disgrace. She acts as the High Priestess of the Church for the Police State. No matter what your opinion is of the Catholic Church, one practice surely shows the wisdom of the faith. Women are not ordained as priests.

All the bluster about women’s reproductive rights misses the nature of the issue. America was created as a nation to guarantee religious freedom. According to the gospel of Obama, his bishops wear skirts and jack boots. By ordering an unconstitutional dictate, Sebelius’ heretical doctrine views the First Amendment as expendable. History repeats itself.

Mark Steyn in an article steeped in canon law irony The Church of Obama has it correct.

“The president of the United States has decided to go Henry VIII on the Church’s medieval ass. Whatever religious institutions might profess to believe in the matter of “women’s health,” their pre-eminences, jurisdictions, privileges, authorities, and immunities are now subordinate to a one-and-only supreme head on earth determined to repress, redress, restrain, and amend their heresies. One wouldn’t wish to overextend the analogy: For one thing, the Catholic Church in America has been pathetically accommodating of Beltway bigwigs’ ravenous appetite for marital annulments in a way that Pope Clement VII was disinclined to be vis-à-vis the English king and Catherine of Aragon. But where’d all the pandering get them? In essence President Obama has embarked on the same usurpation of church authority as Henry VIII: As his Friday morning faux-compromise confirms, the continued existence of a “faith-based institution” depends on submission to the doctrinal supremacy of the state.”

The response from Cardinal-Designate Dolan during a CBS 2 interview sums it up.

“The federal government should do what it’s traditionally done since July 4, 1776, namely back out of intruding into the internal life of a church.”

Integrated Catholic Life quotes the Archbishop Dolan further,

“The Catholic Church defends religious liberty, including freedom of conscience, for everyone. The Amish do not carry health insurance. The government respects their principles. Christian Scientists want to heal by prayer alone, and the new health-care reform law respects that. Quakers and others object to killing even in wartime, and the government respects that principle for conscientious objectors. By its decision, the Obama administration has failed to show the same respect for the consciences of Catholics and others who object to treating pregnancy as a disease.”

 

For a rational and detailed explanation of the pitfalls, view the video ObamaCare: .

Even the most ardent opponent of the Papacy must admit that Western Civilization is based upon the principles of Christian teaching that recognize the unique essence of every human being. That each person has an individual conscience as the focus of behavior and that a belief in God and the revealed word developed our social and legal heritage. The State may have temporal power to impose its will, but does not have legitimate moral authority that violates natural law or the inherent autonomy of each mortal soul.

The Obama gambit is a foolish attempt to wage war directly on the spiritual church doctrine of the Catholic Church. Even the Huffington Post points out in Catholics Rally Against Obama Contraception Mandate the outrage that this assault stirred.

“Dozens of priests took the rare step of reading letters from the pulpit urging parishioners to reach out to Washington and oppose the rule, enacted Jan 20.

The rule requires nearly all employers to provide their employees access to health insurance that covers artificial contraception, sterilization services and the “morning after” birth control pill.

The mandate exempts individual churches but applies to Catholic universities, Catholic-based charities and to groups affiliated with Methodists, Baptists and other denominations.”

The feeble attempt to walk back this mistake with a compromise is symptomatic of a brutal regime that wants to stamp out traditional Christianity, and substitute a state worship in a command and control belief.

The Wall Street Journal provides this account in ObamaCare’s Great Awakening.

“The Affordable Care Act itself is ambiguous about what counts as a religious organization that deserves conscience protection. Like so much else in the rushed bill, this was left to administrative discretion. What the law does cement is the principle that the government will decide for everyone what “health care” must mean. The entire thrust of ObamaCare is to standardize benefits and how they must be paid for and provided, regardless of individual choices or ethical convictions.

Mr. Obama’s allies among Catholic liberals are also professing shock—even the Catholic Health Association’s Sister Carol Keehan, who lobbied for ObamaCare, and Notre Dame’s Father John Jenkins, who invited Mr. Obama to speak on campus in 2009. But if they now claim they were taken for a ride by the secular left, the truth is that they wanted to be deceived in the name of their grander goal of government-enforced equity. The Catholic left was one of ObamaCare’s great enablers.

Speaking of scales from the eyes, we’re eager to hear from former Michigan Congressman Bart Stupak, who for a brief moment led a faction of pro-life Democrats against ObamaCare in 2010. They surrendered when Mr. Obama gave them the fig leaf of an executive order that will supposedly prevent federal funds from subsidizing abortions. Mr. Stupak is now a lobbyist at the D.C. law firm Venable LLP.”

Many political pundits claim that the social issues are no longer important to most of the public. How inept it is to accept that the basis for political decisions need not incorporate the moral issues or Bill of Right axioms. Human freedom is a natural right and is not a concession provided from some obscure government bureaucrat or administrator.

Pat Buchanan has long championed the principles and teaching of Christendom. The Death of the West is not based solely on the decline in birth rates of just European descent families. The suppression or Christian beliefs and the persecution of religious institutions under the 501 C3 extortion scheme to silence preaching and neuter political courage is the core strategy to kill faith in God.

The Business Insider confirms the wisdom in the Catholic viewpoint, Time To Admit It: The Church Has Always Been Right On Birth Control

Today’s injunctions against birth control were re-affirmed in a 1968 document by Pope Paul VI called Humanae Vitae. He warned of four results if the widespread use of contraceptives was accepted:

1.General lowering of moral standards

2.A rise in infidelity, and illegitimacy

3.The reduction of women to objects used to satisfy men.

4.Government coercion in reproductive matters.

