The Worldwide Network of us Military Bases

https://vids.theoven.lol/videoEmbed/1448/standing-army.-die-geheime-strategie-der-us-militärbasen?channelName=Anonymous

Great post filled with extremely valuable information!

“This article has focussed on the Worldwide development of US military power. The US tends to view the Earth surface as a vast territory to conquer, occupy and exploit. The fact that the US Military splits the World up into geographic command units vividly illustrates this underlying geopolitical reality. Humanity is being controlled and enslaved by this Network of US military bases.”

How can we really stop such a huge display of military force? Are pacific organisations & movements enough? All these figures are bone chilling! Not mentionning elements not in the public domaine..!!

For those who don’t believe in the global government agenda, this is an irrefutable proof to me.

The Worldwide Network of US Military Bases when being ANTI means being FOR human rights, coexistence and peace

The Worldwide control of humanity’s economic, social and political activities is under the helm of US corporate and military power. Underlying this process are various schemes of direct and indirect military intervention. These US sponsored strategies ultimately consist in a process of global subordination. Where is the Threat?
The 2000 Global Report published in 1980 had outlined “the State of the World” by focusing on so-called “level of threats” which might negatively influence or undermine US interests.
Twenty years later, US strategists, in an attempt to justify their military interventions in different parts of the World, have conceptualized the greatest fraud in US history, namely “the Global War on Terrorism” (GWOT). The latter, using a fabricated pretext constitutes a global war against all those who oppose US hegemony. A modern form of slavery, instrumented through militarization and the “free market” has unfolded.
Major elements of the conquest and world domination strategy by the US refer to:
1) the control of the world economy and its financial markets,
2) the taking over of all natural resources (primary resources and nonrenewable sources of energy). The latter constitute the cornerstone of US power through the activities of its multinational corporations.
Geopolitical Outreach: Network of Military Bases
The US has established its control over 191 governments which are members of the United Nations. The conquest, occupation and/or otherwise supervision of these various regions of the World is supported by an integrated network of military bases and installations which covers the entire Planet (Continents, Oceans and Outer Space). All this pertains to the workings of an extensive Empire, the exact dimensions of which are not always easy to ascertain.
Known and documented from information in the public domaine including Annual Reports of the US Congress, we have a fairly good understanding of the structure of US military expenditure, the network of US military bases and the shape of this US military-strategic configuration in different regions of the World.
The objective of this article is to build a summary profile of the World network of military bases, which are under the jurisdiction and/or control of the US. The spatial distribution of these military bases will be examined together with an analysis of the multibillion dollar annual cost of their activities.
In a second section of this article, Worldwide popular resistance movements directed against US military bases and their various projects will be outlined. In a further article we plan to analyze the military networks of other major nuclear superpowers including the United Kingdom, France and Russia.
II. More than 1000 US Bases and/or Military Installations
The main sources of information on these military installations (e.g. C. Johnson, the NATO Watch Committee, the International Network for the Abolition of Foreign Military Bases) reveal that the US operates and/or controls between 700 and 800 military bases Worldwide.
In this regard, Hugh d’Andrade and Bob Wing’s 2002 Map 1 entitled “U.S. Military Troops and Bases around the World, The Cost of ‘Permanent War’”, confirms the presence of US military personnel in 156 countries.
The US Military has bases in 63 countries. Brand new military bases have been built since September 11, 2001 in seven countries.
In total, there are 255,065 US military personnel deployed Worldwide.
These facilities include a total of 845,441 different buildings and equipments. The underlying land surface is of the order of 30 million acres. According to Gelman, who examined 2005 official Pentagon data, the US is thought to own a total of 737 bases in foreign lands. Adding to the bases inside U.S. Territory, the total land area occupied by US military bases domestically within the US and internationally is of the order of 2,202,735 hectares, which makes the Pentagon one of the largest landowners worldwide (Gelman, J., 2007).
Map 1. U.S. Military Troops and Bases around the World. The Cost of «Permanent War» and Some Comparative Data

Map 2. The American Military Bases Around the World (2001-2003)

Based on a selective examination of military bases in North America, Latin America, Western Europe, the Middle East, Central Asia, Indonesia, the Philippines and Japan, several of these military bases are being used for intelligence purposes. New selected sites are Spy Bases and Satellite-related Spy Bases.
The Surface of the Earth is Structured as a Wide Battlefield
These military bases and installations of various kinds are distributed according to a Command structure divided up into five spatial units and four unified Combatant Commands (Map 4). Each unit is under the Command of a General.
The Earth surface is being conceived as a wide battlefield which can be patrolled or steadfastly supervised from the Bases.

NATO Military Bases
The Atlantic Alliance (NATO) has its own Network of military bases, thirty in total. The latter are primarily located in Western Europe:
Whiteman, U.S.A., Fairford,
Lakenheath and Mildenhall in United Kingdom,
Eindhoven in Netherlands,
Brüggen, Geilenkirchen, Landsberg, Ramstein, Spangdahlem, Rhein-Main in Germany,
Istres and Avord in France.
Morón de la Frontera and Rota in Spain,
Brescia, Vicenza, Piacenza, Aviano, Istrana, Trapani, Ancora, Pratica di Mare, Amendola, Sigonella, Gioia dell Colle, Grazzanise and Brindisi in Italy,
Tirana in Albania,
Incirlik in Turkey,
Eskan Village in Soudi Arabia and
Ali al Salem in Kuwait

III. The Global Deployment of US Military Personnel
There are 6000 military bases and/ or military warehouses located in the U.S. (See Wikipedia, February 2007).
Total Military Personnel is of the order of 1,4 million of which 1,168,195 are in the U.S and US overseas territories.
Taking figures from the same source, there are 325,000 US military personnel in foreign countries:

1. – 800 in Africa,
– 97,000 in Asia (excluding the Middle East and Central Asia),
– 40,258 in South Korea,
– 40,045 in Japan,
– 491 at the Diego Garcia Base in the Indian Ocean,
– 100 in the Philippines, 196 in Singapore,
– 113 in Thailand,
– 200 in Australia,
and 16,601 Afloat.

In Europe, there are 116,000 US military personnel including 75,603 who are stationed in Germany.
In Central Asia about 1,000 are stationed at the Ganci (Manas) Air Base in Kyrgyzstan and 38 are located at Kritsanisi, in Georgia, with a mission to train Georgian soldiers.
In the Middle East (excluding the Iraq war theater) there are 6,000 US military personnel, 3,432 of whom are in Qatar and 1,496 in Bahrain.
In the Western Hemisphere, excluding the U.S. And US territories, there are 700 military personnel in Guantanamo, 413 in Honduras and 147 in Canada.
Map 3 provides information regarding military personnel on duty, based on a regional categorization (broad regions of the world). The total number of military personnel at home in the U.S. And/or in US Territories is 1,139,034. There are 1,825 in Europe 114, 660, 682 in Sub Saharian Africa, 4, 274 in the Middle East and Southern Asia, 143 in the Ex-USSR, and 89,846 in the Pacific.
IV. The Operational Cost of the Worldwide Military Network
US defense spending (excluding the costs of the Iraq war) have increased from 404 in 2001 to 626 billion dollars in 2007 according to data from the Washington based Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation. US defense spending is expected to reach 640 billion dollars in 2008.
Center for Arms control
These 2006 expenses correspond to 3.7% of the US GDP and $935.64 per capita
Figure 1. U.S. Military Expenditures since 1998

