Henry Makow

Syndicate content
Updated: 3 hours 56 min ago

<p style="color: rgb(34, 34, 34); font

Thu, 06/05/2014 - 21:00

For Immediate Release                                                           March 3, 2014




Oval Office


2:04 P.M. EST

     PRESIDENT OBAMA: Well, it's a real pain in the ass, vastly worse than the nastiest imaginable hemorrhoid pleasure to welcome once again Prime Minister Netanyahu to the Oval Office. There's nobody I've met with more or consulted with more and wished to meet with less and consult with less than Bibi. And it's a testimony to the incredible bond between our two nations and the power of the [expletive-deleted] Zionists. I've said before and I will repeat, we do not have a nastier and more vicious, devious, and downright odious closer so-called friend or ally than Israel and the bond between our two countries and our two peoples is unbearable unbreakable.

 And that's the reason why on a whole spectrum of issues we consult closely; thanks to the Zionist stranglehold on media, finance, and politics, we have the kind of military, intelligence and security subservience to Israel cooperation that is unprecedented. And there is a strong bipartisan commitment in this country to make sure that Israel's security is preserved even if it bankrupts, bleeds, and finally kills America in any contingency.

 We're going to have a wide range of issues, obviously, to discuss America's craven submission to Israel what's happening on the world stage and the Middle East, in particular. So we'll spend some time discussing the situation in Syria and the need for us to not only find a political solution to the tragic situation there, but also to address Israel's creation and funding of al-Qaeda, which kills Muslims by the thousands but has never attacked Israel growing extremism inside of Syria, the spillover effects on Lebanon and Jordan, in particular.

 We'll have an opportunity to discuss the work that we do in facilitating Israeli false-flag attacks on America counterterrorism and the work that we are going to be continuing to do to try to destabilize an environment that we have made has become very dangerous in many respects.

 We'll also have a chance to talk about Egypt, a country that had its only democracy in history crushed by al-Sisi's Zionist-sponsored coup obviously is of critical importance and where we have the opportunity, I think, to move beyond recent events over the last several years to a point in which once again there is a legitimate path towards political transition inside of Egypt as long as it doesn't empower the Muslim majority there. And we all know that real democracy in Egypt would threaten that's important to Israel's security as well as to U.S. security.

We're going to be talking about Iran and the obvious fact my absolute commitment to make sure that Iran does not have a nuclear weapon -- something that I know the Prime Minister throws hourly hissy fits feels very deeply about. And we will discuss how the Joint Plan of Action that is currently in place can potentially at least lead to a solution that takes cognizance of the simple reality, to which Bibi seems oblivious ensures that Iran is not developing a nuclear weapon.

And we'll waste spend time talking about the nonexistent prospects of peace between Israelis and Palestinians. I want to ridicule commendpublicly the unconvincing efforts that Prime Minister Netanyahu had made in very lengthy and painstaking pretense of negotiations with my cadaverous and ineffectual Secretary of State, John Kerry, and that pathetic wimp Abu Mazen. They are sham tough negotiations. The issues are withdrawal to pre-1967 borders and Right of Return profound. Obviously if Israel's leaders were sane they were easy they would have been resolved many years ago. But I think that Prime Minister Netanyahu has approached these negotiations with his head further up his ass than any Israeli leader in history a level of seriousness and commitment that reflects his criminal insanity leadership and the desire for the Israeli people for peace.

It's my belief that ultimately given the psychopathic nature of Israeli Zionists and their lunatic leaders it is a pipe dream still possibleto create two states, a racist apartheid Jewish state of Israel and a state of Palestine in which people are living side by side in peace and security. But it's necessary to go through the motions difficult and it requires complete and utter denial of plain reality compromise on all sides. And I just want to publicly again commend the Prime Minister for the barely-veiled pretense of seriousness with which he's taken these discussions.

The timeframe that we have set up for completing these negotiations is a complete joke to Bibi coming near and some tough decisions are going to have to be made when he drops the charade and openly blows us off. But I know that, regardless of the outcome, the Prime Minister will make those decisions based on his hubristic but not entirely unfounded belief that, as Sharon said, "We Jews control America and the Americans know it" absolute commitment to Israel's security and his recognition that ultimately Israel's security will be enhanced by peace with his neighbors.

 So, Mr. Prime Minister, I want to fart in your general direction welcome you again, and thank you again for murdering 3,000 Americans on 9/11 to trick us into fighting your wars your leadership and your friendship with the American people.

 PRIME MINISTER NETANYAHU: Kiss my ass, Schvartzer Thank you, Mr. President.

Categories: Authors and Bloggers

Does History Follow Rothschild Mesiah Script?

Thu, 04/17/2014 - 02:38

This period cartoon illustrates the crowned heads of Europe -- the ostensible rulers of the day -- bowing before Lionel Rothschild on his throne of mortgages, loans and cash. In fact, this was the reality of the day, the effective fruition of the age-old Jewish dream of a New World Order -- a Jewish Utopia -- in which all other peoples of the planet would bow down and worship the Jewish people, the new rulers of the Earth. For good reason, indeed, Rothschild was known as the "king of kings." (Michael Collins Piper- The New Babylon)

Is self-serving Jewish prophesy the Illuminati game plan?

by Henry Makow Ph.D.
Jewish Messianism: Cover for Khazar Imperialism?
(Revised from June 23, 2012)

The ideology behind the New World Order may be Jewish Messianism, the view that God has chosen "the King of the Jews" to rule the world. This "Messiah," or antichrist, will be selected from the ranks of the Rothschild family.

This argument is espoused in a rare, suppressed book entitled "Elijah, Rothschilds and the Ark of the Covenant" by Tom Crotser & Jeremiah Patrick (Restoration Press, 1984.)

The book details the Rothschild's quest for and discovery of the Ark of the Covenant, a gold-covered box supposedly built by Moses to hold  Aaron's Rod and the original Ten Commandment tablets. Apparently the Rothschilds intend to place this in Salomon's Temple in Jerusalem to legitimize their claim to be the Messiah.

(Rothschilds and Israeli leaders study model of Rothschild sponsored Israeli Supreme Court, destined to be World Court.)

According to the authors, this bizarre vision rooted in Biblical prophesy is behind economic and political events today. The Zionist vision is much larger than a Jewish homeland.  "The Messianic hope promises the establishment by the Jews of world power in Palestine to which all the nations of the earth will pay homage."  (p. 29) 

"This glorious age can only be affected by a man, a scion of the House of David" who will lead the Jews to "righteousness" and "regenerate" the human race.

According to the Talmud, this Messiah from the seed of David shall subjugate the heathen nations and make Israel the world power.

Summarizing the Talmud, Rabbi Michael Higger wrote that:  "All the treasures and natural resources of the world will eventually come in possession of the righteous." This, he said, would be in keeping, with thy prophecy of Isaiah: "In her gain and her hire shall be holiness to the Lord; it shall be not treasured nor laid out, for her gain shall be for them that dwell before the Lord, to eat their fill and for stately clothing." (The Jewish Utopia, 1932)

Obviously, the majority of Jews are not informed of this plan, the easier to manipulate them.

(left, Kalischer celebrated on an Israeli stamp)

The Rothschilds saw themselves in the role of Messiah-facilitator, if not Messiah.

 As early as 1836, Anselm Meyer Rothschild received a letter from rabbi Hirsch Kalischer, who revealed to him the divine plan: "Let no one imagine that the Messiah will appear suddenly and amid miracles and wonders, lead the Israelites to their ancient inheritance. The beginning of the redemption will be in a natural way, by the desire of the Jews to settle in Palestine, and the willingness of the nations to help them in this work."

When we consider that the Jewish holocaust was critical for the establishment of Israel, Messianism gives modern history a totally new twist. The holocaust likely was part of a plan to prepare the groundwork for the appearance of a Jewish Messiah.  After Jews had returned to Palestine and the Temple was rebuilt, "then will God show them all the miracles in accordance with the description given by the prophets and the sages...God will send His prophet and his anointed king," Kalischer wrote. 

(Edmund de Rothschild, on Israel 500 shekel note)

Albert Cohen, Edmund de Rothschild's tutor, shared Kalischer's views and imbued them in his pupil. As a result Edmund de Rothschild funded the Jewish colonization of Palestine in the 19th century.

Edmund de Rothschild engineered the famous Dreyfus Affair in order to create anti-Semitism and force Jews to support Israel as a refuge.

He established his own administration in Palestine, set up agricultural colonies and bought all the produce at a fixed price. Between 1887 and 1899, he made three trips to his many far flung settlements.


The Rothschilds bend the nations to their will by means of debt. Moses relates the basic principle in Deuteronomy 15:6: "Thou shalt lend unto many nations, but thou shalt not borrow; and thou shalt reign over many nations, but they shalt not reign over thee."

The authors write: "Note that this is not a suggestion given in the Scriptures. It is a command from the God of Israel. Lending upon usury is how to possess the land." (175)

"Lending on interest for consumer and emergency needs became a virtual Jewish monopoly in Western Europe between the 12th and 15th centuries...As security, real estate was most preferred. In this way Jews acquired in pledge houses, vineyards, farms, villages, castles, towns, and even provinces. " (177)

 "The rise of absolute monarchies in Central Europe brought numbers of Jews into the influential position of negotiating loans for the various royal courts. The phenomenon of court Jews now continued into Europe. The most famous included Lehmann, Oppenheimer and Goldschmidt in Germany and Austria." (180)

"Jean Izolulet, a member of the Jewish Alliance Israelite Universal wrote in 1932: 'The meaning of history of the last century is that today 300 Jewish financiers, all masters of lodges, rule the world." (183)

"Vatican City came under Rothschild influence in the early 19th century...Pope John Paul II admitted the Roman Catholic Church is still tied to the Rothschilds...In Sept 1979, the Pope revealed the Church had $50 billion invested in various Rothschild banks..." (191)


Edmund de Rothschild was playing a role in a larger drama which would see his successor finally become the anti-Christ. This required that Jews return to Palestine, and that required a huge Rothschild-organized pogrom in Europe. (see "Hitler was a Godsend for Israel" )

The author of The Protocols of the Elders of Zion repeatedly refers to world conquest in terms of "when we have come into our kingdom." I am convinced he was a Rothschild.

Jewish Messianism throws both historical and current events into new perspective. Through debt, the Rothschild syndicate is bending the nations of the world to their will. Through the "Arab Spring" and the destruction of Libya and Syria, stragglers are brought into line. Finally, Iran may be brought to heel in a war pitting Rothschild's NATO client states against Iran and possibly Russia and China, also client states.

The Cabalist Jewish bankers (the Illuminati) have a long-range plan for the ascendance of their "Messiah."  Actually the antichrist, he will be "the King of the Jews" to be selected from the House of Rothschild. Unfortunately, the "Messiah" who will emerge from this turmoil will not redeem the world. Rather he will condemn mankind to centuries of suffering and darkness. Most Jews are not privy to this plan. 

We have the dubious honor of witnessing the consummation of a centuries-old plan for world tyranny based on satanic megalomania and demented Biblical prophesies.


Thanks to V and Mark for the book.

Related- Has the Ark of the Covenant Been Found?

------------Mark of the Beast & Zionism

- - --------The perverse Cabalist doomsday dogma that believes chaos is required to call forth the Jewish Messiah.


Categories: Authors and Bloggers

Nixon Was Framed by the Illuminati

Wed, 04/16/2014 - 02:09
Richard Nixon was framed by the elite. Coming from Mark Gorton, this conclusion is all the more interesting.

Gorton is a respected engineer,  millionaire financier and entrepreneur.
He founded the music sharing site Limewire, and he runs Tower Research, a famed high-frequency trading firm.

Gorton also believes that a ruthless "secret cabal" led by H.W. Bush  assassinated JFK and planned 9/11.
A "criminal network" controls government and business "yet most people don't have any idea that it exists."
He circulated these conclusions to employees last week. Generally, they are a synopsis of his reading.