So, just to sum up:

It’s a good idea for people to be fruitful and multiply; and

Regardless of how you feel about the Church’s stance on birth control, it’s proven pretty prophetic.

 

Just how can the secular humanism culture of Obama answer the questions of a young girl in the video,  ?

The strong response of the Catholic bishops is long overdue. The need for a full-blown crusade against the Godless elements in government is the true cause of the 21th century. The social destruction that we witness all around is no accident. The vast majority of Americans are believers in the word of God, no matter what particular faith or denomination they accept.

Liberty is the reward of being faithful to the tenants of the Sermon of the Mount. Hopelies in the expectation that justice will one day be realized. The State and especially the social engineers that reside in the Obama hierarchy seek the systematic dismantling of all constitutional restraint. Religion stands in their way of completing their goal for Totalitarian Collectivism.

What is at stake in your immortal soul, so why would you freely give an undeserved allegiance to a government that wants to eliminate your most precious beliefs and moral standards?

The POTUS is a heretic and a religious outcast. As for his devotion to civil liberties, he is an atheist, since he rejects natural law as the underpinnings of any social contact with government. Natural law comes from God. Obamacare resides in the deepest confines of Dante’s Inferno.

Religious wars may seem passé in an era of thermonuclear annihilation, but the only salvation from the insanity of the global tyrants is to engage in spiritual and political combat with the objective of removing all fascists from bogus power and illegitimate authority. The stage is set for a true Armageddon. It is time to send the arrogant Obama administration straight to hell.

CDC Calls Morgellons’ Nanoworms a Delusion, Protects DARPA

Imagine having the mental prowess to be able to create living filaments heretofore unknown, that can reproduce themselves, some of which come with identifying letters embossed on them, and then to make them extrude from beneath your skin, all against your conscious will.

Sound like science fiction? It’s not, says the US Centers for Disease Control.

Despite having spent four years and $600,000, and using the world’s largest forensic database, the premier health agency reports it is unable to identify the source of the fibers emanating from those suffering with Morgellons. [1]

The CDC suggests that four out of a hundred thousand people, the rate of infection in Northern California, are imagining these filaments into existence.

Comprising an array of physical and mental symptoms [2], Morgellons is distinguished by novel fibers that protrude from the skin, causing lesions and sores that do not heal, or that heal very slowly. Though clustered in California, Florida and Texas, it is found in every state and around the planet.

“We conducted an investigation of this unexplained dermopathy to characterize the clinical and epidemiologic features and explore potential etiologies,” the paper explains. The only potential etiology suggested was that the patients were delusional:

“No common underlying medical condition or infectious source was identified, similar to more commonly recognized conditions such as delusional infestation.”

The CDC provided more information in its press releases [3] hyping the study than it did in the 300-word study published last week. Its Unexplained Dermopathy webpage goes beyond what was reported in the actual study, saying there is “no evidence of an environmental link,” and promised to do no further studies. [4]

“People who suffer from Morgellons disease are NOT delusional no matter what the CDC or the mainstream press would have you believe,” says Jan Smith of MorgellonsExposed.com. She’s suffered with Morgellons for over 13 years.

The image above is on her home page. “Ponder why a person with Morgellons disease would have tissue coming out of their body with embossed letters on it. This photo is real and the sample has not been altered in any way. It is available for research and DNA testing.” [5]

The CDC study reported, “Most materials collected from participants’ skin were composed of cellulose, likely of cotton origin.”

One of the specimens extruded from Smith’s body was found to be composed of cellulose and GNA, the synthetic form of DNA. [6] Glycol nucleic acid does not occur naturally; it is used to create synthetic life forms. [7]

But why would the CDC not know exactly the origin of the cellulose, instead saying it’s likely from cotton? And what about the rest that was not cellulose? The study provided no details.

The CDC sent the cellulose and unnatural fibers to the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology, reports the Associated Press. [8] AFIP has been collecting fiber samples and other forensic material for 150 years. [9] Its 2011 budget was $65 million. [10] Surely, if these novel fibers are natural or lab-created, the AFIP would know. Apparently not.

AFIP is the same group that collected all the forensic evidence of the 9/11 attack on the Pentagon and at the Pennsylvania crash site, under code name Operation Noble Eagle. [11] Forensic evidence and a generous dose of imagination led National Geographic to produce a documentary asserting that the plane that supposedly hit the Pentagon disintegrated on impact. Talk about delusion.

Please support my work by reading the full piece at Activist Post. Thanks!

Jewish Imperial News

This last weekend brought with it some vile manifestations of Jewish politics in its most horrific forms.

United Against the Goyim

In the USA, the owner and publisher of the Atlanta Jewish Times, Andrew Adler, suggested that Israeli Prime Minister Benyamin Netanyahu should consider ordering a Mossad hit team to assassinate U.S. President Barack Obama so that his successor will defend Israel against Iran.

Actually, it wasn’t just Obama whom Adler suggested to eliminate, the Atlanta Jewish Times listed three lethal options to help Israel counter Iran’s nuclear capability. The first, to launch a pre-emptive strike against Hamas and Hezbollah, the second to attack Iran’s nuclear facilities and the third is to assassinate the current American president.

Devastatingly, Adler’s murderous attitude towards politics is wholly consistent with some Biblical and Talmudic anti-gentile teaching. It recalls clearly certain Old Testament genocidal verses such as Leviticus 26:7-8:

‘You will chase your enemies, and they shall fall by the sword before you. Five of you shall chase a hundred, and a hundred of you shall put ten thousand to flight; your enemies shall fall by the sword before you.’