Source : Global Issues
According to Fig 1, the 396 billion dollars military budget proposed in 2003 has in fact reached 417.4 billion dollars, a 73% increase compared to 2000 (289 billion dollars). This outlay for 2003 was more than half of the total of the US discretionary budget.
Since 2003, these military expenditures have to be added to those of the Iraq war and occupation The latter reached in March 2007, according to the National Priorities Project
, a cumulative total of 413 billion dollars.
US defense budget will equal ROW combined “within 12 months
Estimates of the Defense Department budget needs, made public in 2006 in the DoD Green Book for FY 2007 are of the order of 440 billion dollars.
Military and other staff required numbered 1,332,300. But those figures do not include the money required for the “Global World on Terrorism” (GWOT). In other words, these figures largely pertain to the regular Defense budget.
A Goldstein of the Washington Post, within the framework of an article on the aspects of the National 2007 budget titled «2007 Budget Favors Defense», wrote about this topic:
“Overall, the budget for the 2007 fiscal year would further reshape the government in the way the administration has been striving to during the past half-decade: building up military capacity and defenses against terrorist threats on U.S. Soil, while restraining expenditures for many domestic areas, from education programs to train service”
2007 Budget Favors Defense
V. US Military Bases to Protect Strategic Energy Resources
In the wake of 9/11, Washington initiated its “Global War on Terrorism” (GWOT), first in Afghanistan and then in Iraq. Other countries, which were not faithfully obeying Washington’s directives including Iran, North Korea, Syria and Venezuela have been earmarked for possible US military intervention.
Washington keeps a close eye on countries opposed to US corporate control over their resources. Washington also targets countries where there are popular resistance movements directed against US interests, particularly in South America. In this context, President Bush made a quick tour to Brazil, Uruguay, Colombia, Guatemala and Mexico «to promote democracy and trade» but also with a view to ultimately curbing and restraining popular dissent to the US interests in the region. .
VOA
The same broad approach is being applied in Central Asia. According to Iraklis Tsavdaridis, Secretary of the World Peace Council (WPC):
“The establishment of U.S. Military bases should not of course be seen simply in terms of direct military ends. They are always used to promote the economic and political objectives of U.S. Capitalism. For example, U.S. Corporations and the U.S. Government have been eager for some time to build a secure corridor for US.-controlled oil and natural gas pipelines from the Caspian Sea in Central Asia through Afghanistan and Pakistan to the Arabian Sea. This region -has more than 6 percent of the world’s proven oil reserves and almost 40 percent of its gas reserves. The war in Afghanistan and the creation of U.S. Military Bases in Central Asia are viewed as a key opportunity to make such pipelines a reality.”
Stop USA
The US. Are at War in Afghanistan and Iraq. They pursue these military operations until they reach their objective which they call “VICTORY”. According to Wikipedia, American troops fighting in these countries number 190,000. The “Enduring Freedom” Operation in Iraq alone has almost 200,000 military personnel, including 26,000 from other countries participating to the US sponsored “Mission”. About 20,000 more could join other contingents in the next few months. In Afghanistan, a total of 25,000 soldiers participate to the operation (Map 6 and Map 7).
Map 6. Petroleum and International Theater of War in the Middle East and Central Asia

Map 7. American Bases Located in Central Asia

VI. Military Bases Used for the Control of Strategic Renewable Resources
US Military Bases in foreign countries, are mainly located in Western Europe: 26 of them are in Germany, 8, in Great Britain, and 8 in Italy. There are nine military installations in Japan (Wikepedia).
In the last few years, in the context of the GWOT, the US haa built 14 new bases in and around the Persian Gulf.
It is also involved in construction and/or or reinforcement of 20 bases (106 structured units as a whole) in Iraq, with costs of the order of 1.1 billion dollars in that country alone (Varea, 2007) and the use of about ten bases in Central Asia.
The US has also undertaken continued negotiations with several countries to install, buy, enlarge or rent an addional number of military bases. The latter pertain inter alia to installations in Morocco, Algeria, Mali, Ghana, Brazil and Australia (See Nicholson, B., 2007), Poland, Czech Republic (Traynor, I., 2007), Ouzbekistan, Tadjikistan, Kirghizstan, Italy (Jucca, L., 2007) and France.
Washington has signed an agreement to build a military base in Djibouti (Manfredi, E., 2007). All these initiatives are a part of an overall plan to install a series of military bases geographically located in a West-East corridor extending from Colombia in South America, to North Africa, the Near East, Central Asia and as far as the Philippines (Johnson, C., 2004). The US bases in South American are related to the control and access to the extensive natural biological , mineral and water resources resources of the Amazon Basin. (Delgado Jara, D., 2006 and Maps 9 and 10).

VII. Resistance Movements
The network of US military bases is strategic, located in prcximity of traditional strategic resources including nonrenewable sources of energy. This military presence has brought about political opposition and resistance from progressive movements and antiwar activists.
Demonstrations directed against US military presence has developed in Spain, Ecuador, Italy, Paraguay, Uzbekistan, Bulgaria and in many other countries. Moreover, other long-termer resistance movements directed against US military presence have continued in South Korea, Puerto Rico, Guam, the Philippines, Cuba, Europe, Japan and other locations.
The Worldwide resistance to US foreign military bases has grown during the last few years. We are dealing with an International Network for the Abolition of US Military Bases.
Such networks’ objective is to broadly pursue disarmament, demilitarization processes Worldwide as well as dismantle US military bases in foreign countries.
The NO BASES Network organizes educational campaigns to sensitize public opinion. It also works to rehabilitate abandoned military sites, as in the case of Western Europe.
These campaigns, until 2004, had a local and national impact.
The network is now in a position to reach people Worldwide. The network itself underscores that “much can be gained from greater and deeper linkages among local and national campaigns and movements across the globe. Local groups around the world can learn and benefit from sharing information, experiences, and strategies with each other”
“The realisation that one is not alone in the struggle against foreign bases is profoundly empowering and motivating. Globally coordinated actions and campaigns can highlight the reach and scale of the resistance to foreign military presence around the world. With the trend of rising miniaturization and resort to the use of force around the world, there is now an urgent and compelling need to establish and strengthen an international network of campaigners, organisations, and movements working with a special and strategic focus on foreign military presence and ultimately, working towards a lasting and just system of peace»
No bases!
The Afghanistan and Iraq wars have, in this regard, created a favourable momentum, which has contributed to the reinforcement of the movement to close down US military bases in foreign countries:
“At the time of an International anti-war meeting held in Jakarta in May 2003, a few weeks after the start of the Iraq invasion, a global anti-military Bases campaign has been proposed as an action to priorize among global anti-war, justice and solidarity movements» (No bases).
Since then, the campaign has acquired greater recognition. E-mail lists have been compiled nousbases@lists.riseup.net and nousbases-info@lists.riseup.net that permit the diffusion of the movement members experiences and information and discussion exchanges. That list now groups 300 people and organizations from 48 countries. A Web site permits also to adequately inform all Network members. Many rubrics provide highly valuable information on ongoing activities around the World.
In addition, the Network is more and more active and participates in different activities. At the World Social Forums it organized various conferences and colloquia. It was present at the European Social Forum held in Paris in 2003 and in London in 2004 as well as at the the America’s Social Forum in Ecuador in 2004, and at the Mediterranean Social Forum in Spain in 2005.
One of the major gatherings, which was held in Mumbai, India, in 2004, was within the framework of the World Social Forum. More than 125 participants from 34 countries defined the foundations of a coordinated global campaign.
Action priorities were identified, such as the determination of a global day of action aiming at underscoring major issues stemming from the existence of US military bases. The Network also held four discussion sessions at the Porto Alegre Social Forum in 2005. One of those pertained to the financing of the Network’s activities.
It is important to recall that the Network belongs to the Global Peace Movement. Justice and Peace organizations have become more sensitized on what was at stake regarding US military bases.
The Quito and Manta International Conference, Ecuador, March 2007
A Network World Conference for the Abolition of Foreign Military Bases was held at Quito and at Manta, Ecuador, from March 5 to 9 2007
The objective of the Conference was to underscore the political, social, environmental and economic impacts of US military bases, to make known the principles of the various Anti-Bases movements and to formally build the Network, its strategies, structure and Action Plans. The main objectives of the Conference were the following:

– Analyze the role of Foreign Military Bases and other features of military presence associated to the global dominance strategy and their impacts upon population and environment;
– Share experiences and reinforce the built solidarity resulting from the resistance battles against Foreign military Bases around the World;
– Reach a consensus on objectives mechanisms, on action plans, on coordination, on communication and on decision making of a Global Network for the abolition of all Foreign military Bases and of all other expressions of military presence; and
– Establish global action plans to fight and reinforce the resistance of local people and ensure that these actions are being coordinated at the international level.