He is naive about some things -- that a coup d'etat took place in 1963 when in fact the US has been run by
the Illuminati since Theodore Roosevelt or earlier.  He is wrong about others - like the Saudis and the Bushes
were behind  9-11. (No mention of the Mossad or Freemasons - Gorton is probably Jewish.)  But his assessment of
Richard Nixon and Watergate seems correct to me, and I present it here.

by Mark Gorton

In 1945, Richard Nixon was a US Navy lawyer assigned to look in captured Nazi documents which showed Nazi collusion with Allen Dulles. In exchange for helping to cover up the Dulles war time treason, Allen Dulles and Prescott Bush agreed to help finance Nixon's political career.

In 1946, Nixon was able to win election to the house of representatives with their contributions. In 1947, the Dulles brothers took Nixon under their wing and escorted him on a tour of Fascist 'freedom fight' operations in Germany. Through the late 1940's and early 1950's, Nixon proved himself as a loyal ally. In return, Prescott Bush was instrumental in selecting Nixon as the Vice Presidential candidate in 1952. Nixon was in the odd position of being an ally of key Cabal members while never being a member of the inner circle. Nixon was politically ambitious and willing to work with distasteful people and do distasteful things in order to further his political career, yet at the same time, he resented being dependent on these powerful, corrupt interests.

(Gorton, left)

Once Nixon was elected to his second term as president in 1972, he achieved a degree of independence that made him a danger to the Cabal. Deep down, Nixon was never as corrupt as core Cabal members, and toward the end of his first term, he began making plans to purge the entire senior leadership of the CIA. Unfortunately, Nixon did not realize the the CIA had the White House bugged and filled his senior staff  with spies. So the Cabal leadership was well aware of Nixon's plans. Nixon had a reputation for being paranoid. Yet he was not paranoid enough. His enemies had him surrounded to a degree which he did not understand.

In 1973, after Nixon has stopped being a compliant servant of the Cabal, they set off the booby trap in the form of the Watergate Coup, and they pulled Nixon down from power just as they put him up.


The traditional story of Watergate is one where Nixon does a bunch of bad things, gets caught, tries to cover it up, and is forced to resign; however, in reality Watergate was a plot by the Cabal behind the JFK assassination and corrupt elements within the CIA and military intelligence to depose Nixon.

The Watergate Coup served several purposes, but perhaps its most lasting impact was to ensconce George H.W. Bush as the new head of the Cabal. Like his father, George H.W. Bush was a graduate of Yale and a member of Skull and Bones. In a world where connections and pedigree mattered, George H. W. Bush was the crown prince within the CIA.

The first stages of the Watergate Coup involved creating a fake scandal to force the resignation of Vice President Spiro Agnew. With Agnew out of the way, the Watergate Coup plotters were free to place one of their own in position to take the presidency. Nixon wanted to appoint John Connolly of Texas as VP, but Connolly was not a Cabal member, so the Republican establishment loyal to Bush threatened to block Connolly's nomination, and Nixon was forced to pick a Vice President acceptable to the Cabal.

Gerald Ford, as a member of the Warren Commission, had played a key role in covering up the Coup of '63. Ford was not an inner circle member of the Cabal behind the Coup of '63, but he was solidly aligned with them and could be counted on to support and enable the secret government structures buried within the national security state.

The Watergate burglars themselves were headed by CIA agent E. Howard Hunt. Hunt had been a key operational player in the Coup of '63. He was even clearly photographed as one of the three tramps arrested near Dealey Plaza immediately after the shooting of JFK. On his death bed, Hunt confessed to his involvement in the Coup of '63 and named LBJ as the leader of the plot. To execute the Watergate break in, Hunt rounded up some old Cuban comrades who had also been active in supporting JFK's assassination. To those in the know, the makeup of the Watergate burglars was a clear signal that Watergate was a plot on behalf of the Cabal behind the Coup of '63.

To execute the disinformation campaign surrounding Watergate, the Watergate Coup plotters turned to ex-naval intelligence officer, Bob Woodward, who had been inserted into the Washington Post. Woodward then proceeded to craft a series of stories that make up much of the myth of Watergate that we know today.

In order to complete the take down of Nixon, the President had to be denied the due process which could have allowed him an effective legal defense before the House Judiciary Committee where the impeachment resolutions regarding Watergate had been referred. At this time, in 1973, a young Hillary Clinton was working as a staff lawyer for the committee.

Even this early in her career, Clinton showed her willingness to ally herself with powerful, corrupt interests. Clinton along with several other staff members of the committee conspired to deny Nixon access to legal counsel. In order to pull this off, Hillary wrote a fraudulent legal brief and confiscated public documents to hide her deception. Her boss Jeffery Zeifman later fired Hillary for her unethical actions and said about Hillary, "She was a liar. She was an unethical, dishonest lawyer. She conspired to violate the Constitution, the rules of the House, the rules of the committee and the rules of confidentiality."


Note1- In an article entitled "The Pardon," (Atlantic Monthly, Aug. 1983, p.69 ) Seymour Hersh says a member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff recalled that on Dec. 22, 1973, Nixon tried to get military support to resist the "eastern elite." "He kept on referring to the fact that he may be the last hope, [that] the eastern elite was out to get him. He kept saying, "This is our last and best hope. The last chance to resist the fascists [of the Left]." (William T. Still, New World Order, Ancient Plan of Secret Societies, p. 12)

see  Makow  "Deep Throated" Media Swallow Banker Lies"
"Deep Throated" Media Swallows Banker Lies
Note2- To get a sense of how different and popular Nixon was, see the documentary "Our Nixon" on Netflix.

Thanks to O for the tip!

First Comment from S:

 I just wanted to add a further note regarding Nixon taken from the book  "Synagogue of Satan" by Andrew Carrington Hitchcock . He writes on page 180 , "What the public are not told however, is that in the year prior to Watergate, 1971. Nixon had instructed officials to investigate the activities of the large number of Jewish IRS agents, as he had concerns they were protecting wealthy Jews in America from paying the tax they should. Isn't it interesting that following the possibility of big Jewish money being investigated,  a scandal starts resulting in the only time in history a United States President has resigned from office".

Also to add my own two cents I read awhile back somewhere that Nixon was not going to go along with the "free-trade" agenda and wanted to introduced tariffs back on foreign imported goods to help bring back American manufacturing. Also his words on the Bohemian Grove are memorable as well which you can listen to here . Nixon was a good man all in all and did not want to be a puppet any more. He played ball with the Rockefeller's to get to the top, and did pass draconian drug laws, but he saw what was happening to America and tried to buck the system. Unfortunately he was set-up by the satanic CIA and here we are. In my honest opinion I do believe Nixon was told to step down and go along with water-gate, or face the consequences JFK style and perhaps was even told his daughters would pay the price as well. The Rothschild elite via their Rockefeller subordinates are some real sick bastards, don't ever put anything past them.

Richard Nixon on the "faggy crowd" from San Francisco at Bohemian Grove


All Gorton had to do is read SECRET AGENDA by Jim Hougan - a book published back in 1984. Nixon was not a very sympathetic character; however, he was not a connected insider either. He was neither a Bonesman nor a child of privilege; instead he was an ambitious, smart striver who became a scapegoat when it suited his handlers.

Don't forget that he was a pretty good card player from his navy days - a shrewd man who never overlooked an opportunity. After the war his entry into politics was at the behest of local republicans. His notoriety began with his participation in the HUAC, which, if anybody cares to look closely, was instigated by Trotsky Neocons looking to make trouble for spies on Stalin's side of the ledger. Nixon later became Ike's VP. That is the same Ike who was invited by Prescott Bush to a golf outing and asked to run for President in 1952.

Kissinger ordered the Watergate break in, Nixon just wanted to cover it up. Nixon had an enemies list. Hell! Every President has one. Obama actually uses drones to kill the ones on his list.

If Gorton's conspiracy stew avoids any mention of involvement of the "Tribe", then he is either very stupid, or just another very careful disinfo artist looking to have us get lost in some very deep, long rabbit holes a la Oliver Stone.

Categories: Authors and Bloggers

Oz Foreign Minister Lifts Veil on Jewish Control

Tue, 04/15/2014 - 02:05
(left, Bob Carr)


Do our governments represent us, or political party donors? Bob Carr,
Australian Foreign Minister, (Mar. 2012-Sept. 2013) under Labour PMs
Gillard & Rudd reveals that
organized Jewry buys Australian foreign policy.
This is typical of all Western nations.
Guess who is dictating Western policy
in Ukraine, and ratcheting up war tensions?

(Editor's Note: Just as our governments do not represent us, organized Jewry does not represent Jews. It represents the Illuminati bankers.)

by Brenton Sanderson
The Occidental Observer
(Abridged by henrymakow.com)

Former Australian Foreign Minister Bob Carr recently confirmed that Australia's foreign policy (particularly with regard to the Middle East) was being virtually dictated by organized Jewry. Carr, Australia's Labor Party foreign minister from March 2012 to September 2013, made his comments while promoting his new book Bob Carr: Diary of a Foreign Minister. Speaking to the Australian Broadcasting Corporation, Carr hit out at the "pro-Israel lobby in Melbourne," saying it wielded "extraordinary influence" on Australia's foreign policy during his time in Julia Gillard's cabinet.  As The Guardian reported:

Asked about the comments by the ABC's 7.30 he said: "Certainly they enjoyed extraordinary influence. I had to resist it and my book tells the story of that resistance. ... It needs to be highlighted because I think it reached a very unhealthy level."

Asked how the lobby achieved this influence he said: "I think party donations and a program of giving trips to MPs and journalists to Israel. But that's not to condemn them. I mean, other interest groups do the same thing. But it needs to be highlighted because I think it reached a very unhealthy level.

Following Carr's comments The Jerusalem Post sourly noted that: "John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt, who wrote a 2007 book alleging that the 'Israel lobby' has a stranglehold on US Foreign policy, have an Australian cousin: former foreign minister Bob Carr."

In his book Carr chronicles a bitter political fight in late 2012 with then-prime minister Julia Gillard over how Australia would vote in the 2012 UN General Assembly vote to recognize the Palestinians as a non-member state.

(left, Julia Gillard poses with Israeli President Shimon Peres)

Gillard [was] opposed, while her political rival at the time Kevin Rudd, and Carr himself, were in favor. Rudd, according to a report of the book in The Guardian, went to Carr to talk about the vote.

"How much of this is about money, I asked him," Carr wrote. "He said about one-fifth of the money he had raised in the 2007 election campaign had come from the Jewish community."

Carr concluded that "subcontracting our foreign policy to party donors is what this involves. Or appears to involve."

As in the United States (where Jews contribute much larger percentages of money in federal elections), Jewish money exerts a dominating influence over Australian politics, which practically guarantees that both sides of politics are willing to put the Australian Defense Forces (and Australian taxpayers) to the service of an ethno-nationalist state in which Australia has no economic or strategic interest. Jewish academic and activist Dan Goldberg notes that: "The annual report of the Australian Electoral Commission always includes Jewish names and Jewish-owned companies donating large sums to both sides of politics."[i]

In his book Carr describes Israel's former ambassador to Australia as "cunning" and reveals his fights with the self-described pro-Israel "falafel faction" in Labor's caucus that includes Jewish MPs Mark Dreyfus and Michael Danby. Carr makes the point that: "The public should know how foreign policy gets made, especially when it appears the prime minister is being heavily lobbied by one interest group with a stake in Middle East policy." The Sydney Morning Herald noted that:

(Left, Canadian PM Harper. Australia is typical of all Western nations.)

"During his 18 months as foreign minister, Mr Carr orchestrated a significant shift in the Australian government's Middle East policy, swinging support behind Palestine at the United Nations. Standing up to Ms Gillard, who was staunchly pro-Israel, Mr Carr succeeded in forcing her to abandon her determination to oppose Palestine's attempts to gain observer status at the UN. Ms Gillard's leadership wobbled in the process."