It is also consistent with the appalling way in which Palestinians are abused by the Jewish State.  But it is also consistent with the Jewish cultural wrath towards the dissenting Jesus and towards dissent in general. May I remind readers that the word Yeshu – Jesus in Hebrew – is the abbreviation of the Hebrew phrase

“may his name and memory be blotted out”.

Without comparing president Obama to Jesus, Adler’s homicidal inclination is somewhat similar. Seemingly, some Jews have yet to forgive Jesus – nor President Obama. .

The American Jewish Committee in Atlanta condemned Adler’s article, saying that Adler’s proposals were

“shocking beyond belief.”

– a pretty bizarre reaction, considering  that the American Jewish Committee is itself an enthusiastic advocate of a war against Iran. Similarly, warmonger Alan Dershowitz listed recently the ‘legal’ reasoning behind an Israeli attack on Iran. True, he has yet to call for an American President to be murdered, he just thinks that launching another world war is a ‘reasonable’ thing to do. And, as far as I can remember, the American Jewish Committee didn’t rush to denounce Dershowitz or to apologise on his behalf or in the name of the Jews.

United Against Freedom

In Britain, following some relentless Jewish Lobby pressure, Press TV, The Iranian News Channel was forced off the air after Ofcom  (The ‘Independent’ regulator for the UK Communications Industries), revoked its licence for ‘breaching the Communications Act’. This should come as no surprise. Bearing in mind that 80% of British Tory MPs are Conservative Friends of Israel, we in Britain must expect the rapid fading away of some of our most elementary freedoms.

United Against Palestine

On Saturday the Islamophobic blog Harry’s Place and the Zionist mouthpiece Jewish Chronicle completed their takeover of UK Palestinian Solidarity Campaign (PSC). In the last two years, the PSC EC has expelled and marginalised some of its leading intellectuals amongst them some prominent Palestinian andMuslim activists and now, at last, they are beginning to receive their just credit.

In the last two months we have noticed that the PSC has been praised by both the notorious JC and Harry’s Place. Two weeks ago, pro-war Harry’s Place thanked the Jewish ‘anti’-Zionists for promoting Jewish tribal interests at the midst of the Palestinian Solidarity Campaign and this weekend a PSC Executive memberconfirmed that PSC’s latest maneuvers against ‘anti-Semitism’ were in response to criticism from the rabid Zionist website Harry’s Place and the Jewish Chronicle. Like others, I am confused.  Should a Palestinian solidarity group surrender to an Islamophobic blog, a Zionist paper and other ‘Jews-only’ pressure groups?

Judging by the scale of the  celebration on Islamophobic Harry’s Place, you’d be forgiven for assuming that PSC – now firmly committed to the struggle against anti-Semitism and Holocaust denial – is now just one more Zionist outlet, whose prime interest is in promoting Jewish tribal interests. I’m sure that the Palestinians in besieged Gaza and in refugee camps all over the Middle East are over the moon.

However, to counter the now complete Zionist takeover of PSC EC, a bunch of leading solidarity  activists, journalists and intellectuals have launched deLiberation, a new UK dissident magazine. We aim to become a leading UK media outlet, to provide news, analysis and fearless criticism – exactly where The Guardian and the BBC so miserably fail. And we will fill that space now created by the current PSC Executive Committee.

United Against The Guardian

Two days ago, I discovered that CIF Watch, a Jewish supremacist site interested solely in cleansing British press of any criticism of Israel and Jewish power, was boasting that the Guardian surrendered to their pressure and

‘removed an Atzmon passage.’

Apparently the Jewish site was annoyed that Khaled Diab quoted me as saying

“The Jewish state is pretty devastated by the idea that a bunch of ‘indigenous Arabs’ are far more technologically advanced than its own chosen cyber pirates.”

Specifically, it didn’t approve of the Guardian printing the word ‘chosen’ in reference to Jews.

The CIF Watch site says of itself that it is

dedicated to monitoring anti-Semitism and combatting the assault on Israel’s legitimacy in the Guardian newspaper’s

Comment is Free’ blog.” So, it is not against racism or discrimination in general, but solely interested in matters to do with one group and its tribal interests.

Shocking but typically, the Guardian surrendered immediately to the Zionist’s demands. As the Guardian rushed to admit: the word ‘chosen’ “is at odds with ‘Guardian regulations”. But the Guardian needs reminding that ‘Choseness’ may be at odds with ‘Guardian regulations’ but it is clearly not ‘at odds’ with Israeli practice, the Israeli legal system, the Jewish Lobby and even Jews-only Palestinian solidarity groups.

United Against Truth

Three months ago I published ‘The Wandering Who’. This book presented a harsh criticism of Jewish identity politics, Left, Right and Centre. It openly argued that contemporary Jewish identity politics is exclusivist, in most cases, racially driven and, in many ways, is a threat to world peace. In some ways, as in Adler’s call to assassinate Obama, it actually also endangers Jews.

The book attempts to grasp the bizarre continuum between Israeli barbarism, Adler’s homicidal inclination, the PSC EC surrender to rabid Zionist bodies and the ‘Guardian’s regulation’.  The book points to the political culture that made Jewish identity politics so powerful and, at the same time, so blind. And in spite of a united front’s attempt to silence the book and its message, in just a short space of time the book sold thousands of copies and its message is spreading like a forest fire.

I’m not one bit surprised by the surge of Jewish power. I wrote a book about it. But, being intimately familiar with Jewish history, I know exactly where it will lead. Jewish political arrogance has always proved to be, above all, devastatingly dangerous for Jews.