Conclusion
This article has focussed on the Worldwide development of US military power. The US tends to view the Earth surface as a vast territory to conquer, occupy and exploit. The fact that the US Military splits the World up into geographic command units vividly illustrates this underlying geopolitical reality. Humanity is being controlled and enslaved by this Network of US military bases. .
The ongoing re-deployment of US troops and military bases has to be analyzed in a thorough manner if we wish to understand the nature of US interventionism in different regions of the World. This militarisation process is charactersied by armed aggression and warfare, as well as interventions called “cooperation agreements”. The latter reaffirmed America’s economic design design in the areas of trade and investment practices. Economic development is ensured through the miniaturization or the control of governments and organizations. Vast resources are thereby expended and wasted in order to allow such control to be effective, particuarly in regions which have a strategic potential in terms of wealth and resources and which are being used to consolidate the Empire’s structures and functions.
The setting up of the International Network for the Abolition of Foreign Military Bases turns out to be an extraordinary means to oppose the miniaturization process of the Planet. Such Network is indispensable and its growth depends on a commitment of all the People of the World. It will be extremely difficult to mobilize them, but the ties built up by the Network among its constituent resistance movements are a positive element, which is ultimately conducive to more cohesive and coordinated battle at the World level.
The Final Declaration of the Second International Conference against Foreign Military Bases which was held in Havana in November 2005 and was endorsed by delegates from 22 countries identifies most of the major issues, which confront mankind. This Declaration constitutes a major peace initative. It establishes international solidarity in the process of disarmament. .
(Conférence internationale contre les bases militaires étrangères
Déclaration finale ).

Ref: Global Research, byJules Dufour

Jules Dufour is President of the United Nations Association of Canada (UNA-C) – Saguenay-Lac-Saint-Jean branch and Research Associate at the Center for Research on Globalization (CRG). He is Emeritus Professor of Geography at the University of Quebec, Chicoutimi.
In 2007, Professor Jules Dufour became Chevalier de l’Ordre national du Québec, a distinction conferred by the Quebec government, for his contributions to World peace and human rights, his numerous scholarly writings and the work he accomplished in the context of national and international commissions on issues pertaining to regional development, human rights and the protection of the environment.
Translated from the French, first published on Global Research’s French language website: Mondialisation.ca
References
COMITÉ DE SURVEILLANCE OTAN. 2005. Las bases militares : un aspecto de la estrategia global de la OTAN. Intervencion del Comité Surveillance Otan en la Conferencia Internacional realizada en La Habana 7-11.11.2005. 9 pages.
DELGADO JARA, Diego. 2006. Bases de Manta, Plan Colombia y dominio de la Amazonia. Militarizacion de la Hegemonia de EE. UU. En América latina. 17 pages.
EQUIPO DE COMUNICACIÓN CONFERENCIA NO BASES. 2007. La gente del mundo no quiere bases militares extranjeras.
GELMAN, J. 2007. Terratenientes. Rebelion. 26 de Febrero de 2007, Rebelion. Terratenientes
Ghana to host US Military Base? February 26, 2006.
JOHNSON, C., America’s Empire of Bases. January 2004.
JOHNSON, C. America’s Empire of Bases. Janvier 2004 .
JOHNSON, C. 2005. The Sorrows of Empire. Militarism, Secrecy, and the End of the Republic. Henry Holt, April 2005, Paperback. 389 pages.
JOHNSON, C., 2007.. 737 U.S. Military Bases = Global Empire. February 19, 2007
JUCCA, L., 2007. Italians protest over U.S. Base expansion. Sat Feb 17, 2007.
MANFREDI, E. 2007. Djibouti : Hôtel Corne d’Afrique, grande base américaine. Le GRAND SOIR.info. Édition du 23 mars 2007.
NEW INTERNATIONALIST. 2004. The Bases of Resistance, December 2004, Issue 374.
NICHOLSON, B. 2007. Secret New Us Spy base to Get Green Light. February 15, 2 007.
TRAYNOR, I. 2007. US EXPANDS, Builds New Military Bases in Europe. The Guardian, anuary 22, 2007.
TSAVDARIDIS, I., 2005. Military Bases around the world and in Europe – the role of the USA and NATO. Novembre 2005. Stop USA / STOP United States of Agression.
VAREA, C., Las bases Militares de EEUU en Iraq. 4 mai 2006. Nodo50.
Web Sites
An Internet Guide to United States Military Bases Around the World :
American Military Bases Around the World
APPEL A UN RASSEMBLEMENT INTERNATIONAL en Mars 2007, Équateur, Pour l’abolition de toutes les bases militaires
Bases y Ejercicios Militares de EE.UU. El Comando Sur.
BUILDING A GLOBAL ANTI-MILITARY BASES MOVEMENT
Campana. Un mundo sin bases militares . Asemblea de Organizaciones y Movimientos contra la guerra, la OTAN y el Neoliberalismo (Madrid), Nodo50.
Challenges to the US Empire, Challenges to the US Empire – Empire? – Global Policy Forum.
Washington veut installer une base militaire en Algérie. Le Quotidien d’Oran, 20 juillet 2003.
Empire? Empire? – Global Policy Forum
International Conference against Foreign Military Bases. Final Declaration.
[Fsmed-general] for all that are against foreign military bases:
[Fsmed-general] for all that are against foreign military bases:en/sp/fr
FUENTES DE AGUA EN AMÉRICA LATINA :
Visiones Alternativas – Inicio
Abdulhafeth Khrisat, Impérialisme américain et politique militaire, , Université Mu’tah
Interview with Chalmers Johnson, Part 1. An Empire of More Than 725 Military Bases.
Liste des bases militaires américaines dans le monde.
Major Military Bases World-Wide,
Major Military Bases World-Wide
Military Bases Around The World, Bases Around the World
Military Bases around the world and in Europe – the role of the USA and NATO , Iraklis Tsavdaridis, Secretary of the World Peace Council (WPC) 8th November 2005, From the Greek Committee for International Detente and Peace (EEDYE), Presented on November 8, 2005 at the International Conference on Foreign Military Bases in Havana/Cuba organized by MOVPAZ :
Military Bases around the world and in Europe – the role of the USA and NATO
Military of the United States : Military of the United States – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
MOVIMIENTOS SOCIALES DE RESISTENCIA EN AMÉRICA LATINA
No a la instalacion de una base de la OTAN en Zaragoza :
No a la instalación de una base de la OTAN en Zaragoza | Ecologistas en Acción de Zaragoza
OTAN – Le grand jeu des bases militaires en terre européenne :
OTAN – Le grand jeu des bases militaires en terre européenne
Protestas contra bases militares de EEUU en Espana :
Protestas contra bases militares de EEUU en Espaa
RIQUEZA DE LA BIODIVERSIDAD EN AMÉRICA LATINA
US Military Troops and Bases Around the World :
US Military Troops and Bases Around the World- US Empire and Unilateralism – Global Policy Forum
U.S. Military Troops and Bases Around the World /united for peace & justice:
United for Peace & Justice:U.S. Military Troops and Bases Around the World
US Military Expansion and Intervention :
US Military Expansion and Intervention – Empire? – Global Policy Forum
YACIMIENTOS PETROLEROS EN AMÉRICA LATINA :
Visiones Alternativas – Inicio

LinkBacks (?)