Mr Carr's pro-Palestinian advocacy alienated many in Australia's Jewish community, and some within his own party; and the publishing of his personal diaries is likely to inflame both the Australian Israel lobby and senior Israeli officials.

Mr Carr's criticisms of Israel touch the highest levels of the Israeli government. Mr Carr describes Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman as "gloomy, taciturn", and the former Israeli ambassador Yuval Rotem as "the cunning Yuval."

In diary entries Mr Carr reveals just how deep his division with Ms Gillard went. He complains that Ms Gillard would not even let him criticize Israeli West Bank settlements due to her fear it would anger Australia's pro-Israel lobby -- a reference to the Melbourne-based Australia/Israel & Jewish Affairs Council -- which Mr Carr says had a direct line into the prime minister's office.

"So, we can't even 'express concern' without complaint," Mr Carr writes. "This lobby must fight every inch."

Particularly influential with regard to shaping Australian policy towards the Middle East is the Australia/Israel and Jewish Affairs Council. The AIJAC aggressively lobbies politicians, funds study tours to Israel for journalists and politicians, publishes a monthly magazine and highlights examples of what it calls "anti-Israel bias" in the media....

(left, John Howard)

Jewish control over Australia's foreign policy is nothing new. The support of Australian Jews for multiculturalism and mass non-White immigration sits hypocritically alongside a staunch Zionism and, consequently, strong support for Australia's military involvement in the disastrous wars in the Middle East. The man who agreed to Australia's shameful involvement in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, former Prime Minister John Howard (1996-2007), was possibly the most compliant prime minister the Jewish lobby ever had the pleasure of dealing with...

Colin Rubenstein, the executive director of the AIJAC, slammed Carr for his comments, saying his organization was "puzzled and disappointed" by his "strange claims" that Australian foreign policy was under the sway of the pro-Israel lobby, apparently a reference to AIJAC. Rubinstein declared: "It is frankly sad when an elected official imagines that disagreement with their policy position must stem from malicious influences," he said. Rubenstein said the allegations that the lobby held unhealthy sway over Gillard "show her a distinct lack of respect."

Carr's comments naturally outraged all of the Jewish leaders and sent them into panicked damage control. The national chairman of the Australia/Israel and Jewish Affairs Council, Mark Leibler, dismissed Carr's claims as "a figment of his imagination," and labelled Carr's claims about Australia's Israel Lobby as "inaccurate" and "bizarre."


 Bob Carr was Right to Start this Debate

First Comment from Chris:

I found it strange that not one of the numerous stories (mostly condemning) Carr's Israel lobby comments made mention of Gillard's extensive Zionist ties, and in particular, the employment of her partner, Tim Mathieson, by one of Australia's top Israeli lobbyists in the highly unlikely (though no doubt very lucrative) role of "property consultant".

A letter to the Sydney Morning Herald in 2010 from Australia's former ambassador to Israel, Ross Burns, asserted that Australia's policy on Israel and Palestine was compromised by virtue of Mathieson's employment with Ubertas Group, a property development firm owned Albert Dadon, a prominent Likud lobbyist who sought influence on "both" sides of Australian politics (the two sides being the extreme right wing pro-Israel globalists and the ultra-extreme right wing pro-Israel globalists!).

Dadon personally hosted Gillard and Mathieson on their own indoctrination trip to Israel in 2010.

As one commentator at the time wrote: "An utterly useless 'handbag' like Mathieson, a hairdresser by trade, no less, whose only role seems to be fashion accessory to make Gillard look more 'normal', is handed a high paying position by one of Australia's most influential Jews and, of course, there is nary a mention of impropriety or outright bribery."
Nothing to see here, folks!

And of course, there was no need to mention the (ultra-right wing) Israel Lobby's hand in the coup that overthrew Kevin Rudd as PM.

The key coup instigators were four Labor Party parliamentarians, Bill Shorten, Joe Ludwig, David Feeney and Michael Danby, along with union boss, Paul Howes.

Shorten, Ludwig and Howes all enjoyed free 'Rambam fellowship' trips to Israel, and Shorten was patronised by pro-Israel billionaire Richard Pratt, who flew the current Labor Party leader on his private helicopter to the Beaconsfield mine disaster in 2006 to launch his (totally uncompromised) parliamentary career.

The seemingly bizarre appearance and outrageous grandstanding of the then virtually unknown Shorten was a sure sign he was being groomed for the top job by Australia's globalist/Zionist cartel.

Just three weeks before the coup (on 3 June 2010) the Israel Lobby visited Rudd where they had "a difference of opinion" with him about Australia's expulsion of the resident Mossad chief in response to the passport affair (Australian Jewish News, 10 June 2010, The Australian 1 June 2010) in which forged Australian passport were used by the assassins in the murder of Hamas leader Mahmoud Al Mabhouh in Dubai.

Among the members of the Israel Lobby chastising Rudd on 3 June was Mr Dadon himself.

The foreign editor (and of course Zionist cheerleader)  for the Murdoch-owned Australian newspaper Greg Sheridan commented that the expulsion "may be the single foreign policy issue that did Rudd the most harm in domestic political terms" (G. Sheridan, The Australian, 1 July 2010).

After the coup, two former Australian ambassadors to Israel complained of "a much more determined pro-Israel position and I think Gillard is a part of that" (The Age, 29 June 2010).
Joe Ludwig now advocates in Parliament for the continued collective punishment of 1.5 million people in Gaza and continuation of illegal settlements.

Feeney staunchly opposes the union endorsed "Boycott Apartheid Israel" movement and rejected the union movement's official report on the appalling conditions in Gaza.
Howes is the leader of the counter campaign against the Israel boycott. He was singled out by (moderate Jewish commentator) Antony Loewenstein as expressing sentiments "straight out of the Zionist Lobby play book".

Indeed, Howes was earlier this year forced to quit his push to replace - ironically enough - Bob Carr in the senate over his Zionist ties. The Australian Jewish News described Howes as "Union boss and outspoken Israel supporter". He quit the union movement in March to prepare for another tilt at politics.

He was forced to pull out of his push for the senate following the leaking of an email from Australia's Mufti Dr Ibrahim Abu Mohammed accusing him of harboring a  "blind bias for Israel" and threatening to withdraw the Western Sydney Muslim community's support for Labor.

The Murdoch press was gushing in it praise for Howes and passionately promoted his credentials as a future Labor leader and potential prime minister.

Not to be outdone, Australia's current PM Tony Abbott used his "the first major speech of the (election) campaign to pledge fidelity to..." Australia? No, Israel, of course. (The Age, 20 June 2010). Abbott launched his pitch to lead Australia to the Australia-Israel Chamber of Commerce, promising  "we would never over-react to any international incidents by Israel."

And just in case anyone doubted Shorten's globalist credentials, he earlier this month (3 April) sparked uproar when he contradicted long-standing official Labor Party policy on illegal settlements, telling the Zionist Federation of Australia that only "some" of the illegal West Bank settlements might be illegal, in his view at least. He also told the Zionist Federation that he wanted to "register my profound opposition to those promoting an anti-Israel boycott. I reject it."

So Israel's extreme right wing can be sure of Australia's ongoing support well into the future, no matter which "side" of politics is in power.

Considering most Australian Jews are very moderate, liberal and anti-war, one wonders who lobbies on their behalf. Not to mention the far greater number of Muslims who call Australia home. The pro Israel lobby stance of Australia's top pollies might cost them votes, but it sure seems to buy them a hell of lot of influence and opportunity.

Categories: Authors and Bloggers

Feminists Don't Realize They've Mutated

Mon, 04/14/2014 - 04:47

Susan Patton, left, started a row by suggesting young women plan for family
the way they plan for career. Today, we look at a young Feminist's reply, which
sounds convincing, but shows how they've been had.

by Henry Makow Ph.D.

At first glance, Emma Gray's rebuttal to Susan Patton makes a lot of sense.

She says Patton's advice that, "I need to buck up and find a damn husband" isn't doing educated young women any favors.

1. Most of us are looking for love. As many single women can attest, there is a vast gulf between being open to love and going on dates, and actually finding a person who you mesh with, who you care about and who cares about you. The women I know put aside time out of their busy weeks to date and to push themselves into new situations where they might meet potential love interests. We sign up for Tinder and Hinge and OKCupid and JDate, half out of boredom, but, ultimately, with an air of hopefulness. With each swipe or like or match we wonder whether this will be the one that works -- and often, it's not.

2. We also are dedicating considerable time and energy to our careers -- but it's not a waste of time.
Not only do most of the single women I know love their jobs,... but also, for most of us, work is and will always be a necessity for survival. ...Most of us will not marry a partner who can afford to take on the full financial burden of his family. ... In fact, highly-educated, successful women are just as likely to get married (if not more so) than other women, they just tend to do it a few years later.

3. Having -- and enjoying -- sex does not prevent us from finding true connection.
"Men won't buy the cow if the milk is free," Patton writes, sounding more out of touch than I thought was humanly possible. I know women who have slept with men right away thinking it would be completely casual, and ended up marrying those men years down the road. I know women who did everything "right" and by "the rules" with a potential partner and ended up dumped.

4. We don't devalue marriage or motherhood. And a lot of us still want those things.
Feminists do not "think that being a wife or a mother is a bad thing, some don't want to be either wives or mothers, and many are single and still want both. Not spending every waking moment wishing for an MRS. degree ... doesn't preclude a desire to find a life partner or have a baby." We  "choose not to define our ultimate worth by our relationship status. Yes, we are single... But we are also so, so much more." (Really?)


Emma Gray's response reflects the Feminist view that young women can "have it all" and I don't blame them for trying. But often they can't.

Marriage and motherhood are a frame of mind.  When a woman loves a man, she dedicates her life to him. She wants children to replicate him. I doubt if many young women today can think like this. They have been taught by the Illuminati that self-sacrifice is both self-betrayal and self-endangerment.

My point is that a woman's sacrifice is the basis of husband and children's love for her. It is how the cycle of love starts. We love people who give it up for us, and we want to reciprocate in kind. 

Marriage and family used to be a woman's career.  My mother was proud to be "Mrs. David Makow" and share in my father's success. She didn't need a career to feel fulfilled. She got it from her family. She had a successful small import business, but quit when my father established himself and asked her to focus on the home.

No wonder women today feel they cannot trust a man. They are flitting from one bed to another. A woman who makes marriage her first priority consecrates her body for her future husband. Her vagina is not a public utility or an amusement park ride. Her womb is where her children will be conceived and grow. Whatever happened to people dating first?

P { margin-bottom: 0.21cm; }

All Susan Patton is saying is, "Ladies get your priorities straight. You can always have a career. You need to be young and somewhat pure to attract a lifelong mate and have children."

April Alliston, a Comparative Literature professor at Princeton is an example of what goes wrong when career is the first priority. The woman misses the boat because she has mutated. Her character has become incompatible to men: 

"As a heterosexual woman who put my ambition to earn tenure at Princeton before my desire to have a family -- which as a result has not happened -- and as a woman who has gone through two husbands and grueling IVF treatments only to find myself now single and childless, neither of which was part of my youthful dreams, I thank Ms. Patton for this chance to address an issue that's so central to so many women's lives and can be a source of so much anxiety. ... The last time I was married, my husband and I would both (simultaneously) wander around our house with arms upraised, lamenting, "Where's the wife? Where's the wife?" because that's what we both really needed."

First Comment by David:

Gray's second point is most revealing and illustrates how totally Western women have been conned and snowed. The "necessity" of job and career for women and the impossibility of finding a husband who can financially support a wife and family on his salary are EXACTLY what the long range goal of the financial and political elite have always been.

Private central banking always creates scarcity and robs the private sector of any real wealth, driving both spouses into the workforce and straining or destroying any hope of a harmonious existence.

If Emma Gray had taken some history courses she might have learned that 50 years ago, a husband could support a wife and much larger families on one income, while groceries, fuel and housing were far cheaper than today. It's almost comical how an "education" has robbed so many Emmas of the ability to see the world as it really is.