For the sake of peace, both Jews and gentiles must confront the prominence of Jewish identity politics. We should never be afraid to question ideologies and lobbies that impose a threat to peace, our value systems, freedom of thought, humanity and humanism.

Wondering about the Wandering Who

[Book Review by Israel Shamir of Gilad Atzmon, The Wandering Who?: A Study of Jewish Identity Politics]

Gilad Atzmon is larger than life; no delicate and sensitive artistic soul, he is rather a living volcano, a titan with a Rabelaisian sense of humor and enough energy to power a city. Nights, you will find him entertaining his fans in every corner of the globe with his masterful saxophone playing: tonight in Mexico City, tomorrow night in Sheffield. His days are spent producing a vast quantity of writing and blogging, sending out at least two letters a day to his many readers. His previous book,  , is a very funny novel with more than a touch of the macabre and grotesque. It features a roving Israeli orchestra smuggling Nazis in double bass cases. It also contains kosher pigs, sexy spies, smelly underwear, casual killings, and a row of Israeli national leaders, all with their trousers down.

The best writings of Gilad Atzmon firmly belong to the realm of Israeli literature. His preference for writing in English attennuates his essentially Israeli character, just as Beckett remained a British writer while writing in French. His merciless goading of tender Jewish sentiments recalls the much-loved Israeli playwright, Hanoch Levin; this explains why Atzmon is enjoyed more by his country-mates than by Diaspora Jews. His newest book,   is a collection of essays that revolve around Jewish-identity politics. This subject (“what does it mean to be a Jew”) holds much fascination to people of Jewish origin. Many contemporary Jewish writers indulge in this sort of reflection, usually slipping into woe and whine mixed with self-adoration, and coated over with treacle and romanticism.

Being no delicate flower (see above), Atzmon delivers robust and forceful opinions with both hands. He regains some of the lost honesty once expressed by free thinkers and Zionists of the fin-de-siècle. Early Zionists from Nordau to Herzl provided some very frank and critical assessments of Jewish society. Yet even more critical was Otto Weininger (1880 – 1903), the tragic Viennese writer who dared to connect sex and Jews in his great bestseller ; he followed up his success by committing suicide at the age of 23. Weininger has long been forgotten in Europe, and yet he holds a fascination for Israelis. A play by prominent Israeli playwright Joshua Sobol, Weininger’s Night (subtitled “The Soul of a Jew”) was a great hit in 1983; it was responsible for opening up Israeli theatre to the world. It was the first Israeli play ever staged in Moscow’s MXAT theatre (in 1990), directed by talented Gedalia Besser.

Atzmon has a loving and thoughtful essay about him. He provides some valuable insights. He turns Weininger’s “I dislike what I am” into “I dislike what I do”.  Atzmon sees Weininger’s suicide as an impetuous reaction against his womanly/Jewish side. Atzmon sympathizes with Weininger’s feeling that “Jewishness” is somewhat similar to “queerness”, and this provides a key to the book’s understanding.Jewish-identity musings, like gender-identity discussions, tend to fluctuate between the vulgar and the brazen; both can seem boring and repetitious unless the reader is directly involved, and perhaps even then.

The first essay of the collection has the freshness and sincerity of true testimony. The story of a young man trying to break free from his fiercely nationalist non-religious Jewish family background is akin to any man’s escape from stifling gender politics. Imagine a virile young man conceived in vitro and brought up by a sorority of lesbian activists, who has finally come of age and broken out into a rich and satisfying world of natural love. Clearly one might expect and forgive such a young man his unflattering depictions of “dykes” and “butches”, but such transgressions could never be forgiven by the sanctimonious gay activists and PC wardens who decide for us what is permissible and what is not.

This in fact has happened with Atzmon’s book: it has generated a significant amount of heated controversy. This kind of publicity is never bad for book sales. As for the author, he is no shrinking violet and quite up to the task; in fact, he is a pugnacious fellow, able to defend himself and always ready for a good brawl. Many of Atzmon’s critics seem to think that when we talk about Jews we must speak as we do about the dead: say something nice, or don’t say anything at all. And yet who should critique the activities and attitudes of the dead but the living? Banning all outsiders from the debate is a recipe for insipidity.

And yet, Atzmon is no outsider. An (ex-) Israeli, he has some first-hand knowledge, and he introduces us to a long obscured side of Jewishness, just as Jean Genet once reminded us about the backside of queerness. In Genet’s oevre we see the gender-confused men who are not saintly martyrs on their way to Auschwitz, but brutal criminals who kill and betray their friends in the hellish darkness of a jail. Though art is perhaps a better mode for such delivery.

One of his problems is that the Jewish subject is over-explored, and one treads on the footsteps of predecessors, even if one does not give them credit. The most interesting essay in the book contains Atzmon’s reflections on an essay by Milton Friedman. Friedman was curious as to why so many Jews had abandoned their historically Left-leaning socialist ways. To avoid the conclusion that Jews used to love Justice and Mercy, and now they have traded it for Power, Friedman instead posits that Jews are most naturally creatures of the Right. Friedman declares that while pure capitalism is the environment in which Jews thrive best, for one hundred years Jews were kept out of right-wing politics because the Right stood with the Church; the Left, anti-clerical and atheist, accepted them as they were. It was only after the Right was separated from the Church that Jews began to stream back into right-wing movements, and they ended up wholeheartedly embracing capitalism of the most brutal kind. This is a valuable observation, something that has yet to be learned by leftist philosemites like Seumas Milne, and by the Christian Right. The mass participation of Jews in a movement has a price, and this price is the rejection of the Christian Church.