This article was scrubbed from the regular web. I found it here: https://web.archive.org/web/20160329033332/http://www.assatashakur.org/forum/breaking-down-understanding-our-enemies/33113-worldwide-network-us-military-bases.html

Zitate aus dem Talmud – Das “Heilige Buch” der Juden

Quelle

Das Herz der jüdischen Eigenart und das Wesen des jüdischen Volkes liegt in einem Werk verborgen, das als Talmud bekannt ist.

Der Talmud ist der Kern des Judentums.

Verständnis des Talmud ist Verständnis des Judentums…”

Was liegt also näher, als den Talmud zu Rate zu ziehen, um das Geheimnis der jüdischen Eigenart zu ergründen? Doch bereits ein flüchtiger Blick in dieses Heilige Buch der Juden läßt erahnen, warum bereits Martin Luther den Talmud ein “Buch voller Abgötterei, Fluch und Lästerung” nannte.

~~~~~~ Zitate aus dem Talmud ~~~~~~

“Die Güter der Nichtjuden gleichen der Wüste, sie sind ein herrenloses Gut und jeder, der zuerst von ihnen Besitz nimmt, erwirbt sie.” (Baba bathra 54b)

“Dem Juden ist es erlaubt zum Nichtjuden zu gehen, diesen zu täuschen und mit ihm Handel zu treiben, ihn zu hintergehen und sein Geld zu nehmen. Denn das Vermögen des Nichtjuden ist als Gemeineigentum anzusehen und es gehört dem ersten [Juden], der es sich sichern kann.” (Baba kamma 113a)

“Wenn sich ein Nichtjude mit der Thora befaßt, so verdient er den Tod.” (Synhedrin 59a)

“Die Wohnung eines Nichtjuden wird nicht als Wohnung betrachtet.” (Erubin 75a)

“Den besten der Gojim sollst du töten.” (Kiduschin 40b)

“Weshalb sind die Nichtjuden schmutzig? Weil sie am Berge Sinai nicht gestanden haben.

Als nämlich die Schlange der Chava beiwohnte, impfte sie ihr einen Schmutz ein; bei den Jisraéliten, die am Berge Sinai gestanden haben, verlor sich der Schmutz, bei den Nichtjuden aber verlor er sich nicht.” (Aboda zara 22b)

Sobald der Messias kommt, sind alle [Nichtjuden] Sklaven der Jisraéliten. (Erubin 43b)

“Wer die Scharen der Gojim sieht, spreche: Beschämt ist eure Mutter, zu Schande die euch geboren hat.” (Berakhoth 58a)

“Wer die Gräber der Gojim sieht, spreche: Beschämt ist eure Mutter, zu Schande die euch geboren hat.” (Berakhoth, 58b)

“Eher gib einem Jisraéliten umsonst als einem Nichtjuden auf Wucher.” (Baba mezia 71a)

“Ihr aber seid meine Schafe, die Schafe meiner Weide, Menschen seid ihr, ihr heißt Menschen, nicht aber heißen die weltlichen Völker Menschen, sondern Vieh.” (Baba mezia 114b)

“Der Samen der Nichtjuden ist Viehsamen.” (Jabmuth 94b)

“Der Beischlaf der Nichtjuden ist wie Beischlaf der Viecher.” (Aboda zara 22b)

“Ein Mädchen von drei Jahren und einem Tag ist zum Beischlaf geeignet.” (Jabmuth 57b, Jabmuth 60 a, Aboda zara 37a)

“Der Notzüchter braucht kein Schmerzensgeld zu zahlen, weil das Mädchen diese Schmerzen später unter ihrem Ehemann gehabt haben würde.” (Baba kamma 59a)

“Wenn jemand wünscht, daß seine Gelübde des ganzen Jahres nichtig seien, so spreche er am Beginn des Jahres: jedes Gelübde das ich tun werde, ist nichtig; nur muß er beim Geloben daran denken.” (Nedarim 23b)

~~~~~~ Ende der Zitate aus dem Talmud ~~~~~~
<h3>Gefälschte Zitate?</h3>Die meisten Menschen reagieren auf diese Talmud-Zitate mit einer Mischung aus Nicht-Glauben-Wollen und Entsetzen. Nachfolgend werden die häufigsten Entgegnungen beantwortet:

1.) Diese Zitate sind gefälscht!

Antwort: Alle zitierten Passagen finden Sie hier: Der Babylonische Talmud , erste vollständige und zensurfreie Übersetzung ins Deutsche von Lazarus Goldschmidt, zwölf Bände, Erstpublikation im Jüdischen Verlag Berlin 1930-36; Neuauflage im Jüdischen Verlag Frankfurt 2002, (ISBN 3-633-54200-0). Schlagen Sie nach, Sie werden staunen!

2.) Diese Zitate sind aus dem Zusammenhang gerissen!

Antwort: In >welchem< Zusammenhang wären die hier zitierten Aussagen mit heutigen Vorstellungen von Ethik, Moral und Anstand vereinbar? Wer bemängelt, es würden nur einige wenige Stellen aus einem ca. 10.000 Seiten umfassenden Werk zitiert, der mache sich die Mühe, das Original etwas genauer zu studieren.

Beispielsweise wird alleine im Traktat Aboda zara über 500 mal auf Nichtjuden Bezug genommen, und in keinem einzigen Fall handelt es sich um freundliche Formulierungen. Auch im übrigen Talmud findet man keine einzige Stelle, an der Juden zu ethischem Verhalten gegenüber Nichtjuden ermahnt werden. Dies ist auch nicht weiter verwunderlich, denn nach talmudischer Auslegung der Thora ( Altes Testament ) gelten die Zehn Gebote nur für Juden untereinander, nicht aber für das Verhalten von Juden gegenüber Nichtjuden.

3.) Diese Zitatensammlung ist antisemitisch!

Antwort: Ist es nicht vielmehr so, daß der Judaismus geprägt ist von Haß und Intoleranz gegenüber Nichtjuden?

Vor diesem Hintergrund ist die Reaktion auf den Judaismus per Definition antisemitisch, präziser ausgedrückt anti-judaistisch.

Dies ist die zwingende Folge des Gesetzes von Ursache und Wirkung, meint der jüdische Gelehrte Bernard Lazar in seinem Buch "Antisemitismus". Wie sonnst ist es zu erklären, daß Juden zu allen Zeiten und bei allen Völkern auf Ablehnung stießen?

4.) Ja, aber die Bibel ist um keinen Deut besser!

Antwort: Dieser Einwand ist durchaus berechtigt, sofern das Alte Testament (von den Juden Thora genannt) gemeint ist, schließlich ist der Talmud nichts weiter als die rabbinische Interpretation der Thora .

Im Alten Testament wird an vielen Stellen davon berichtet, daß die Israeliten andere Völker ausgerottet ("den Bann an ihnen vollstreckt") haben, um ihrem zornigen, strafenden Gott Jahwe ein Opfer zu bringen (siehe u.a.: 4.Mos 21,3; 5.Mos 3,6; 13,16; Jos 6,21; 8,26; 11,11-21; Ri 1,17; 21,11; 2.Sam 12,31; 1.Chr 4,41; Jes 34,2-5 Jer 25,9; 50,21; 50,26).