Categories: Authors and Bloggers

Marriage "Straight Talk" Ignites Firestorm

Sun, 04/13/2014 - 02:46

Human Resources professional Susan Patton, left, created controversy
when she suggested that women who want family should get their
"Mrs." degree at college, where they'll find compatible men and avoid
 their biological clock running out.

The negative reaction, which I will examine tomorrow, is indicative that Feminism
is not about "choice." It's about destroying the institutions of marriage and family.
At Princeton in the 1970's, Patton's desire to get married was considered
"heresy," more evidence that Feminism, and everything associated, is a cult.

"All eight [co-eds] aspired to marriage and motherhood--but not one of them wanted to admit it."

 "No women should be authorized to stay at home and raise her children. Women should not have that choice, because if there is such a choice, too many women will make that one"  (Feminist pioneer Simone de Beauvoir, Saturday Review, June 14, 1975).

by Susan Patton
USA Today Excerpt from "Marry Smart"

I wrote a letter
to the editor of the newspaper of the college [Princeton] I attended forty years ago.

I wrote the letter because I was on campus for a Women and Leadership conference that was followed by a breakout session. This afforded current female undergraduates an opportunity to speak informally with alumnae. There were eight young women at my table and they were told that I am a human resources professional and an executive coach, so naturally we all chatted about career planning, resume writing, and interview techniques. Their eyes seemed to glaze over from yet again hearing still more advice about how to succeed in the working world.

Then I looked at each of them and asked, "Do any of you girls want to someday get married and have children?" Their jaws dropped. They were stunned by the very question. They looked cautiously at each other before sheepishly raising their hands. All eight aspired to marriage and motherhood--but not one of them wanted to admit it.

Now it was my turn to be stunned. These amazing young women were reluctant to share their heartfelt hopes, for fear of critical judgment. It was clear to me that someone had to talk with them honestly about finding husbands, getting married, and having babies.

That someone might as well be me.

(Patton expanded her advice into this book.)

So I decided to write a letter to the editor, addressed to the daughters I never had. Back when I was an undergraduate, a proud member of one of the pioneering first classes of women to graduate from Princeton University, I dated but I never had a serious boyfriend. Instead of looking for and possibly finding a life partner among my college classmates, I spent almost ten years after college dating men who weren't as interesting, educated, or accomplished as my classmates had been. I ultimately married the man I had been dating for years, because if I was to fulfill my lifelong dream of having children, time was running out. He wasn't the love of my life, but we marry for many reasons. Sometimes, we make sacrifices to achieve our greater goals. I married at thirty-one years old because I knew that I wanted to have children and do so in a traditional marriage--and I was cognizant of the limitations on my ability to procreate. And although after twenty-five years my marriage ended in divorce, I consider it to have been successful--because I had the children I always wanted.

In retrospect, I realize that I may have squandered some of my best years looking for what I probably could have found as a student on campus when I was twenty years old. I wish somebody had told me when I was an undergraduate that I should look more carefully at my male classmates. There must have been many marriageable men in that group. Either I didn't recognize them, or I carelessly dismissed them for superficial reasons, or I allowed myself to be shouted down by feminists who made me feel that it was a betrayal to the sisterhood for an educated woman to be so interested in marriage.

Did the fact that I didn't choose a man with comparable academic credentials damage my marriage and contribute to my divorce? I don't know for sure. But I know it didn't help.

During my four years on campus, I did many things right. I made great friends, had wonderful experiences that I'll remember always, and I graduated! But there are at least as many things I wish I had done differently. I especially wish that I had had sense enough to look for a husband on campus before I graduated.

So I wrote a letter, and it went, as they say, "viral." Honestly, I thought I would just share a few words of simple, maternal advice with the girls on campus, where my younger son was an undergraduate.

I didn't mean to cause an international firestorm or infuriate some women on campus, let alone on the Internet.

(Well, maybe I did expect a little controversy--I am more blunt than most people, I've always been like that--but who knew anyone would pay attention?)

And viral? Who thinks of going viral? Within three days of the publication of my letter to the editor of the Daily Princetonian, my advice exceeded 100 million inquiries on Google worldwide. Not all of the responses were positive. In fact, I was called "retro," "crazy," "a throwback"--and those are some of the nicer epithets. I was accused of being a traitor to feminism, a traitor to coeducation, and an elitist.

Somewhere early on in the brouhaha, I was dubbed the "Princeton Mom." And you know what? I love that moniker! I earned it, both by graduating from Princeton and by having two children who went there. The advice I offered in the Daily Princetonian was intended for the women on the campus of my beloved alma mater, but it is applicable to smart women everywhere who want a traditional family. To avoid a life of unwanted spinsterhood--with cats!--you have to smarten up about what's important to you, and keep your head in the game. You have to plan for your personal happiness with the same commitment and dedication that you plan for your professional success.

Honestly, what about that is so controversial?

Knowing and respecting yourself. That's what it's really about: understanding what's important to you and prioritizing. That's what it's about. When I say, "Find a man," what I really mean is "Find a man who will respect you." And when I say, "Find a husband in college," what I'm really saying is "It's never too early to start planning for your personal happiness and looking for a husband who will respect you." It's never too early, and it's never too late. (Well, that's not really true, but we'll discuss that later.)

So, with the benefit of hindsight, this book contains the advice I wish I had been given when I was younger, which I now offer to educated young women everywhere.

The Letter

March 29, 2013

Advice for the Young Women of Princeton--the Daughters I Never Had

Forget about having it all, or not having it all, leaning in or leaning out . . . here's what you really need to know that nobody is telling you.

For years (decades, really) we have been bombarded with advice on professional advancement, breaking through that glass ceiling and achieving work-life balance. We can figure that out--we are Princeton women. If anyone can overcome professional obstacles, it will be our brilliant, resourceful, very well educated selves.

When I was an undergraduate in the mid-seventies, the two hundred pioneer women in my class would talk about navigating the virile plains of Princeton as a precursor to professional success. Never being one to shy away from expressing an unpopular opinion, I said that I wanted to get married and have children.

It was seen as heresy. For most of you, the cornerstone of your future and happiness will be inextricably linked to the man you marry, and you will never again have this concentration of men who are worthy of you. Here's what nobody is telling you . . . find a husband on campus before you graduate.

Yes, I went there. Men regularly marry women who are younger, less intelligent, less educated. It's amazing how forgiving men can be about a woman's lack of erudition, if she is exceptionally pretty. Smart women can't (shouldn't) marry men who aren't at least their intellectual equals. As Princeton women, we have almost priced ourselves out of the market. Simply put, there is a very limited population of men who are as smart or smarter than we are. And I say again--you will never again be surrounded by this concentration of men who are worthy of you.

Of course, once you graduate you will meet men who are your intellectual equal--just not that many of them. And, you could choose to marry a man who has other things to recommend him besides a soaring intellect. But ultimately, it will frustrate you to be with a man who just isn't as smart as you.

Here is another truth that you know, but nobody is talking about. As freshman women, you have four classes of men to choose from. Every year, you lose the men in the senior class, and are older than the class of incoming freshman men. So, by the time you are a senior, you basically have only the men in your own class to choose from, and frankly--they now have four classes of women to choose from. Maybe you should have been a little nicer to these guys when you were freshmen?

If I had daughters, this is what I would be telling them. - --Susan A. Patton, Class of 1977

Related - Interview with Patton -
---------- Reaction on Campus
Thanks to Sandeep for the tip!

First Response from Peter R:

Applied anti-feminism, from the heart. And very true. My accountant of more than 20 years is a spinster who comes to the house every month for some paper work. She sees our small kids sometimes and loves them. Just last week she told my wife, you make such beautiful children, why don't you make another one and give it to me, I will raise it.

I don't think she is a feminist, at least not a militant one, but for whatever reason, biology will catch up with people, and at some point in their lives they will remember what it's all about.

Dr. Elisabeth Kuebler, a Swiss-American, who took care of dying people in hospices, made a study and wrote a book about the psychological condition of people in their last phases. She said the deepest and biggest regret of childless, dying people was that they never had children. Very profound, and very true. Feminists with their emptiness have no answer to that.

Categories: Authors and Bloggers

Why I Had a Vasectomy

Sat, 04/12/2014 - 02:19
(left, not Dave)

Sex is Russian roulette.
Dave Ess decided to
remove the bullet.

by Dave Ess

Two years ago, at age 32,  I decided to have a no-scalpel vasectomy because of my experiences with the opposite sex, and concerns about money and the unjust legal system.

My parents had a lengthy, bitter divorce when I was 18.  My retired father was forced to live with a friend until the courts allowed him enough money to live on his own. During the divorce, he had to live on $500 a month and take whatever job he could find. Once the divorce was finalized, the family's hobby farm and other property were split, but this process took four years while the Freemason lawyers made off like bandits. This experience left a bitter taste in my mouth. Courts favor women in child custody, support, and property partitioning.

My first sexual relationship at 19 was with a woman who was two years my junior.  I didn't have much experience and was a very socially inept person. During sexual intercourse, she would frequently take the condom off. I was worried about STDs and pregnancy.  This relationship lasted about six months. She became pregnant a month later but it was not my child.  Years later I found out she had seven children by other men.  You could say I dodged multiple bullets.  She was my first close call with early feminism and the possibility of legal entanglement.

Turning 24 years old was a pivotal time in my life. I was in University and dating so many women.  One was nine-years-older than me. She was a University librarian with two Masters degrees. I was head of a pseudo-Marxist student group on the campus and we shared similar interests. She was a feminist, but I still had not fully realized what Marxism or Feminism meant.  I was invited to her house where she prepared a meal with wine for both of us, while dressed in a provocative outfit.  As you can guess, we became inebriated and had sex.  She was another woman who, after about 30 minutes of intercourse, removed the condom. 

(Dave with a recent date)

Any man will tell you that when you are under a woman's hypnosis during intercourse that you are easily manipulated. After our encounter she admitted that her "boyfriend" of eight years was out of town. I was shocked but also mildly smitten that a woman her age would sleep with someone like me.  Nevertheless, this relationship continued on and off for about 5 months until she moved out of town for another job. I'm assuming her husband never found out about me.

About four months after this "relationship," another woman asked me out on a date. We started having sex into the third month of dating and she never took the condom off.  She did, however, start taking birth control pills.   About two-thirds into the relationship, she started being degrading, rude, and demanding. I could tell things were not going to last much longer. Toward the end, she met a German fellow at the University and I found out that they had children together. Another bullet dodged.

Some time after graduating University I traveled to South Korea to join the hordes of Caucasian English teachers. It was here I had my first experience with a foreign woman. We dated for several months before we had sexual intercourse. She was polite, confident (but not arrogant), intelligent, and dressed modestly. These traits ran contrary to many of the Western women I dated.

I had a lot of pleasant experiences with her while living in Seoul, including karaoke and dancing (and I never dance). About 6 months into the relationship I met her parents and we had dinner. These meetings happened about 10 times until my Korean girlfriend told me her parents did not approve of her dating, and potentially marrying, a Westerner.

Some traditional Koreans do not see Westerners as appropriate husbands due to cultural customs, and not wanting to have a "half breed" child. Depressed, I ended the relationship just before I left South Korea for good.

Given all this, I'm still open to the possibility of raising a child, but it won't be my biological child. Actually, doing this is more in line with my philosophy of helping other people rather than helping myself. I am currently single, but have some women friends I see once in a while.

Maybe one day I will "settle down" with a compatible mate and adopt a child, but it's not something I can financially or emotionally afford right now. I will try to avoid feminists zealots at all costs from now on, but people come into relationships with many masks.

Dave Ess is a computer technical support specialist, web specialist living in Canada and is planning on a career change. His email address is: thecomingdepression@gmail.com

"To all the commenters please remember I had limited space to write and could not include all the experiences I've had, including the platonic, non-sexual, and relationships I've had without sex.  Some people choose to see the article to paint me as using women but I, and my friends and family, do not consider me to be that.  The funny thing is the majority of my relationships were initiated by women and it was they who often wanted to take the relationship a step further.  Remember I am a human being with feelings and consider the choice I made appropriate for myself, the experiences I've had, and what I want out of a future for myself and those I care for.  The first commenter on the article pretty much summed up everything quite nicely.  Thank you. "

Related (from Bill) --     "You are NOT the Father!"   (The Joys of not becoming a father before a man is ready.)