Atzmon rejects Friedman’s conclusions: he would rather walk us through all the hypocrisies of the Jewish Left, as though a change in leadership would solve the problem. This attitude is very common among educated Israelis who have lived through the great betrayal of humanism by the left-wing parties, climaxing with labour leader Ehud Barak carrying water for Sharon and Netanyahu. Since the destruction of the Israeli Left can be directly attributed to these “traitors to the cause”, Atzmon might be forgiven for thinking that but for a crisis in leadership the Left would be still ruling the roost.

Atzmon gets carried away by his own rhetoric when he proclaims that the Jewish Left wants to seize assets of the rich just because Jews do not respect Goyim property rights. This is plainly not true: radical leftists everywhere call for the expropriation of all banks, Jewish or otherwise, and Jewish leftists are no different in this aspect. Jews are the wealthiest minority in the world; they have the most to lose in a leftist revolution. It’s apparent to everyone except Atzmon that the Jewish move to the Right is as natural as bacon.

With zeal of a born-again Christian, Atzmon offers not the smallest fig leaf of hope for good-hearted Jews. If a Jew supports the Left, he is doing it because he wants to rob wealthy Goys with Talmudic impunity. If a Jew supports the Right, it is because he wants to steal land. If a Jew supports Palestine, he is doing it in order to take over the Palestinian movement. This is a bridge too far. This sort of self-criticism should be reserved for confession. Not all Jews are that self-serving. Yes, there are hopeless wretches like Tony Greenstein and Roland Rance, leftist British Jews whose main participation in the Palestinian struggle is constrained to battling phantom antisemitism and Holocaust rhetoric, but not all Atzmon’s adversaries are paper tigers.

However, as Atzmon wrote in his essay on Weininger, one condemns one’s own faults, so perhaps this is a form of his contrition.

Atzmon is tough on Jewish tribalism, no endearing feature to be sure, but something not all rare in the Middle East. Jews are not any more tribalist than are Armenians, and no more nationalist than Georgians. This clannishness may be less common in British/American culture, but the tribal setup of immigrant croups is well known even there. Jewish success in the US and the UK cannot be explained by expounding upon Jewish insularity; a better explanation is traditional Jewish fidelity to power.

We could do with less psychologism and Portnoy’s complaints. Discussion of English or American identity and mentality does not lead to better understanding of British and American imperial policies. Likewise, policies of the World Jewry are very relevant for us, while Jewish mental attitudes are not. Who cares what Jews feel towards their neighbours? We care what the Jews do. Instead of dealing with bees, we need to know of swarms, and this is what Atzmon fails to deliver, because this brave man gets cold feet.

Atzmon is least convincing and most dull when he pedantically constructs his castle of exceptions and explanations intended to ward off the inevitable accusations of ‘hate’ and ‘racism’. He declares his preference for “accidental Jews”, i.e. people who are Jews by accident of birth. This alibi is designed to fortify his position against attack. It is as if Nietzsche added to his famous dictum (“You are going towomen? Do not forget the whip!”) a caveat “but beware some women are able to use the whip, too”. An allegoric poetic quality of writing has been ruined, and now nobody is happy. We admire Atzmon’s fierce and fearless qualities, and it’s kind of a let-down when he chooses to be prudent now and then.

One can point out several errors of fact in his book. For instance, he claims that Jews did not write any histories until the 19^th century. This is not true: Abraham Zacuto produced his  (“Sefer Yohassin”) in the last decades of the 15^th century, and this book is available on . Still he builds some castles on this factual error, and they collapse like straw houses.

However, Atzmon’s greatest fault is narcissism, or perhaps it is a myopic solipsism. Atzmon remains locked in the very Jewish dichotomy of Jews vs. Gentiles. He does not seem to appreciate the marvellous variety of the Gentiles; he cannot recognize that the Nations of the Earth are quite different from each other. The British are not the same as the Palestinians, nor are they as French as France. And yet for Atzmon, they are all one happy crowd without specific features. In vain shall we seek to learn what are the qualities of the Palestinians that have attracted him (except perhaps the ability to make good hummus). The one all-redeeming quality that they all share is that they are not Jewish. For this reason he suggests that Jews fully adapt to the modern, generic, global cosmopolitan monoculture of multiculturalism. This is absolutely unnecessary. While we applaud acculturation, Jews should adopt the culture of the land they inhabit, become one with the folk they live with. There is no shortcut to universality. I would like to read about Atzmon hanging out with average Brits, Scouses, and Brummies, or about his adventures with Palestinian shepherds, but they are not to be found: in a diverse world, he sees only Jews.

Another problem is the absence of God. Indeed, all discourse on Jews sine God is quite useless. I am aware that in the modern British climate, if Atzmon were to publish his thoughts on God and Jews, he would not find a publisher. You may use every obscenity, but you should not mention Christ. And yet Jews are first of all a religious community; a valid analysis of Jewish identity must take religion into account. Atzmon purposely adds a disclaimer declaring he will not criticise Judaism, but this simply ducks the issue.

He does give himself permission to use the Bible against them, but his literal readings are too primitive for the sophisticated readers of the 21st century. One can’t quote bloody stories of the Conquest of Canaan from the Book of Joshua like one quotes the admissions of a criminal. So many wonderful minds have discussed these tales, from St Jerome to Edward Said, and all of them had more valuable thoughts than Atzmon has to share. Indeed, when God says: you will inherit houses you did not build and vineyards you did not plant, Atzmon says: “that’s why the Jews seized Palestine!” This is trite. We live in houses we did not build, most especially in the houses of our bodies, built by God. We enjoy many wonderful things we did not produce. For instance, we enjoy Atzmon’s saxophone, though we didn’t built it. God’s grace gave us these things. This Biblical verse reminds us all that we receive a lot of undeserved things, and that we should all work harder to justify God’s trust in us.