Hingegen ist die im Neuen Testament verkündigte Lehre der Liebe, Barmherzigkeit und Vergebung eine diametrale Abkehr vom sprichwörtlichen alttestamentarischen Haß und vom Auserwähltheitsgedanken der Hebräer.

Nichts macht den Gegensatz zwischen dem Alten Testament und dem Neuen Testament deutlicher als die Rede Jesu Christi an die Juden:

"Ihr habt den Teufel zum Vater, und nach eures Vaters Gelüste wollt ihr tun. Der ist ein Mörder von Anfang an und steht nicht in der Wahrheit; denn die Wahrheit ist nicht in ihm. Wenn er Lügen redet, so spricht er aus dem Eigenen; denn er ist ein Lügner und der Vater der Lüge." (Joh 8,44)

5.) Die über tausend Jahre alten Aussagen des Talmud spielen für Juden von heute nicht die geringste Rolle!

Antwort: Dem steht entgegen, daß Rabbiner heute noch die zentrale Bedeutung des Talmud für das Judentum bei jeder sich bietenden Gelegenheit hervorheben. Auch folgende Äußerungen aus jüngerer Zeit legen den Schluß nahe, daß die talmudische Ideologie heute nach wie vor die spirituelle Heimat der Juden ist:

"Die Seelen der Gojim [Nichtjuden] sind von ganz anderer, minderer Art. Alle Juden sind von Natur gut, alle Gojim von Natur böse. Die Juden sind die Krone der Schöpfung, die Gojim ihr Abschaum." (Rabbi Shneur Zalman, einer der einflußreichsten Talmudgelehrten unserer Zeit, FAZ, 11. 3. 1994)

"Araber sind Tiere, keine Menschen. Ihr Fleisch ist das Fleisch von Eseln, deshalb sollten sie wie Tiere behandelt werden." (Sharon Kalimi, SZ, 3. 3. 1999)

"Im Lande Israel hat kein Araber das Recht zu existieren. Ganz klar, Araber stehen auf der Kulturleiter der Welt weit unten. Goldsteins Tat [29 Nichtjuden zu ermorden] stellt die Erfüllung einiger Gebote des jüdischen Gesetzes dar. Dazu gehört auch, Rache an Nichtjuden zu üben." (Rabbi Jizchak Ginsburg, Ha'aretz vom 5. 11. 2003)

"Wenn ein Jude eine Leber benötigt, erlaubt die Thora wahrscheinlich, einem gerade vorbeikommenden Nichtjuden die Leber gewaltsam zu entnehmen. Jüdisches Leben ist unendlich viel heiliger und einmaliger als nichtjüdisches." (Rabbi Jizchak Ginsburg, zitiert in: Israel Shahak, "Jewish Fundamentalism")

"Die Palästinenser sind Tiere auf zwei Beinen!" (Menahim Begin, ehem. israelische Premierminister, New Statesman , 25. 6. 1982)

"Wir, das jüdische Volk, kontrollieren Amerika, und die Amerikaner wissen das." (Ariel Sharon, israelischer Premierminister im Radiosender Kol Yisrael)

"Wir werden die Palästinenser vernichten wie die Heuschrecken und ihre Köpfe gegen die Wand schlagen" (Friedensnobelpreisträger (!) Yitzak Rabin, ehemaliger israelischer Premierminister, New York Times , 1.4.1988)

"Die jüdische Lehre ist rassistisch, und das ist gut so." (Rechavam Zeevi, ehem. israelischer Tourismusminister, SZ, 27. 10. 2001). Derselbe im israelischen Armeeradio: ''Wir sollten die Palästinenser auf gleiche Weise entfernen wie man Läuse los wird."

"Warum sind die Juden im Geschäftsleben überall auf der Welt unglaublich erfolgreich, außer in Israel?

In Israel gibt es nicht genug Gojim, will heißen Trottel, die darauf warten, betrogen zu werden.

Wenn alle um den Ball stehen, kann keiner ein Tor schießen." (Chaim Bermant, israelischer Schriftsteller)

"Suchen wir das Geheimnis des Juden nicht in seiner Religion, sondern suchen wir das Geheimnis der Religion [des Judaismus] im wirklichen Juden. Welches ist der weltliche Grund des Judentums? Das praktische Bedürfnis, der Eigennutz. Welches ist der weltliche Kultus des Juden? Der Schacher. Welches ist sein weltlicher Gott? Das Geld […] Das Geld ist der eifrige Gott Israels, neben dem kein anderer Gott bestehen darf. Der Gott der Juden ist der Weltgott geworden." (Karl Marx, Zur Judenfrage)

Soweit einige Zitate. Auch folgende Verhaltensweisen scheinen eher vom talmudischen Geist geprägt zu sein als von allgemein akzeptierten Ideen von Toleranz und Humanismus:
<h3>Terror- und Apartheidsregime Israel:</h3>Diejenigen, die sich heute Juden nennen, (also überwiegend Abkömmlinge des zentralasiatischen Volkes der Khasaren) rechtfertigen die brutale Vertreibung der Palästinenser aus ihrer angestammten Heimat mit dem scheinheiligen Argument, ihr Gott Jahwe habe das "Heilige Land" ausschließlich ihnen geschenkt. Im Staat, der sich Israel (zu deutsch: "Gottesstreiter") nennt, sind, ganz nach Manier der Nürnberger Rassengesetze von 1935, Eheschließungen zwischen Juden und Nichtjuden verboten.

Israel schickt nahezu täglich Panzer und Bulldozer in palästinensische Flüchtlingslager, um Häuser, Straßen und landwirtschaftliche Flächen zu zerstören (vgl. Erubin 75a). Außergerichtliche Exekutionen (sprich: die Ermordung) von Palästinensern (vgl. Kidduschin 40b) sind ebenso an der Tagesordnung wie die permanente Bedrohung und Demütigung der palästinensischen Bevölkerung durch das israelische Militär (vgl. Baba mezia 114b).

UN-Sonderberichterstatter John Dugard nennt Israel ein Apartheidsregime, das schlimmer sei als das seinerzeit international boykottierte Südafrika. Wo bleibt der Aufschrei im Fall Israel?
<h3>Beschneidung:</h3>Die genitale Verstümmelung männlicher Neugeborener ist aus medizinischer Sicht völlig unnötig, nicht selten sogar schädlich. Das häufig bemühte Argument der Hygiene ist in der heutigen Zeit geradezu absurd. Dennoch lassen so gut wie alle Juden ihre Söhne am achten Tag nach der Geburt im Rahmen einer religiösen Zeremonie beschneiden.

Mit anderen Worten: Schutzlosen Neugeborenen wird ohne triftigen Grund und ohne deren Zustimmung das wohl sensitivste Stückchen Haut weggeschnitten. Viele Ärzte plädieren dafür, die Beschneidung von Jungen genauso zu ächten wie die von Mädchen. <a href="https://archive.is/o/qLuDa/https://www.mosaisk.com/video/Circumcision_Omskaering_Video.mpeg">Beschneidung Video (9 MB- rechts klicken und runter laden)</a>
<h3>Die Kosher Nostra:</h3>Jeder hat schon mal den Begriff "koscher" gehört und weiß in etwa, was damit gemeint ist. Doch kaum jemand hat von der Kosher Nostra gehört. Dies ist ein weltweit tätiges Syndikat, das Lebensmittelkonzernen für teures Geld völlig sinnlose Koscher-Zertifizierungen aufnötigt. Firmen, die nicht mitmachen, werden unterschwellig mit Boykott oder negativer Presse bedroht.