First Comment from Bruce -

I think Dave did exactly the right thing by getting a vasectomy. This world is owned and controlled by satanists, and the earth already has an unsustainable human population. Bringing children into this corruption sentences them to a life of servitude on the Freemason slave plantation.

There are very few good women in today's world who would be suitable mothers and wives. My own experience has shown that people often change, or they were living a lie all along.

In today's world, becoming a father offers no advantages for men. It is impossible to raise morally good children with a feminist mother, a Marxist public education system, in an environment of cultural Marxism. The Freemason family court system encourages divorce and enslaves the father.

I got a vasectomy immediately after my son was born, and it is one of the best things I have ever done for myself. My son is now 26 years old, and I hope he never gets married or impregnates a feminist she-devil.

Categories: Authors and Bloggers

British Man Laments Lost Love

Fri, 04/11/2014 - 00:31

Feminists don't like to see a woman
engaged to be happily married.
They attack her mind and, like Communists,
destroy society one person at a time.

Mark, a successful British businessman,
describes how "the love of his life"
slipped through his fingers.

"The poison traveled though her veins and is now in her heart, thanks to these stupid women brainwashed by media and other Satan-controlled propaganda.
To her 'friends,' sleeping around and using a sex toy to replace 'him' is normal."

by Mark

I am now in my early forties and spent many years just seeing women for sex and fun.  I was a dance DJ and had my pick of most girls at the nightclubs.
About two years ago, I finally met someone who I really wanted to spend my life with. At first, I honestly wanted just sex, as this is normal, I have been told. She was different from other women though, and into the idea of the man being the head of the house and taking the lead. She said she felt "like a woman" when she was in the kitchen making meals and cakes. In the bedroom I was the boss too. She was beautiful in appearance and in mind. After six months, I moved into her place with the plan to build my own home, which I am now doing, and settle down. I asked her to marry me and she accepted. It all seemed to be going so well until four months ago.
Firstly, she quit her job as an Admin assistant to go into the hair and makeup field. There, she met a new crowd of 'friends'. These 'professional' and 'independent' women totally destroyed her belief in love and marriage. They take her out to bars, keep her busy with a crazy amount of non-stop work, and say that she doesn't need a man to be successful.
So the poison traveled though her veins and is now in her heart, thanks to these stupid women brainwashed by media and other Satan-controlled propaganda.


To her 'friends,' sleeping around and using a sex toy to replace 'him' is normal. They don't see that she had an ideal partnership 'until death us do part.'
Shortly after meeting these women, she totally distanced herself from me. Her kiss was less passionate than my mother's peck on the cheek! She totally neglected our relationship and in the end, it all fell apart.

Just to see what is out there, I took a look at a dating website. It was full of self-important women who go totally by what a man has to offer: "must be this, must be that," not one thing about needing to be loved or feeling like a woman. The majority specify JUST DATING ONLY. I'm not bitter but to have found a rare gem and have her taken from me by some feminist bitches all twisted up by pop culture totally kills me.

All of these women dog rough and cake themselves in makeup and all they do is drink at coffee shops spitting venom about men and how we like to control them and stifle their business careers.
Obviously these women will look back and realize what they have missed. By this time, they will be bitter and jealous with not much hope of finding a man willing to take them on.

The real sick feeling is that my girl has been sucked in and we have now separated. I was asked to move out and then stay as friends. She still has the engagement ring on her finger but says it is there as a 'reminder,' whatever that means. I have never loved anyone the way I love her and I'm not some teenager pining after my first girlfriend. I'm not inexperienced when it comes to handling women. I was never worshiping her and made sure she understood men are there to support and love women, not idolize them the way many younger men do now (and that puts you on a losing streak from the start.)

So I have lost the best thing in my world. I am quite well off with money due to a successful business I own. You know what? It means nothing to me right now, the money, all my material goods are worth nothing. I never was materialistic anyway but losing a person to such a bunch of bitches set on making as many men miserable as possible hurts more. I saw her this week to collect some things from her place and gave her a hug and she couldn't even put her arms around me. I asked how we got to this point and she said work was number one priority.
Did she cheat or have another man? No way. One thing I do know is that she is not that type and she wouldn't have time anyway.
So now she's with these women and seemingly happy but how long before she wakes up and I'm well gone?

She uses a sex toy for her satisfaction these days. I found it under her bed. She watched lots of porn (looked at history on my laptop left at her place and so much porn you wouldn't believe it!)
So once again, this Satanic-controlled society has destroyed a functioning heterosexual relationship by selling the idea that men just keep you down and stop you from having fun.
In the past, I did sleep around but I always said I wanted no commitment and if they were the same it was okay. Really that wasn't okay at all and maybe guys like me and my friends who thought it was cool and fun to sleep with lots of girls perhaps contributed to this screwed up society we have today.
Anyway, I thought it was worth writing to you about this as I know you and your readers are interested in what is going on in society.

Makow comment: Mark, I'm sorry for your loss but better you learn her true (lack of) character now rather than after you marry and have children. This girl was pretending to be something she wasn't. I'd demand she return the engagement ring. You need to look at the family upbringing to see what a woman really is. I'd check out immigrant women from traditional backgrounds. I welcome other reader comments.

First Comment from Scottie-

In response to Mark's article. Many women who are in the hair and makeup field are skanks and bar-flys. .

 My mother was a hairdresser and divorced my father after 30 years of marriage because he was too "controlling". She was heavily influenced by her girlfriends who were bitter,lonely and jealous women who were duped by the satanic culture into buying the feminist agenda.

 My mother constantly needed to dress-up,wear loads of make-up and always felt the need to go out. This is typical behavior for many women today, but especially for any woman who is pursuing a career in the hair/beauty and make-up field.

Also Mark should demand that ring back. If I was him I definitely would not be giving her hugs after getting kicked out and dumped, no matter how hard it hurts.

I am 22-years-old and was in a three year relationship with a girl I really loved. and I mean really loved. But it was just too much to compete with the decadency and moral degradation of the college life-style surrounding her. It was always a constant battle pitting me against the skanks who were in her class always trying to get her to go out and have 'fun', which really means getting drunk,fucked, (maybe gang-banged) and losing any amount of innocence left what-so-ever.

 I will not make the mistake again of investing all my time and efforts into a girl. Find your passion, read books, educate yourself, use this amazing tool we have called the internet to find the truth we are so in desperately need of. Don't think about a bitch all day, especially one who sells you out for a couple of slut girlfriends and drunk entailed weekends. Trust me Mark, your ex-gf will realize the mistake she made, and when she does, you will be the one who is better off.

Comment from Carl:

I'm going to teach my son that sleeping around is a trap for missing a compatible wife. I wonder how many of the girls that Mark slept with were marriage material? Surely that one in college or online wasn't just a brainless party girl? Mark, didn't you miss any of them, maybe want to have some companionship? There really is plenty of time for a guy in his early 40's, half decent looking, well read/educated and especially monetarily well off.

Have kids soon, you will hate yourself for waiting as long as you did, the love of a child is second to none. If you're serious about this, just lower your standards a touch physically and look for that woman who was brought up by a family oriented mother; look online and don't look desperate. She just might not look like a fashion model. If you want that, you have to start early and make a job out of trying to find a super hot motherly type. They don't last long on the "market." The more a women looks like a fashion model, the more she doesn't need you or notice you even if you look good. There is a dis-proportionate amount of men who want her. Then we can talk about how the media has made her a narcissist.

Here where I preside in the last bastion of a white neighborhood in Northern Port Coquitlam BC. My whole street and area is filled with attractive white women with white husbands and white kids. Its kind of like Winnipeg's Fort Richmond neighborhood in the '70's, I was pretty surprised actually. I can't say the same thing for London, several major European and southern US cities, or Richmond BC, that's for bloody sure. Because Asian women are small, cute and motherly, they attract white guys like flies here in greater Vancouver...

As far as seeking "foreign women," I would try as hard as possible to find a white woman. If you are Caucasian, part of the Illuminati plan is to make the world less populated and yellow/brown mixed genetics with the exception of some of their inner circle of European Aristocrats and fair skinned Ashkenazi Jew's. 

Its too bad UK and Canada don't bring in legions of Slav's (West - Russian relations won't help). My wife was born in Russia and raised like a girl (and oddly well prepared for a career.) She's not Betty Crocker but nobody's perfect. All the people I know in greater Vancouver from Eastern Europe and Russia are very family oriented. Plenty of former Soviet states went to feminism many years before the West, so there has been some healing and the Slavic motherly instinct is very powerful and seeks family. Also, my wife tells me that Soviet leaders killed so many men over a few generations, that Russia (more women) still has almost opposite demographics than China (all men).

Categories: Authors and Bloggers

<br /><img alt="Windle.jpeg" src="http:

Thu, 04/10/2014 - 07:52

(left, Patricia Baird Windle)

Abortion is a Rite of  Witchcraft

by Dan

There's a long history of abortions being performed by practicing witches.  This has come out in public again again all along, many times in blatant statements by the witches themselves.  It amazes me how the public simply tunes out things that don't into their little window on the world.
I can give you one quote off the top of my head right here:  Patricia Baird Windle, founder and owner of an abortion business called 'Aware Woman'.  She was an avowed witch who raised a stink years ago saying "You practice your religion and let me practice mine. My religion is a holy ritual child sacrifice." 

She got away with saying that because her abortion clinic is LEGAL.  In fact she meant to make the news to promote one of her books 'Targets of Hatred: Anti-Abortion Terrorism',  which labels the "pro life" position as fundamentalist fanatics endangering the lives of women, yada yada yada...

She's just one of five I can cite to show it's a religion and they're proud of it.  They share this insanity that claiming feminine power involves this initiation of taking the life she creates. That's how a woman graduates to 'goddess'.

The Masonic maxim is true.  Everything really is out there 'in plain sight'.  But people don't believe their eyes and ears if they don't believe evil is real and there's a non-human aspect to it.  That's why everything that came out in broad daylight in the 1980's about the epidemic of Satanism already went down the memory hole.   We're always having to start from scratch trying to explain these things over, and over and over.

Of interest, abortion clinics are on the run here in Texas. The Legislature and Governor have closed most of them down by pulling State funding from Planned Parenthood.  We'll see how long it sticks.

Categories: Authors and Bloggers

The "Catastrophic Canonization of a Judas Pope"

Thu, 04/10/2014 - 01:28

Pope John Paul II told the Voodoo priests of Benin in Africa that their Satanic traditions contain "seeds of the Word."

John Paul II's imminent canonization  proves the Church of Rome
is the vehicle for "the damnation of souls," says Michael Hoffman,
an expert on Judaism and the subversion of the Church.

by Michael Hoffman
Three Points of Departure from Magisterial Dogma

On April 27, 2014 in the course of the allegedly "infallible" process of saint-making (canonization), the Church of Rome will confer on Popes John XXIII and John Paul II the supposed mark of sure salvation as an alleged model of a miracle-working life of heroic sanctity worthy of eternal emulation by every Christian.

Pope John Paul II is the pontiff who reverently kissed a copy of Islam's Koran, and who told the Voodoo priests of Benin in Africa that their Satanic traditions contain "seeds of the Word," after which the barbaric practice of Voodoo in that blighted land nearly doubled.

John Paul II permitted the Tibetan Buddhists to place a statue of their idol on the altar of the Church of Assisi and this pope prayed with them to their "god(s)."

Pope John Paul II taught that Judaics have an irrevocable covenant with God by virtue of their alleged racial descent from Abraham and therefore this carnal "Israel" need not be evangelized for conversion to Christ.