The bottom line is that identity musings are dry and boring stuff; Atzmon is actually a much better writer than one would conclude from reading this book. He wanted to get it off his chest. Fine! Now let us see more of his witty novels.

P.S. Naturally I side with Atzmon in his polemics against his numerous detractors, but their arguments are so senile that it would be a waste of reader’s time to dwell time and time again on the endless and fruitless assertions of ‘hate’ and ‘self-hate’. What we do is soul-searching, not hate. Non-Jews have become so over-sensitised to allegations of race hatred that they swarm with the rest even when it’s an honest discussion between Jews.

Multicultural vs. Stereotypical

Srdja Trifkovic’s paper on Russia and the European Media, delivered at the conference “Russia and Europe: Issues of Contemporary Journalism,” Paris, November 24, 2011.

Most West European media professionals tend to subscribe, consciously or not, to a neoliberal world outlook in general and to the tenets of multiculturalism in particular. In other words, they tend to accept the principle that recognition and positive accommodation of demands and special political and moral claims of various ethno-racial, religious, or sexual minorities are obligatory through “group-differentiated rights.”

The result is an obsessive favoritism of allegedly disadvantaged groups, such as Third World societies in general, Third World immigrants in particular, and most notably Muslims in Western Europe. The BBC and other media outlets thus routinely described the rioters in French banlieus six years ago—who were overwhelmingly of Arab-Muslim origin—as “angry French youths.” The term was technically correct, of course, assuming that most of them were indeed French citizens, but it was journalistically misleading to the point of dishonesty.

These assumptions have become culturally, psychologically and institutionally internalized in the West European mainstream media. Behind the veneer of all-embracing diversity, however, we find a carefully calibrated scale of acceptance or rejection of “the Other” depending on the cultural and political preferences of the media professionals themselves. Their insistence that there are many self-validating, closed systems of perception, feeling, thought, and evaluation—each associated with a racially, ethnically, religiously or sexually defined group—effectively rejects the legacy of the Western civilization, and specifically its insistence on the standards of reason, evidence, and objectivity, and principles of justice and freedom that apply to human beings as such. The result is a moral and intellectual relativism, which enables the media elite to pick and choose which group or nation will be approved for the status of sanctified victimhood, and which will be denied the benefit of the doubt, let alone sympathy, in the reporting and analysis of its foreign and domestic policies or its cultural and social developments.

Any serious discussion of the image of Russia in the Western media in general, and in those of Western Europe in particular, has to start with the recognition that Russia has been firmly and decisively relegated to the latter category by the Western elite class in general and the European media elite in particular. “It sounds paradoxical,” said Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, referring to the Western attitude toward Russia, “but there was more mutual trust and respect during the Cold War.” His correct hint is that the regimes in Brussels and Washington detest a post-Soviet Russia—the state that no longer is subservient, as it had been in the 1990s, but reviving its patriotic and Christian roots—more than the Cod War leaders of the West hated the USSR.

Let me focus on a specific, well documented example which is seven years old. It is hardly possible to envisage an orgy of terrorist savagery more deprived than that staged by Chechen jihadists and their foreign cohorts in Beslan in September 2004—at the end of a week in which two Russian passenger planes were blown up in mid-air and a lethal bomb exploded outside a Moscow metro station. All these attacks were terrorist in character and, in the case of Beslan, Islamic in the method of execution; yet the reaction of the European media was characterized by (1) blaming the victim, (2) ridiculing Russia’s claim to be battling terrorism, and (3) advising “dialogue” with the Chechen terrorists and effective Russian capitulation to their demands.

The problem of such visceral bias, stereotypical quasi-reporting and quasi-analysis is by no means new. The collapse of Russia’s institutions and social infrastructure under Yeltsin was accompanied by hyperinflation that wiped out savings and reduced the middle class and pensioners to penury. Its leading lights—Anatoly Chubais, Yegor Gaidar, Boris Nemtsov and Vladimir Ryzhkov—were nevertheless hailed in the European media as “pro-Western reformers” sans peur et sans reproche. Their political factions, lionized by the Western media, were duly supported by the quasi-NGO network funded in part by the Western taxpayers.

The parallel wholesale robbery of Russian resources by the oligarchs and fire-sale of drilling concessions to their Western cohorts such as the BP, became a contentious issue in Russia’s relations with the West only a decade later, with the arrest of Mikhail Khodorkovsky. Media allegations of “Putin’s revenge” against the Yukos boss may have been worthy of serious investigation (which was lacking) but they disregarded the fact that—quite apart from his political ambitions—Khodorkovsky was guilty of fraud and tax evasion on a massive scale.

The West European media commentary brought to mind the manner in which Brezhnev’s propaganda had built Rudi Dutschke and Angela Davis into political martyrs. And while last month’s court proceedings in Kiev against Yulia Tymoshenko may have left a lot to be desired, the Western media disregard for her proven record of corruption and venality was equally predictable. Her transgressions are irrelevant in the context of the ideological usefulness of her constructed victimhood with clear anti-Russian implications and connotations.

There is absolutely no evidence, by contrast, that Anna Politkovskaya was killed on Putin’s orders, as claimed or suggested in dozens of West European mainstream media outlets With no evidence whatsoever, that assumption was immediately made when she was shot in November 2006, and gravely presented as near-certainty by the usual “experts.” But when a leading opposition politician was shot in May 2007 in Georgia, the event was barely mentioned in Europe: just try a Google search for “Guram Sharadze.”