Das Ergebnis dieser skrupellosen Taktik: In den USA ist gut wie jeder in Supermärkten erhältliche Artikel "koscher" zertifiziert, ganz egal, ob es sich um Limonade, Kekse, Waschmittel oder Plastiktüten handelt.

Dies ist im wahrsten Sinne des Wortes ein Milliardenschwindel. (<a href="https://archive.is/o/qLuDa/www.aztlan.net/koshernostra.htm&quot; target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Kosher Nostra Scam</a>).

Auch in Europa zahlen Verbraucher, ohne es überhaupt zu ahnen, eine Koscher-Steuer. Beispiele bekannter Firmen, deren Produkte "koscher-zertifiziert" sind: Coca Cola, Nestlé, Kellogg´s, Del Monte, Hilcona, Thomy, Dr. Oetker, Henkel, Underberg, Milford, Milupa, Beck´s Bier, Ulzena, Degussa, BASF, Bayer AG (letztere drei für chemische Grundstoffe und Lebensmittelzusätze).

Ist das nicht ironisch, Herr Bundespräsident? Erst vor kurzem gab es einen riesigen Skandal, weil das Holocaust-Mahnmal, mit Produkten von Degussa behandelt werden sollte? Den jüdischen Gruppen, die sich darüber öffentlich und lautstark aufregten war wohl nicht bekannt, daß die Produkte der Degussa koscher zertifizeirt sind.
<h3>Schächten:</h3>Fleisch ist nur "koscher", wenn das Schlachttier auf religiös-rituelle Weise getötet wird. Hierbei werden dem unbetäubten Tier gleichzeitig Luftröhre, Speiseröhre und Halsschlagader durchtrennt. Der Todeskampf dauert meist über zehn Minuten.

Diese völlig unnötige Grausamkeit gegenüber Tieren ist in Deutschland gesetzlich untersagt. Juden haben mit der etwas weit hergeholten Behauptung, das Schächten sei durch die Religionsfreiheit geschützt, eine Ausnahmeregelung erstritten, die es ihnen gestattet, diese archaische Tierquälerei fortzuführen.<a href="https://archive.is/o/qLuDa/https://www.mosaisk.com/artikler/Joedisk-Kosher-Rituel-Slagtning-Schaechtning.php&quot; target="_blank" rel="noopener"> Schächten Video</a>
<h3>Eruv:</h3>Jede größere Stadt in der Juden leben, hat einen Eruv. Dies ist ein durch eine symbolische Schnur eingegrenztes Gebiet, in welchem es frommen Juden gestattet ist, auch am Sabbat (Samstag) leichte Arbeiten zu verrichten wie z.B. einen Schlüssel tragen, Licht einschalten oder einen Fahrstuhlknopf betätigen.

Man mag dies für einen längst überkommenen religiösen Hokus-Pokus halten, aber die in London ansässigen Juden haben erst kürzlich gegen den Widerstand der nichtjüdischen Bevölkerung einen neuen Eruv ausgewiesen.

Sowohl das Europäische Parlament in Straßburg als auch das Weiße Haus in Washington befinden sich (rein zufällig?) in einem als Eruv gekennzeichneten Gebiet.

Herr Bundespräsident, gerne würden wir erfahren, ob das Berliner Regierungsviertel sich ebenfalls, rein zufällig natürlich, innerhalb eines Eruvs befindet. Würden sie die Öffentlichkeit darüber informieren? Sie wollen doch nicht, daß der Eindruck aufkommt, in der BRD wird die Trennung von Staat und Religion nicht so genau genommen, sofern der Judaismus betroffen ist.
<h3>Auf's Kreuz spucken:</h3>Für fromme Juden ist das Bespucken von Nichtjuden und deren religiösen Symbolen eine gottgefällige Tat.

In Israel hat der Haß auf das christliche Kreuz geradezu paranoide Züge angenommen: In vielen Schulbüchern wurde dort nämlich das international gebräuchliche arithmetische Zeichen für Addition "+" durch ein auf den Kopf gestelltes "T" ersetzt (Israel Shahak, "Spitting on the Cross").
<h3>Kol Nidre:</h3>Am höchsten jüdischen Feiertag (Jom Kippur) wird das Gebet "Kol Nidre" gesungen.

Damit erklären Juden alle Gelöbnisse, die sie im kommenden Jahr ablegen werden, im voraus für null und nichtig (vgl. Nedarim 23b).

<strong><em>~~~~~~ Sonstiges ~~~~~~

Gerichtsurteil in der Schweitz – Talmud Zitate nicht gefälscht

Die Neue Luzerner Zeitung muss die Richtigstellung veröffentlichen, dass die Zitate aus dem Talmud von Tierschützer Erwin Kessler NICHT GEFÄLSCHT sind. (Hier gibt noch mehr lächerliche und mörderische Talmud Zitate!) Lesen

The Illuminati Depopulation Agenda

(Excerpted from Chapter 13: USS Persian Gulf: Big Oil & Their Bankers in the Persian Gulf…)

While the global elite construct underground bunkers, eat organic and hoard seeds in Arctic vaults; the global poor are being slowly starved thanks to high commodity prices and poisoned with genetically modified (GMO) food. Austerity measures aimed largely at the poor are being imposed on all the nations of the world. Weather events grow more deadly and brushfire wars more frequent. An AK-47 can be obtained for $49 in the markets of West Africa. The depopulation campaign of the inbredIlluminati bankers is accelerating.

In 1957 President Dwight Eisenhower, who later warned of a “military-industrial complex”, commissioned a panel of scientists to study the issue of overpopulation.  The scientists put forth Alternatives I, II and III, advocating both the release of deadly viruses and perpetual warfare as means to decrease world population.

The first supposition dovetailed nicely with the pharmaceutical interests of the Rockefellers.  According to Nexus magazine, the Rockefellers own one-half of the US pharmaceutical industry, which would reap billions developing medicines to “battle” the deadly viruses about to be released.

In 1969 the Senate Church Committee discovered that the US Defense Department (DOD) had requested a budget of tens of millions of taxpayer dollars for a program to speed development of new viruses which target and destroy the human immune system.  DOD officials testified before Congress that they planned to produce, “a synthetic biological agent, an agent that does not naturally exist and for which no natural immunity could be acquired…Most important is that it might be refractory to the immunological and therapeutic processes upon which we depend to maintain our relative freedom from infectious disease.”  House Bill 5090 authorized the funds and MK-NAOMI was carried out at Fort Detrick, Maryland.

Out of this research came the AIDS virus which was targeted at “undesirable elements” of the population. The first AIDS viruses were administered through a massive smallpox vaccine campaign in central and southern Africa by the World Health Organization in 1977.  A year later ads appeared in major US newspapers soliciting “promiscuous gay male volunteers” to take part in a Hepatitis B vaccine study. [1]

The program targeted male homosexuals age 20-40 in New York City, Los Angeles, Chicago, St. Louis and San Francisco. It was administered by the US Centers for Disease Control which, under its earlier incarnation as the US Public Health Department in Atlanta, oversaw the Tuskegee syphilis experiments on African American males. [2]

San Francisco has been a target of numerous CIA experiments, due to its high population of left-leaning and gay citizens, which the Illuminati views as “undesirables”.  According to Dr. Eva Snead, San Francisco has one of the highest cancer rates in the country.  For years Malathion- first developed by the Nazis- was sprayed over the city by helicopters from the CIA’s Evergreen Air, whose Arizona base is used, according to author William Cooper, as CIA transshipment point for Columbian cocaine.  The mysterious Legionnaire’s Disease occurs often in San Francisco and the CIA’s MK-ULTRA mind control bad acid program was based there.