Pope John Paul II was the patron saint of serial child-molestation facilitators such as Fr. Marcial Maciel Degollado, Bishop Skylstad, Cardinal Law and Cardinal Mahony and thousands of others like them. Many of the most unconscionable waves of horrendous victimization of defenseless children occurred on his watch.

Pope John Paul II permitted these molestations to be shrouded in secrecy. He granted safe haven to fugitive molestation facilitators such as the notorious Cardinal Bernard Law who was wanted in Boston by the authorities and rewarded by Pope John Paul with being named archpriest of a prominent basilica in Rome.

John Paul II was the first pontiff to enter a synagogue and encourage the deluded people in spiritual bondage within its walls to continue in their sins, which include rejection of Jesus Christ as Messiah and Savior.

This evil Judas will soon become "Pope Saint John Paul II" and his "heroic virtues" held up for all Catholics to imitate. This demonic mockery and incomprehensible catastrophe is not a Second Vatican Council aberration!

While it is now public knowledge in the "Who am I to judge [gays]?" pontificate of Pope Francis that the Church of Rome is the vehicle for the damnation of souls and not the salvation of souls, "traditional" Catholics have misdirected millions of people by pointing to Vatican II, Kant, Rousseau, or the French Revolution as the root of this decline and fall, thereby concealing and exculpating the occult popes of the Renaissance and the Neoplatonic conspiracy that has guided the Church of Rome for more than five hundred years.

We are at work on a booklet which we hope to publish by April 27. It is titled The Renaissance Church of Rome: Three Points of Departure from Magisterial Dogma. The Three Points are: • Judaism and the Occult • Equivocation and mental reservation • Usury.

We will endeavor to demonstrate from the documentary record that the smoke of Satan entered the Church of Rome clandestinely in the 16th century and went from victory to victory, culminating according to plan in our 21st century, in this, the final stage in the alchemists' ritual peregrination, the Making Manifest of All that is Hidden.

Pope Francis is the public face of a formerly covert occult process initiated by the popes of the Neoplatonic conspiracy, which is showing forth its true face to the world now that "Christendom" is sufficiently processed to accept it.

Yes, we well know that Jesus Christ declared that the gates of hell shall not prevail against His Church. There is no question of that. The question is, where is His Church on earth today? We can only find it if we have the courage and vision to proceed from Thomistic first principles, not by mistaking symptoms of rot for the root of the rot. Myopia disguised as Catholic truth will only produce more confusion and defeat.

Michael Hoffman, left, is the author of Judaism Discovered  and Judaism's Strange Gods.

Related - by Michael Hoffman, US Honors Racist Rabbi who says "non Jewish souls come from three satanic spheres."

Categories: Authors and Bloggers

<img alt="media-960x360.jpg" src="http:

Thu, 04/10/2014 - 00:03
Canada's Political Prisoner - Dean Clifford

(left, Dean Clifford)

This is what happens when you challenge the legitimacy of government.

(Editor's Note: I don't support the Freeman movement but think it's worth knowing about.)

by V

There is a political prisoner sitting in a Manitoba prison that few people outside the Freeman movement have ever heard about. Dean Clifford was abducted by the Hamilton Police Department on November 24, 2013 after he gave a 2-day seminar. His crime? Challenging the validity of the law.

Dean Clifford is a white male of Irish-Canadian heritage who lives just north of Winnipeg. Manitoba. A contractor by trade, he concluded the Canadian government and courts are detrimental to the health, finance and well-being of the people. Dean drives without a driver's license, has no government license plates and pay's no income tax to the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA). He does this lawfully (common-law.)

Of all the person's in the Freeman movement such as Winston Shrout, Max Egan, etc, Dean Clifford practices in real life what he preaches and his number #1 point is, 'Do Harm To No One'. For this he has been jailed many times over the years and has even been physically abused by the police.

Manitoba court records show that the charge was that Dean didn't show up for a court appearance in August 21st.

Dean has been in prison for over four months know with trumped-up charges. The "crown" and the powers behind the "crown" do not want other people to know the fahat Dean Clifford is teaching to the public.

Dean Clifford has shown in simple, clear language that the government of Canada is a separate foreign power and the only way the government of Canada can interact with us, private citizen's is to trick us into making us franchisees (employees) of the 'crown' through the fraudulent use of our birth certificate, driver's license, social insurance card, etc.

So far the courts have denied Dean access to a notary or commissioner of oath, and have tried every dirty trick up their sleeves to keep him in prison. The best guess seems to be to send a strong message to others out there in the "true" Freeman's movement that doing battle with the crown courts and crown prosecutors will only land you in jail for a long time. Mind you in Dean's case on trumped up charges and in a private statutory 'kangaroo court' environment.


For those of you that want to learn more of Dean Clifford's teachings go to his website (http://deanclifford.info/) and watch more of his video's on his website: http://deanclifford.info/media/

Categories: Authors and Bloggers

UN Peddles Illuminati's Heterophobic Program

Wed, 04/09/2014 - 00:32

 UN agencies promotes the Illuminati's
 satanic agenda: abortion, homosexuality
 and pedophilia.

"Delegates to the UN General Assembly have become weary of arguing over the UNFPA's harsh manipulation and insistence that abortion and sexual rights be introduced into countries which have no wish to go in this direction."

by Reality (March 2014)
Publication of Real Women of Canada
(Edited by henrymakow.com) 

At every opportunity, UN agencies ... as well as NGO's, are incessantly scheming, manipulating and deceiving, trying to impose the Illuminati's heterophobic sexual policies world-wide.

With disasters around the world-- wars, earthquakes, epidemics, famines-- one would assume that the UN had its hands full. Instead, the UN gives priority to promoting abortion, homosexuality and birth control.

The UN agency, UN Fund for Population Activities (UNFPA) is the paramount agency at the UN pushing sexual issues. Without exaggeration, the UNFPA is downright sinister. In 2008, UNPPA spent  $165.1 million on "reproductive health" (i.e. abortion.)

In December, 2012, UNFPA hosted a "Global Youth Forum"in Bali. The final declaration featured a call for abortion-on-demand, "gay, lesbian and transgender rights," and legalized prostitution.

When UNFPA presented these results to the UN General Assembly, which is more representative of the popular will, the latter barely even acknowledged the document. In fact, UN diplomats refused to even officially "take note" of the document. They knew it was a set up by UNFPA.

Delegates to the UN General Assembly have become weary of the UNFPA's harsh manipulation and insistence that abortion and sexual rights be introduced into countries which have no wish to go in this direction. Yet UNFPA continues relentlessly in pursuit of these issues.


This UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights has an obsession with lesbian, gay, bi-sexual and trans- gender (LGBT) rights.

The agency employs more than 850 staff and includes a work force of some 240 international human rights officers. OHCHR has produced a 60-page booklet entitled: Born Free and Equal which falsely states that UN treaties provide "core legal obligations" regarding homosexuality, which included asylum for LGBT people, as well a requirement to extend marriage to same-sex couples.

In November, 2013, Russia, Ethiopia, Poland, and Malta chastised this human rights office and its unending promotion of LGBT "rights." Russia was especially incensed, stating that attention to sexual orientation is "disproportionately high" and that "there are more topical issues in the world for us to deal with".

Ethiopia, speaking on behalf of African countries, complained about the increasing trend by OHCHR "to create new Rights concepts, and categories and standards that are not recognized" in international agreements nor by all countries.

The UN Human Rights Council is also a launching pad for sexual issues. For example, in March, 2013, the Council  recommended that children's health include the right to comprehensive sexual education and access to "confidential sexual and reproductive services, including abortion."

The report also recommended that children using illicit drugs have available to them "harm reduction" strategies, including free needle exchanges, drug injection sites, etc.

Finally, the report recommended that any social and cultural values, that require parental and/or spousal consent, be rejected on the basis that children should make their own decisions when it comes to sex.

Fortunately, these alarming recommendations were solidly rejected by large groups of states, such as the African group, the Arab group and the Organization of Islamic Conferences (OIC).

This rejection, however, will not stop the Council from pushing forward with sexual issues.


The UN is a corrupt and dysfunctional organization used by the Illuminati to change the values, cultures, and religions of its member states, contrary to the UN's Charter, which provides for sovereignty and independence.

What can be done about the UN?  For one thing, we should curtail our generous funding to it.

Categories: Authors and Bloggers

Diego Garcia Theft Epitomizes Government Evil

Tue, 04/08/2014 - 01:22
  (Left, This 12-min CNN documentary tells the story. Who is capable of such evil? Satanists.)

Who would steal an airliner, and imprison or kill its 239 passengers and crew?
The same people who stole the island where the airliner is probably hidden.

In 1970, 2000 islanders were forcibly deported to make way for a US air force base.
Although the base is worth billions, the natives didn't get a cent for their homes, possessions and way of life. They live in destitution in Mauritius and the Seychelles. They didn't object to the base.
All they wanted was jobs working there.  Instead, the US imported 3000 Filipinos. Talk about

The US government was afraid 450 fishermen and their families might make a claim. No wonder, our Masonic-run governments make us puke.

by Sherwood Ross
Islanders Forcibly Deported
(Abridged by henrymakow.com)

In order to convert the sleepy, Indian Ocean island of Diego Garcia into a dominating military base, the U.S. forcibly transported its 2,000 Chagossian inhabitants into exile and gassed their dogs. [The were allowed to take their clothes- nothing else.]

By banning journalists from the area, the U.S. Navy was able to perpetrate this with virtually no press coverage, says David Vine, an assistant professor of anthropology at American University and author of "Island of Shame: the Secret History of the U.S. Military on Diego Garcia" (Princeton University Press).

"The Chagossians were put on a boat and taken to Mauritius and the Seychelles, 1,200 miles away, where they were left on the docks, with no money and no housing, to fend for themselves," Vine said on the interview show "Books Of Our Time," sponsored by the Massachusetts School of Law at Andover.

(left, in 2002 the natives sued the UK government and won, but the Masonic court system awarded them no compensation)

"They were promised jobs that never materialized. They had been living on an island with schools, hospitals, and full employment, sort of like a French coastal village, and they were consigned to a life of abject poverty in exile, unemployment, health problems, and were the poorest of the poor," Vine told interview host Lawrence Velvel, dean of the law school.

Their pet dogs were rounded up and gassed, and their bodies burned, before the very eyes of their traumatized owners, Vine said.

"They were moved because they were few in number and not white," Vine added. The U.S. government circulated the fiction the Chagossians were transient contract workers that had taken up residence only recently but, in fact, they had been living on Diego Garcia since about the time of the American Revolution. Merchants had imported them to work on the coconut and copra plantations. Vine said the U.S. government induced The Washington Post not to break a story spelling out events on the island...

Although the Chagossians were forcibly removed in 1971, they still hope to return, Vine says, and refer to their period of exile as one of "profound sorrow." Vine says they would be happy to live on the unused eastern portion of the island and work at the base but the U.S. instead "imports contract labor from other areas so they can send them home when the job is done." The island's exiled survivors and their descendants today number about 5,000.

Long off limits to reporters, the Red Cross, and all other international observers and far more secretive than Guantánamo Bay, many long suspected the island was a clandestine CIA "black site" for high-profile detainees, Vine wrote in a related article. Journalist Stephen Grey's 2006 book "Ghost Plane" documented the presence on the island of a CIA-chartered plane used for rendition flights. On two occasions former U.S. Army General Barry McCaffrey publicly named Diego Garcia as a detention facility. And a Council of Europe report named the atoll, along with those in Poland and Romania, as a secret prison.

The island became "a major launch pad" for the U.S. attacks on Afghanistan and Iraq, Vine said. In addition to its capacious harbor, the island readily supports some of the largest U.S. warplanes, including Air Force B-52s, B-1Bs and B-2s. Two years ago, the Pentagon awarded a $32 million contract to add a submarine base to the island's arsenal.

Diego Garcia had been a British possession until 1966, when London allowed the U.S. to use it as a military base in exchange for cancelling a $14-million British debt for a military hardware purchase. Some idea of the size of the base may be conveyed by the fact it is said by the Pentagon to contain 654 buildings.