Talking of Georgia, the anti-Russian stereotypes most notably prevailed over common sense and journalistic integrity at the time of Saakashvili’s attack on South Ossetia in August 2008, with the British media leading the pack in their attacks on Russia’s “aggression” and Western “passivity.” I am not going to bore you any longer with detailed quotes, we all remember it well.

While never missing an opportunity to hector Russia on democracy and criticize her human rights record, the West European media have been notably silent on the discriminatory treatment of large Russian minorities in the former Soviet republics. In Latvia and Estonia the Russians are subjected to arguably the worst treatment of any minority group by any member of the European Union, or (with the exception of Turkey) of NATO. Latvia and Estonia have been allowed by the West flagrantly to break promises made before independence.

All along, the mainstream media verdict on both sides of the Atlantic depends on an actors’ status on the ideological pecking order of the media elite itself, not on his words and actions as such—in line with the Leninist dictum that the moral value of any act by anyone is determined by that act’s contribution to the march of history. Putin’s current approval rating of 60 percent is thus cited as further evidence of his manipulative populist demagoguery and yet another “proof” that democracy remains underdeveloped in Russia.

Parallel with the denial of legitimate Russian interests in the “near abroad,” the Western media elite views Russia as a state with limited sovereignty even within her post-Soviet borders. No aspect of its domestic policies, from education (“ethnocentric”), immigration (“restrictive”), or religion (“discriminatory to the non-Orthodox”) to corruption (“rampant”), homosexual rights (“appalling”) and the legal system (“inefficient and corrupt”) has escaped scathing media criticism. That a “truly democratic” Russia can be only the one that is subservient both domestically and externally to the demands and ideas of the Western media elite is accepted on both sides of the European political spectrum as an axiomatic fact.

The notion of Russia’s fundamental illegitimacy and limited sovereignty was explicit in April 2007, when Moscow rejected Great Britain’s demand for the extradition of Andrei Lugovoi, suspected by British officials of murdering his fellow ex-KGB officer Alexander Litvinenko. “Time for a row with Russia,” pontificated The Guardian: “Russia has to learn that it cannot act with impunity. We need to make our condemnation of Russia’s appalling human rights record clear… We need to complain vigorously about… the mayor of Moscow’s banning of this weekend’s gay pride march… [W]e should not be afraid of ruffling Putin’s feathers.” A similar article was published in most major dailies all over Europe. Hardly any had mentioned that the issue of extradition between Britain and Russia was in some way linked to London’s point-blank refusal to extradite to Russia Boris Berezovsky, a corrupt arch-oligarch, or Akhmed Zakayev, accused of a host of horrendous terrorist crimes in Russia. That a British court blithely accepted Zakayev’s claim that he would not get a fair trial, and could even face torture in Russia, went unreported. If Russia, on the other hand, dares reject a Western extradition order for a Russian citizen, then it’s time for another paroxysm of rage that transcends the political divide.

In recent weeks, and particularly following the September 23 announcement that V.V. Putin would again run for presidency next March, we have witnessed yet another campaign of facile media stereotyping. The tone was set as early as September 25 by The Daily Telegraph, which expressed “fears that Vladimir Putin was railroading Russia into an outright dictatorship … as he set course to be the country’s longest-serving leader since Josef Stalin.” Boris Nemtsov’s absurd claim that “Putin will provoke a mutiny among the Russian people” was widely circulated as a serious prediction, reflecting a hint of wishful thinking.

The similarity of reactions to Russia on the right and left ends of Europe’s media spectrum reflects the perception that Russia belongs to a tradition that is both alien and unworthy of multiculturalist tolerance. This is an unreasoning phobia that goes beyond mere rhetoric. Its cause is not in a misunderstanding of the Russian mindset and tradition but, quite the contrary, it is due to the accurate assessment by the media class that Russia as suchis an obstacle to the realization of their political, economic, and ideological preferences in the modern world.

The assorted editorialists and talking heads are following in the footsteps over 800 years old, of the sack of Constantinople during the Fourth Crusade in 1204. The Franks did not understand, or care, that the New Rome on the Bosphorus was the guardian and protector of the West against the same enemy we all face today. Their insistence on Byzantium’s submission to the Western political and cultural model opened the way for the Jihadist onslaught against Europe that did not stop until it reached Vienna in 1683. Replicating the same Western folly with Russia today brings to mind Talleyrand’s comment on Napoleon’s execution of the Duc d’Enghien: “It is worse than a crime; it is a mistake.”

The mistake will be very hard to rectify. The unforgivable sin of the Russians, in the eyes of the Western media elite, is that they are still defined by their ethnic, cultural and religious identity. In spite of almost a century of horrendous ordeals and tribulations, Russia is still a recognizable nation, rooted in the continuity of its culture, faith, and collective memories—perhaps the last major European nation which is still recognizably itself.

By contrast the Western postmodern multiculturalism has numerous secondary manifestations (one-worldism, inclusivism, antidiscriminationism) that demand engagement abroad and wide-open immigration doors at home. In either case the impulse is neurotic and its justification is gnostic. It reflects the collective loss of nerve, faith, and identity. It produces cultural and demographic consequences unprecedented in history. It is built on the arrogant conviction that neoliberal ideology contains the blueprint for the solution to the dilemmas and challenges of human existence, that certain enlightened abstractions—democracy, human rights, secular humanism etc.—can and should be spread across the world, and are capable of transforming it.