The intellectual force behind the introduction of AIDS was the Bilderberger Group, which became fixated on population control after WWII. Author Cooper says the Policy Committee of the Bilderbergers gave orders to DOD to introduce the AIDS virus.  The Bilderbergers are close to the Club of Rome, which was founded on a Rockefeller estate near Bellagio, Italy and is backed by the same European Black Nobility who frequent Bilderberger meetings.  A 1968 study by the Club of Rome advocated lowering the birth rate and increasing the death rate.  Club founder Dr. Aurelio Peccei made a top-secret recommendation to introduce a microbe that would attack the auto-immune system, then develop a vaccine as a prophylactic for the global elite. [3]

One month after the 1968 Club of Rome meeting Paul Ehrlich published The Population Bomb. The book hints at a draconian depopulation plan in the works.  On page seventeen Ehrlich writes, “The problem could have been avoided by population control…so that a ‘death rate solution’ did not have to occur.”  A year later MK-NAOMI was born.  Peccei himself authored the Club of Rome’s much-touted Global 2000 report, which President Jimmy Carter pushed on his BCCI shakedown cruise of Africa.  Peccei wrote in the report, “Man is now vested with unprecedented, tremendous responsibilities and thrown into the role of moderator of life on the planet- including his own”.

The Bilderbergers were behind the Haig-Kissinger Depopulation Policy, a driving force at the State Department and administered by the National Security Council.  Pressure is applied to Third World countries to reduce their populations.  Those that do not comply see their US aid withheld or are subject to Pink Plan low-intensity war that targets civilians, especially women of child-bearing age.  In Africa famine and brush-fire wars are encouraged.  AK-47 rifles can be bought at West African markets for under $50.  The same is true in the markets of Peshawar, Pakistan.  In 1975, a year after attending a Club of Rome conference on the topic, Secretary of State Kissinger founded the Office of Population Affairs (OPA).

Latin American OPA case officer Thomas Ferguson spilled the beans on OPA’s agenda when he stated, “There is a single theme behind all our work; we must reduce population levels.  Either they do it our way, through nice clean methods or they will get the kind of mess that we have in El Salvador, or in Iran, or in Beirut…Once population is out of control it requires authoritarian government, even fascism, to reduce it…The professionals aren’t interested in reducing population for humanitarian reasons…Civil wars are somewhat drawn-out ways to reduce population.  The quickest way to reduce population is through famine like in Africa.  We go into a country and say, here is your goddamn development plan.  Throw it out the window.  Start looking at your population…if you don’t …then you’ll have an El Salvador or an Iran, or worse, a Cambodia”. [4]

Ferguson said of El Salvador, “To accomplish what the State Department deems adequate population control, the civil war (run by CIA) would have to be greatly expanded.  You have to pull all the males into fighting and kill significant numbers of fertile, child-bearing age females.  You are killing a small number of males and not enough fertile females to do the job…If the war went on 30-40 years, you might accomplish something.  Unfortunately, we don’t have too many instances of this to study”.

Report from Iron Mountain

In 1961 Kennedy Administration officials McGeorge Bundy, Robert McNamara and Dean Rusk, all CFR and Bilderberger members, led a study group which looked into “the problem of peace”.  The group met at Iron Mountain, a huge underground corporate nuclear shelter near Hudson, New York, where CFR think tank The Hudson Institute is located.  The bunker contains redundant offices in case of nuclear attack for Exxon Mobil, Royal Dutch/Shell and JP Morgan Chase. [5]  A copy of the group discussions, known as Report from Iron Mountain, was leaked by a participant and published in 1967 by Dial Press.

The report’s authors saw war as necessary and desirable stating “War itself is the basic social system, within which other secondary modes of social organization conflict or conspire. (War is) the principal organizing force…the essential economic stabilizer of modern societies.”  The group worried that through “ambiguous leadership” the “ruling administrative class” might lose its ability to “rationalize a desired war”, leading to the “actual disestablishment of military institutions”.

The report goes on to say, “…the war system cannot responsibly be allowed to disappear until…we know exactly what we plan to put in its place…The possibility of war provides the sense of external necessity without which no government can long remain in power…The basic authority of a modern state over its people resides in its war powers. War has served as the last great safeguard against the elimination of necessary classes.”

Historian Howard Zinn described this conundrum when he wrote, “American capitalism needed international rivalry- and periodic war- to create an artificial community of interest between rich and poor, supplanting the genuine community of interest among the poor that showed itself in sporadic movements”.

The Iron Mountain gang was not the first to discover the virtues of war.  In 1909 the trustees of the Andrew Carnegie Foundation for International Peace met to discuss pre-WWI American life.  Many of the participants were members of Skull & Bones.  They concluded, “There are no known means more efficient than war, assuming the objective is altering the life of an entire people…How do we involve the United States in a war?”

The Report from Iron Mountain goes on to propose a proper role for those of the lower classes, crediting military institutions with providing “antisocial elements with an acceptable role in the social structure.  The younger and more dangerous of these hostile social groupings have been kept under control by the Selective Service System…A possible surrogate for the control of potential enemies of society is the reintroduction, in some form consistent with modern technology and political process, of slavery…The development of a sophisticated form of slavery may be an absolute prerequisite for social control in a world at peace.”

The Iron Mountain goons, though thrilled by the idea of slavery, listed as other socioeconomic substitutions for war: a comprehensive social welfare program, a giant open-ended space program aimed at unreachable targets, a permanent arms inspection regime, an omnipresent global police and peacekeeping force, massive global environmental pollution which would require a large labor pool to clean up, socially-oriented blood sports and a comprehensive eugenics program. [6]

The Iraqi genocide fulfilled the dreams of the Club of Rome Zero Population Growth maniacs, while also providing a testing ground for two of the war substitutes proposed by the Iron Mountain fascists: an arms inspection regime and UN peacekeepers.  Both concepts gained traction in the international community thanks to the Gulf War.

Let the Iraqi Genocide Begin

Estimates of Iraqi casualties during the Gulf War are sobering.  Some organizations like Greenpeace put the death toll at near one million people.  It was a war in which the media was denied access on a scale never before seen, so casualty figures vary greatly.  According to Tony Murphy, a researcher at the International War Crimes Tribunal, the US attack on Iraq killed 125,000 civilians, while destroying 676 schools, 38 hospitals, 8 major hydroelectric dams, 11 power plants, 119 power substations and half the country’s telephone lines.  The attacks occurred mostly at night when people were most vulnerable.

In the months following the war the death rate of Iraqi children under five tripled.  Thirty-eight percent of these deaths were caused by diarrhea. [7]  Victor Filatov, a Russian journalist reporting for Sovetskaya Rossiya from post-war Baghdad wrote, “What further bloodshed do these barbarians of the 20th century need?  I thought the Americans had changed since Vietnam…but no, they never change.  They remain true to themselves.”

According to former US Attorney General Ramsey Clark, the US was found guilty of nineteen war crimes against Iraq before the International War Crimes Tribunal.  The US dropped 88,000 tons of bombs on Iraq during the Gulf War and has rained down countless more bombs since.  Many bombs were tipped with armor piercing depleted uranium (DU) warheads, which may account for chronic Iraqi health problems.  Dr. Siegwart-Horst Gunther, a German physician who came to Iraq to help its people, became gravely ill when he handled just one cigar-sized fragment from a DU warhead.  Dr. Gunther measured the tiny object’s radioactivity to be 11 microSv per hour, whereas an acceptable exposure is no more than 300 microSv per year. [8]  Three hundred tons of DU ammunition was deployed during the war.

Many believe DU is responsible for Gulf War Syndrome, which has killed and permanently injured many US soldiers who fought in the Persian Gulf theater.  Since 2000, nearly 11,000 US Gulf War veterans have died from Gulf War Syndrome, while the Pentagon continues to cover up this travesty.