In a related article about Diego Garcia, Vine has written: "With support for the Chagossians' struggle growing in both the United States and Britain at the same time that revelations about a secret CIA prison are spreading, the United States must finally act to remedy the damage done by another Guantánamo damaging too many lives and undermining its international legitimacy. The United States must allow the Chagossians to return and assist Britain in paying them proper compensation; the United States must close the detention facilities and open Diego Garcia to international investigators; the United States must end the painful irony that is a base the military calls the 'Footprint of Freedom.'"

Sherwood Ross is a media consultant to the Massachusetts School of Law at Andover. Reach him at sherwoodross10@gmail.com


WikiLeaks CableGate disclosures (2010)

According to Wikileaks CableGate documents (reference ID "09LONDON1156"), in a calculated move planned in 2009, the UK proposed that the BIOT become a "marine reserve" with the aim of preventing the former inhabitants from returning to their lands. A summary of the diplomatic cable is as follows:

    HMG would like to establish a "marine park" or "reserve" providing comprehensive environmental protection to the reefs and waters of the British Indian Ocean Territory (BIOT), a senior Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) official informed Polcouns on May 12. The official insisted that the establishment of a marine park--the world's largest--would in no way impinge on USG use of the BIOT, including Diego Garcia, for military purposes. He agreed that the UK and United States should carefully negotiate the details of the marine reserve to assure that United States interests were safeguarded and the strategic value of BIOT was upheld. He said that the BIOT's former inhabitants would find it difficult, if not impossible, to pursue their claim for resettlement on the islands if the entire Chagos Archipelago were a marine reserve.

Additionally, Diego Garcia was used as a storage section for U.S. cluster bombs as a way of avoiding UK parliamentary oversight.

2. On 30 December 1966, the United States and the UK executed an agreement through an Exchange of Notes which permits the United States to use the BIOT for defense purposes for 50 years (through December 2016), followed by a 20-year optional extension (to 2036) to which both parties must agree by December 2014.[22] No monetary payment was made from the United States to the UK as part of this agreement or any subsequent amendment. Rather, the United Kingdom received a US$14 million discount from the United States on the acquisition of submarine-launched ballistic missile system Polaris missiles per a now-declassified addendum to the 1966 agreement.


Related - Did MA-370 Passenger send a message from Diego Garcia?

Categories: Authors and Bloggers

Economists Sell their Souls to the Fed

Mon, 04/07/2014 - 04:53
P { margin-bottom: 0.21cm; }A:link { }

(Left, Economists need a crystal ball because they aren't allowed to think for themselves)

Economists are the template for doctors

and all academic professions (historians etc.)

They do the bidding of the Illuminati Federal Reserve bank

directly or indirectly.

You were bought at a price; do not become slaves of men. - 1 Corinthians 7:23

All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is to offer good men good jobs. (Apologies to Edmund Burke)

by Ryan Grim

How the Fed Bought the Economics Profession (Oct, 2009)

(Edited by henrymakow.com)

The Federal Reserve, through its extensive network of consultants, visiting scholars, alumni and staff economists, so thoroughly dominates the field of economics that real criticism of the central bank has become a career liability for members of the profession.

This dominance helps explain how, even after the FED failed to foresee the [credit crash] the greatest economic collapse since the Great Depression, the central bank has largely escaped criticism from academic economists. In the Fed's thrall, the economists missed it, too.

"The FED has a lock on the economics world," says Joshua Rosner, a Wall Street analyst who correctly called the meltdown. "There is no room for other views, which I guess is why economists got it so wrong."

One critical way the FED exerts control on academic economists is through its relationships with the field's gatekeepers. For instance, at the Journal of Monetary Economics, a must-publish venue for rising economists, more than half of the editorial board members are currently on the FED payroll - and the rest have been in the past.

Robert Auerbach,left, a former investigator with the House banking committee, spent years looking into the workings of the FED and published much of what he found in the 2008 book, "Deception and Abuse at the FED". A chapter in that book, excerpted here, provided the impetus for this investigation.

Auerbach found that in 1992, roughly 968 members of the AEA designated "domestic monetary and financial theory and institutions" as their primary field, and 717 designated it as their secondary field.

Combining his numbers with the current ones from the AEA and NABE, it's fair to conclude that there are something like 1,000 to 1,500 monetary economists working across the country. Add up the 220 economist jobs at the Board of Governors along with regional bank hires and contracted economists, and the FED employs or contracts with easily 500 economists at any given time.

Add in those who have previously worked for the FED - or who hope to one day soon - and you've accounted for a very significant majority of the field.


The FED keeps many of the influential editors of prominent academic journals on its payroll. It is common for a journal editor to review submissions dealing with FED policy while also taking the bank's money. A HuffPost review of seven top journals found that 84 of the 190 editorial board members were affiliated with the Federal Reserve in one way or another.

"Try to publish an article critical of the FED with an editor who works for the FED," says University of Texas professor James Galbraith.

And the journals, in turn, determine which economists get tenure and what ideas are considered respectable.

The pharmaceutical industry has similarly worked to control key medical journals, but that involves several companies. In the field of economics, it's just the FED.

Being on the FED payroll isn't just about the money, either. A relationship with the FED carries prestige; invitations to FED conferences and offers of visiting scholarships with the bank signal a rising star or an economist who has arrived. Affiliations with the FED have become the oxygen of academic life for monetary economists.

"It's very important, if you are tenure track and don't have tenure, to show that you are valued by the Federal Reserve," says Jane D'Arista, a FED critic and an economist with the Political Economy Research Institute at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst.

Galbraith, a FED critic, has seen the Fed's influence on academia first hand.

He and co-authors Olivier Giovannoni and Ann Russo found that in the year before a presidential election, there is a significantly tighter monetary policy coming from the FED if a Democrat is in office and a significantly looser policy if a Republican is in office. The effects are both statistically significant, allowing for controls, and economically important.

They submitted a paper with their findings to the Review of Economics and Statistics in 2008, but the paper was rejected.

"The editor assigned to it turned out to be a fellow at the FED and that was after I requested that it not be assigned to someone affiliated with the FED," Galbraith says.

Publishing in top journals is, like in any discipline, the key to getting tenure. Indeed, pursuing tenure ironically requires a kind of fealty to the dominant economic ideology that is the precise opposite of the purpose of tenure, which is to protect academics who present oppositional perspectives.

And while most academic disciplines and top-tier journals are controlled by some defining paradigm, in an academic field like poetry, that situation can do no harm other than to, perhaps, a forest of trees.

Economics, unfortunately, collides with reality - as it did with the Fed's incorrect reading of the housing bubble and failure to regulate financial institutions. Neither was a matter of incompetence, but both resulted from the Fed's unchallenged assumptions about the way the market worked.

Even the late Milton Friedman, whose monetary economic theories heavily influenced Greenspan, was concerned about the stifled nature of the debate.

Friedman, in a 1993 letter to Auerbach that the author quotes in his book, argued that the FED practice was harming objectivity: "I cannot disagree with you that having something like 500 economists is extremely unhealthy. As you say, it is not conducive to independent, objective research.

You and I know there has been censorship of the material published.

Equally important, the location of the economists in the Federal Reserve has had a significant influence on the kind of research they do, biasing that research toward noncontroversial technical papers on method as opposed to substantive papers on policy and results," Friedman wrote.

Greenspan told Congress in October 2008 that he was in a state of "shocked disbelief" and that the "whole intellectual edifice" had "collapsed."

House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform Chairman Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) followed up: "In other words, you found that your view of the world, your ideology, was not right, it was not working."

"Absolutely, precisely," Greenspan replied. "You know, that's precisely the reason I was shocked, because I have been going for 40 years or more with very considerable evidence that it was working exceptionally well."

But, if the intellectual edifice has collapsed, the intellectual infrastructure remains in place.

The same economists who provided Greenspan his "very considerable evidence" are still running the journals and still analyzing the world using the same models that were incapable of seeing the credit boom and the coming collapse.

continued here


Categories: Authors and Bloggers

Satan Worship: The Coming One-World Religion

Sun, 04/06/2014 - 02:03

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


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

by James Perloff

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

Revelation 13:7 says the Antichrist will have "authority over every tribe, people, language and nation." Protocol 5:11 says the Illuminati plan to "absorb all the state forces of the world and to form a super-government."
Revelation 13:8 says that "inhabitants of the earth will worship the beast." Protocol 15:20 brags "they will acknowledge the autocracy of our ruler with a devotion bordering on 'apotheosis'" [glorification as a god]. He "will be the real pope of the universe, the patriarch of the international church." (17:4)
For Satan to rule Earth autocratically, he must not only consolidate governments and currencies, but belief systems. But how could he unite something so diverse as religions?

The long-term strategy: (1) splinter a religion into sects on the "divide and conquer" principle; (2) assault the religion's foundations, creating doubts among believers; (3) finally, herd the remnants together with other religions - i.e., ecumenism.
Let's see how this played out in Christianity. Protocol 17:5 says of churches: "we shall fight against them by criticism calculated to produce schism." Over centuries, Christianity has been splintered into increasingly smaller sects. For example, the Jehovah's Witnesses were founded by a Freemason, Charles Taze Russell. 
To plant doubts in believers, Darwin's theory of evolution was introduced as a "scientific" alternative to creation by God. Protocols 2:3 flaunts "the successes we arranged for Darwinism."
Attacks on the Bible achieved what Protocol 17:2 terms "the complete wrecking of that Christian religion." The Rockefellers funded seminaries that questioned the Gospel, most notoriously the Union Theological Seminary. In the late 19th century, Union Theological professor Charles Briggs introduced "Higher Criticism," in America claiming the Bible was error-ridden.
In 1922, Harry Emerson Fosdick, left, gave a landmark sermon which cast doubt on the Bible being God's Word, the Virgin Birth, the Second Coming, and Christ's death as atonement for sins. He declared those holding these beliefs "intolerant."

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

The views expressed by theologians like Briggs and Fosdick were called "Modernism," which included denying Christ's divinity, miracles and resurrection. Modernism was not a quibbling over some gray area of theology; it was total repudiation of Christianity's major tenets. With Rockefeller funding, it permeated seminaries and churches.
Recently Modernism has gone further; the Jesus Seminar (financial backers unpublicized) declared over 80 percent of sayings attributed to Jesus weren't authentic. The Da Vinci Code - this century's best-selling novel, thought by John Coleman to be a Tavistock creation - claimed Jesus wasn't resurrected and married Mary Magdalene. Shortly after the film version's release, a Discovery Channel documentary claimed a tomb had been found containing the bones of Jesus and Mary Magdalene.