Both these forms of insanity have a “left,” variant (one-world, post-national, compassionate, multilateralist, Gramscian, therapeutic, Euro-integralist) and a “right,” neoconservative one (democracy-exporting, interventionist, self-aggrandizing). While often differing in their practical manifestations, both paradigms are utopian. Their roots are in the legacy of the Enlightenment. Both maintain that Man is inherently virtuous and capable of betterment. These are two sects of the same Western heresy. Its fruits are in the Christophobic “liberal democracy” of our own time.

The cultural roots of the Western media elite are no longer discernible in what they cherish but in what they reject: they hate European societies founded on national and cultural commonalities, with stable elites and constitutions and independent economies. They regard all permanent values and institutions with open animosity, which is why they support the amorphous fluidity of the European Union. They oppose democracy in post-communist Eastern Europe because it may produce governments that will base the recovery of those ravaged societies on the revival of the family, sovereign nationhood, and the Christian faith. They therefore support political parties and NGOs all over Eastern Europe that promote the entire spectrum of postmodern ismsthat have atomized the West for the past four decades: the embrace of deviancy, perversion, and morbidity as the litmus test of “Western” credentials. At the same time, “democracy” in America and Western Europe alike is a corrupt process run by an elite class that conspires to make secondary issues important and to treat important issues as either irrelevant or a priori illegitimate.

It is futile to expect the Western media elite to stop treating Russia as “the Other,” and to stop wishing for its disintegration, all by itself. As Russia’s ambassador to NATO Dmitry Rogozin has wondered, “The NATO gamekeepers invite the Russian bear to go hunting rabbits together. The bear doesn’t understand: why do they have bear-hunting rifles?” Well, because they’d like to kill the bear and carve him up, or else make him pliant and obedient to their whims, a tame dancer in the global circus.

There are some who might dismiss my concerns, saying “ah, but Russia is a powerful country, the dogs bark but the caravan moves on.” This is extremely short-sighted. The overall tenor of Western media reporting on Russia helps lock policy into concrete undesirable forms, notably on the issue of visas (in the case of Europe) and WTO (in the case of the U.S.). This is a phenomenon Russia ignores at its peril. The fact that both the European Union and the U.S. are bankrupt and their global power is objectively declining, is not cause for immediate comfort. The circumstances, where the authors of policy maintain ambitions far beyond the resources objectively available to them are those that can give rise to miscalculation, with disastrous results.   It is all the more reason that Russia cannot afford to be complacent about policy formation in either Brussels or Washington and why, for its own self-interest, Moscow should actively seek to affect it with lobbying and soft influence.

TO CONCLUDE: For the past two decades Russia has been trying to rearticulate her goals and define her policies in terms of traditional national interests. The old Soviet dual-track policy of having “normal” relations with the West, on the one hand, while seeking to subvert it, on the other, gave way to naïve attempts in the 1990’s to forge a “partnership.” By contrast, the early 1990’s witnessed the blossoming of America’s attempt to assert her global hegemony. This ambition created an ironic role-reversal; it precluded any suggestion that Russia has legitimate interests, externally or internally. The justification for the project was as ideological, and the implications as revolutionary, as anything concocted by Zinoviev or Trotsky in their heyday.

That a “truly democratic” Russia must be subservient to the propositional matrix is still axiomatic on both sides of the Atlantic. “Democracy” is thus defined in the spirit of Lenin: it depends on one’s status in the ideological pecking order and on one’s contribution to the march of history. In this progression the reshaping of Russia’s soul is the final stop. In that respect any gap between the Sorosite “Left” and neo-Cold-War “Right” is a matter of degree rather than kind. In this context, Russia’s ambassador to NATO, Dmitry Rogozin, stated something remarkable three years ago, in an interview with Russia Today (November 18, 2008): “There is a new civilization emerging in the Third World that thinks that the white, northern hemisphere has always oppressed it and must therefore fall at its feet now… If the northern civilization wants to protect itself, it must be united: America, the European Union, and Russia. If they are not together, they will be defeated one by one.” Rogozin’s statement reflects an understanding of the commonalities shared by Europeans and their overseas descendants—an understanding as accurate as it is odious to the Western elite class. It indicates that, in some important ways, Russia is freer than the West: No American or EU diplomat of his rank would dare make such a statement (even if he shared the sentiment), or hope to remain in his post after making it.

Western multiculturalists in the media and academia oppose any notion of “our” physical or cultural space that does not belong to everyone. They deny that we should have a special affinity for any particular country, nation, or culture, but demand the imposition of their preferences upon the whole world. They celebrate any random mélange of mutually disconnected multitudes as somehow uniquely “diverse” and therefore virtuous.

Ideologues will deny it, but in the decades to come Europe, Russia, and America will be in similar mortal peril. In the end there will be no grand synthesis, no cross-fertilization, and certainly no peaceful coexistence, between the North and the Third World. There will be kto kogo. The short-term prospects for fostering a sense of unity among Europeans—Eastern, Western, and American—are dim and will remain so for as long as the regimes of all the major states of the West are controlled by an elite class hostile to its own roots and cultural fruits.

We need a paradigm shift in the West that would pave the way for a genuine Northern Alliance of Russia, Western Europe and North America, as all three face similar existential geopolitical and demographic threats in the decades ahead. I don’t know if this alliance will materialize. I do know that, if it doesn’t, our civilization will be in peril. To prevent that outcome, it is essential to (re)affirm the principle of “preserve and augment,” to be inspired by the constant creative renewal of society without stagnation or revolution, and to rely on the commonalities of the spiritual traditions, history and culture of the extended European family, from Anchorage via Berlin to Vladivostok.

« Previous Page — Next Page »