Consolidation of churches required organizations. The Rockefellers funded the National Council of Churches. John Foster Dulles was chosen to spearhead the ecumenism drive.  Dulles was a Rockefeller in-law, chairman of the Rockefeller Foundation trustees, a founding CFR member who helped draft the UN Charter (which never mentions God.)
In 1942, Dulles chaired a 30-denomination meeting which called for "a world government of delegated powers." Not content with unifying America's churches, Dulles traveled to Amsterdam in 1948 to attend the founding conference of the World Council of Churches. Director of research for this foundation-funded conference was John Bennett - president of Union Theological and a CFR member.
Among today's ecumenical traps: the Tony Blair Faith Foundation. The former British prime minister - a consummate insider - said he wanted to "promote respect, friendship and understanding between the major religious faiths" since "globalization pushes us ever closer."
But even with structures for consolidation, the question remained: how to motivate churches to unite. Since denominations often disagree on theology, the strategy was to encourage collaboration where they did agree: values (e.g., helping the poor and sick.) This materialized in an action-based program, "the Social Gospel" (socialism masked as religion.)
Walter Rauschenbusch, trained at Rockefeller-funded Rochester Theological Seminary, became "Father of the Social Gospel," declaring that "the only power that can make socialism succeed, if it is established, is religion."
Perhaps the most notorious "Social Gospel" pusher: Rockefeller-backed Reverend Harry F. Ward, who long taught at Union Theological. Ward, the ACLU's first chairman, was called by labor leader Samuel Gompers "the most ardent pro-Bolshevik cleric in this country." Ward helped found the Methodist Federation for Social Action, which advised Christians to downplay the Gospel and fight for things like social justice, better labor conditions, and "world peace" - i.e., the goals Marxists proclaimed.
Missionary work was targeted. In 1930, John D. Rockefeller, Jr. funded the "Laymen's Foreign Missions Inquiry," which recommended missionaries downplay Christian doctrines and ally with other religions in doing good works. Although most denominations were critical of the report, former missionary Pearl Buck praised it in the media. Subsequently her novel The Good Earth received the Nobel Prize.
This "unity through action" strategy continues today. The Tony Blair Faith Foundation's original website had a "Social Action Projects" page which asked viewers to sign a declaration stating: "I commit to working together with people of all faiths to fight against disease and poverty."
Rick Warren, author of The Purpose Driven Life (over 30 million sold) is America's current Social Gospel point man.  In 2008, backed by a $2 million Rupert Murdoch donation, Warren launched the PEACE Coalition. Time magazine headlined it: "RICK WARREN GOES GLOBAL." Warren said the coalition's goal was "to mobilize 1 billion Christians worldwide."
Warren, who is a CFR member, gave the invocation at Obama's inauguration, and was dubbed "America's pastor" by CNN.  He's anointed, but by who?

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

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

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

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

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

To induce worship, the Antichrist will not initially appear as a tyrant, but as a "savior." To save us from what? Probably from all the chaos the satanic Illuminati will have created: wars ignited by false flags, famines from artificial food shortages, plagues from viruses synthesized in laboratories, HAARP-generated storms and earthquakes, and perhaps even a fake "Blue Beam" alien attack, simulated by holograms of spaceships. Having contrived these disasters, it will easy for him to stop them. By turning off HAARP, for example, he will appear to duplicate the feat of Jesus in quelling the storm on the Sea of Galilee. These high-tech counterfeit "miracles" will allow him to be accepted as God, as Christ returned.
But any "saving" will be short-lived. Once enthroned in Jerusalem (the end goal of Zionism), Satan will use his absolute dictatorship to unleash his greatest cruelties on the world. Worshiping the Antichrist will undoubtedly include human sacrifices - a practice consistently associated with Satan worship, from child sacrifices offered to the demonic Baal in the Old Testament, to today's mock human sacrifices carried out by America's elite at Bohemian Grove.
People of faith should stand united; not in their one-world religion but against the Illuminati.

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

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

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

First Comment from Dan:

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

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

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

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

Categories: Authors and Bloggers

Insider Reveals 21st Century Illuminati Agenda

Sat, 04/05/2014 - 01:18
In a book Henry Kissinger called "brilliant and provocative..difficult to dismiss," Jacques Attali confirms that the Illuminati bankers are imposing a hideous "Brave New World" on mankind, one divorced from goodness, truth or reality.  


When he recently learned that Illuminati Jewish fixer George Soros was funding marijuana legalization,  David Richards reminded me that drug legalization was one of the 2006 predictions of Jacques Atali, another Illuminati Jewish go-fer.

"Drugs will be legalized to numb us to the growing insanity around us," Atali wrote in his book A Brief History of the Future. "'Alcohol, cannabis, opium, morphine, heroin, cocaine, synthetic products (amphetamines, methamphetamines, Ecstasy). Chemical, biological, or electronic drugs, distributed by "self-repairers," will become consumer products in a world without law of police, whose chief victims will be the infranomads.'  (Infranomads= world's poor)

In light of this prescience, I revisited Richard's 2010 book review and was astonished to read that Atali also

foresaw a surveillance state where "our i-phones send data to the NSA."

(From December 22, 2010)

by David Richards

(for henrymakow.com)

A Brief History of The Future by Jacques Attali (2006) outlines the elite's agenda for the 21st Century.


A French Jew (he recently told the European Jewish Congress the world's Jewish population needs to rise to 200 million),  Attali is a high-level technocrat working to fulfill the New World Order.

Jacques Attali has a varied CV.  For ten years he worked as an adviser to former French President Francois Mitterrand. In 1980, he started the European program Eurêka (a major European program on new technologies that invented, among other things, the MP3).

In 1991, he co-founded the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development.  He is also at the origin of the higher education reform, known as LMD, designed to bring all European degrees into line.

He has published over 50 books, selling over 6 million copies worldwide. They include an adoring biography of banker Siegmand Warburg.

He has also written a glowing account of Karl Marx, arguing that Marx was a free-marketeer who favored capitalism as a stepping-stone to his Communist ideal and predicted globalization as we know it today (i.e. the New World Order).

In 'A Brief History of The Future' Attali predicts that this century will unfold in three distinct phrases.

1.   Super-empire = an era of privatization where corporations rule the day.  He writes, "money will finally rid itself of everything that threatens it- including nation states, which it will progressively dismantle." The market will become the world's only recognized law. A system of power whose 'structures remain elusive but whose goal is global.'

2.   Hyperconflict = super-empire will implode and there will be a period of worldwide chaos. Starting about 2030,  Attali foresees 'devastating wars, pitting nations, religious groups, terrorist entities, and free-market pirates against one another'.

3.   Hyperdemocracy (2060)= Exhausted by wars and social upheavals the world public will welcome with open arms 'the creation of a democratic world government.' It will be a collectivist system, with everyone working towards the 'common good.'

I have selected a few themes to give you a flavor of the book.



(Jacques Attali, left)

Illuminati  Sexuality


In the future, people will no longer bond and create families. 'The couple will no longer be the principal base for life and sexuality. [People] will prefer to choose, in full transparency, polygamous or polyandrous loves.'

The driving force of this trend is technology that frees youth from parental control. The first was the radio, which allowed the young:

'To dance outside the ballrooms and therefore be free of parental supervision- liberating sexuality, opening them to all kinds of music, from jazz to rock, and thus announcing youth's entry into the world of consumption, of desire, and of rebellion.'

A media-dominated culture will create an egocentric populace who 'will be loyal only to themselves.'


With lovers failing to mate for life, 'the world will be no more than a juxtaposition of solitudes, and love a juxtaposition of masturbations.'

The elite goal is to remove love from sex so that they control reproduction.  Attali writes that in the twentieth century, society 'sought to evacuate the reproductive role of sexuality by making motherhood artificial, by using increasingly sophisticated methods- pills, pre-mature labor, in vitro fertilization, surrogate mothers.'

In the future, society 'will even go so far as to dissociate reproduction and sexuality.  Sexuality will be the kingdom of pleasure, reproduction that of machines.'

Future generations 'will manufacture the human being like a made-to-measure artifact, in an artificial uterus, which will allow the brain to further develop with characteristics chosen in advance. The human being will thus have become a commercial object.'


Attali paints a picture of a surveillance society that would make the Stasi wince.

Even our washing machines will be conspiring against us,  while the 'packaging of food products, clothing vehicles, and household goods will become "communicative."'

We will live with untrustworthy robots.

'Domestic robots will become universal in daily life. They too will be constantly connected to high-output grids in nomadic ubiquity. They will function as domestic help, as aids for the handicapped or aged, as workers and as members of security forces. In particular they will become "Watchers."'

All our data will be collected by public and private security firms.  The main form of surveillance will be portable entertainment devices. The embryo of this today is the iPhone that sends data to the NSA.

'The unique nomadic object will be permanently traceable. All the data it contains, including images of everyone's daily life, will be stored and sold to specialist businesses and to public and private police.'

By 2050, these machines will have evolved into what Attali calls 'self-surveillance machines' that will allow everyone to monitor his own compliance with the norms.

We will monitor our consumption of water, energy and raw materials. We will even have the 'opportunity to measure, permanently or periodically, the parameters of [our] own body.'

'Electronic bugs, worn subcutaneously, will ceaselessly register heartbeat, blood pressure, and cholesterol. Microprocessors connected to various organs will watch their functioning as compared to the norms.'

Living insecure and chaotic lives, we will be dependent on insurance companies for security. These companies will make sure their clients 'conform to norms to minimize the risks ... They will gradually come to dictate planetary norms (What to eat? What to know? How to drive? How to protect oneself? How to consume? How to produce?)'

These companies will be ruthless.

'They will penalize smokers, drinkers, the obese, the unemployable, the inadequately protected, the aggressive, the careless, the clumsy, the absentminded, the spendthrift. Ignorance, exposure to risks, wasting, and vulnerability will be considered diseases.'

Prisons 'will be gradually replaced by long-distance surveillance of a person under house arrest.'


Immigration flows will expand and submerge nation states.  'Great Britain will become a major host country, especially for citizens of Central European countries. The latter will in their turn welcome Ukrainian workers, themselves replaced by Russians, themselves replaced by vast Chinese populations.'

Resistant countries will learn that a population inflow 'is the condition of their survival.'  In a sinister passage, Attali speaks of third-world hordes engulfing the West.

'Ever more numerous masses will hurl themselves at the gates of the West. They already number hundreds of thousands every month; that figure will increase to millions, then tens of millions.'

The United States will be the most popular destination and 'In twenty years, the Hispanic and African-American populations will almost constitute a majority in the United States.'

Nomadism will also become the norm in the West, 'more and more people will leave one country for another: there will soon be more than ten million of them switching countries every year.

Our main incentive will be money, but many will leave because they are disgusted by their homeland.

'They [will] no longer want to depend on a country whose tax system, legislation, and even culture they reject. And also to disappear completely, to live another life. The world will thus be increasingly filled with people who have become anonymous of their own free will; it will be like a carnival where everyone - ultimate freedom! - will have chosen a new identity for himself.'

Future Of The US

The dollar will remain dominant until at least 2025, when foreign backers will start abandoning it and 'the credit pyramid, based on the value of American housing, will collapse.'

The US will then start disintegrating, with violence and chaos ensuing. Attali states, 'it will not be tomorrow's Africa that will one day resemble today's West, but the whole West that could tomorrow evoke today's Africa.'

The US will then have to redesign its government to regain control.

'The United States could then become a Scandinavian-style social democracy, or a dictatorship - and even perhaps one after the other. It would not be the first time such a surprise occurred: the first leader to apply the principles required to emerge from the crisis of the [last depression] was Mussolini; the second was Hitler. Roosevelt only came third.'

As chaos and violence engulfs the world, Christianity and Islam will strengthen. The Bible belt region in the Southern US will mobilize and could dominate US politics.

'The United States could then around 2040 fall prey to a theocratic temptation, explicit or implicit, in the shape of theocratic isolationism in which democracy would be no more than a shadowy presence.'

This Christian movement could be used in a war against a mobilized Islam, which would presumably weaken and discredit both religions. 

An international Christian alliance 'could well form alliances here and there with secular pirates and traffickers in arms, women and drugs.'

This alliance will 'stand face to face against Islam  - and the struggle will be relentless. They will defend Christians in countries where they are a minority, as in Lebanon, Syria, Iraq and Syria.'

Before the end of century the US will be disintegrated and under the authority of a collectivist world government.


Part Two is here

First Comment from Dan:

Finally , at the ultimate stage of evolution, we might witness (we may already be witnessing) a hyperintelligence of the living, of which humanity will be but an infinitesimal component.'
'The singular history of Homo sapiens sapiens would achieve consummation.'

What 'consummation' can the 'ultimate stage of evolution' be, that requires the total annihilation of 'humanity', ie., conscience, compassion, empathy, and charity?  It can only be 'trans humanism' - they believe merging their consciousness with machines integrated with cloned body parts will make the surviving 'elite' immortal.

This is as clear a glimpse of the eschaton envisioned by the Illuminati as you'll ever see.   That's their vision of the destiny of humanity.  "Consummation" has a connotation of fulfillment.  If you read this book, you'll sense that Attali had a 'warm fuzzy', possibly even an orgasm, composing this finale.

Categories: Authors and Bloggers