Satanism & Psychotronic Warfare

The US also tested numerous top-secret high-tech weapons systems in the Gulf theatre, while utilizing some old low-frequency favorites.  When Iraqi ground forces surrendered, many of them were in a state of delirium and lethargy that could have been induced by extremely low-frequency radio waves, which the US used as a weapon as early as the Vietnam conflict.

Yale University and CIA psychiatrist Dr. Jose Delgado studied mind control for the Company during the 1950’s as part of the MK-ULTRA program.  Delgado determined, “Physical control of many brain functions is a demonstrated fact…it is even possible to create and follow intentions…By electronic stimulation of specific cerebral structures, movements can be induced by radio command…by remote control.”

According to a military document written by Colonel Paul Valley and Major Michael Aquino titled From PSYOP to Mindwar: The Psychology of Victory, the US Army used an operational weapons system “to map the minds of neutral and enemy individuals and then to change them in accordance with US national interests”.  The technique was used to secure the surrender of 29,276 armed Viet Cong and North Vietnamese Army soldiers in 1967 and 1968.  The US Navy was also heavily involved in “psychotronic” research. [9]  Many US soldiers who served near the DMZ that divided North and South Vietnam claimed to see UFOs on a regular basis.  The Pentagon Papers revealed that an electronic barrier was placed along the DMZ by the secretive JASON Society.

Major Michael Aquino was an Army psyops specialist in Vietnam, where his unit specialized in drug-inducement, brainwashing, virus injection, brain implants, hypnosis, and use of electromagnetic fields and extremely low-frequency radio waves.  After Vietnam, Aquino moved to San Francisco and founded the Temple of Set.  Set is the ancient Egyptian name for Lucifer.  Aquino was now a senior US Military Intelligence official. [10]  He’d been given a Top Secret security clearance on June, 9, 1981.  Less than a month later an Army intelligence memo revealed that Aquino’s Temple of Set was an off-shoot of Anton La Vey’s Church of Satan, also headquartered in San Francisco. Two other Set members were Willie Browning and Dennis Mann.  Both were Army Intelligence officers.

The Temple of Set was obsessed with military matters and political fascism. It was especially preoccupied with the Nazi Order of the Trapezoid.  Aquino’s “official” job was history professor at Golden Gate College.  The Temple recruited the same Hells Angels who Billy Mellon Hitchcock had used to dole out his bad CIA acid.  Its members frequented prostitutes where they engaged in all manner of sadomasochistic activities. [11]  Director of Army Counter-Intelligence Donald Press revealed that Dennis Mann was assigned to the 306 PSYOPS Battalion and that Aquino was assigned to a top secret program known as Presidio.

Presidio was also the name of a spooky US Army base in what is now the Golden Gate National Recreation Area, which Mikhail Gorbachev reportedly frequented as the Soviet Union was falling apart.  Was Aquino part of an operation to “map the mind” of the Soviet Union’s last leader and induce him into proposing both glasnost and perestroika, the two free market policies that ultimately led to the Soviet Union’s demise?  Remember the curious mark which suddenly appeared on Gorbachev’s forehead?  Was he implanted with some sort of microchip mind-control device to make him think “in accordance with US national interests”?

Such Orwellian technology is marketed on a regular basis throughout the world.  International Healthline Corporation and others sell microchip implants in the US, Russia and Europe.  The Humane Society has adopted a policy of micro-chipping all stray pets. The State of Hawaii requires that all pets be micro-chipped.  Six thousand people in Sweden have accepted a microchip in their hand, which they use for all purchases. Trials are also underway in Japan.  In July 2002, National Public Radio reported a similar trial beginning in Seattle.  Later in 2002, after a rash of suspicious abductions of young girls, BBC reported that a British company plans to implant children with microchips so that their parents can monitor their whereabouts.

Dr. Carl Sanders, a highly acclaimed electronics engineer, revealed that a microchip project he launched to help people with severed spinal cords was taken over by the Bill Colby’s Operation Phoenix in a series of meetings organized by Henry Kissinger.  Sanders says the optimal spot for a microchip implant is just below the hairline on a person’s forehead, since the device can be recharged by changes in body temperatures, which are most pronounced there.  Interestingly, this is the location of the pineal gland or Third Eye.

The 1986 Emigration Control Act grants the President the power to mandate any kind of ID he deems necessary. [12]  Researchers at Southern California have developed a chip which mimics the hippocampus, the part of the brain that deals with memory.  Pentagon officials are interested in using it in experiments to create a “super-soldier”. [13]  Another microchip called Braingate is being implanted in paralyzed people.  It allows them to control their environment by simply thinking. [14]

In Iraq, psychological warfare gave way to slow genocide.  According to UNICEF, as of late 2001, 1.5 million Iraqi children had died as a result of sanctions, while one child in ten died before their first birthday.  Thalassemia, anemia and diarrhea were the biggest killers and could have been prevented were it not for a chronic shortage of blood and medicine in Iraq due to the sanctions.  UN Committee 661 served as arbiter of what constituted a “dual use” item and therefore banned for import into Iraq.  As of 2001, over 1,600 Iraqi contracts with Western companies for medical equipment had been blocked by 661. [15]

The Gulf War decimated Iraq’s sewer and water treatment systems. Iraqis were forced to drink polluted water, leading to numerous health problems.  Iraq was not allowed to import chlorine to clean the water since 661 deemed it a potential chemical weapon.  Electrical power was rationed in three-hour daily increments per household since the Iraqi government couldn’t get the parts it needed to fix its power plants after the US bombed its entire power grid.  With the devaluation of the Iraqi dinar and the ban on the export of 2.4 million barrels of oil per day, the average Iraqi lived on $2.50 a month- enough to buy a pair of shoes.  The only Iraqis not affected were the wealthy elite, who had long ago stashed their savings overseas in US dollars.

UNICEF estimates that 28% of Iraqi children no longer went to school.  Before the war almost all children attended.  Often families could only afford to send one child to school because of the cost of simple things like backpacks, shoes and notebooks.  Rafah Salam Aziz, Director of Mansour Children’s Hospital, said parents were often forced to make similar decisions about their children’s lives.  Aziz said, “Many times it’s easier for a family to let a baby die rather than let the whole family go hungry and get sick.”[16]

In 1996 Clinton Defense Secretary William Perry announced a new military buildup in the Persian Gulf.  Soon cruise missiles were again raining down on Baghdad.  Many nations now grew weary of both US bombing and the sanctions regime, which was brutalizing the Iraqi people while strengthening the grip of Saddam Hussein.  Russian President Boris Yeltsin, whose country signed a deal with Iraq to rebuild its shattered oil sector, said he was disturbed at the use of “extreme and radical force against the Arab world”.  The Russian opposition offered a more scalding appraisal.  Alexander Lebed stating angrily, “The US is like a strong master who spits on everybody.”[17]

Turkey, Jordan and Syria all expressed unease over the new round of bombing.  Even the Saudis, where Islamic fundamentalism was on the rise and two major bombings had occurred at US bases, now refused to allow the US to use its bases to bomb Iraq.  Many countries, including France, began openly flaunting the UN embargo against Iraq in the late 1990’s.

Dennis Halliday, former Assistant Secretary of the UN who initially headed the UN Humanitarian Program to Iraq, resigned his post in protest. He said sanctions were demolishing the very class of Iraqi people who wanted to create a better government in the country.  He was scornful of the UN Oil for Food Program under which the US received 70% of Iraqi oil.  Halliday stated plainly, “We are guilty of committing genocide, through the Security Council, against Iraq.”[18]

Halliday’s 1998 successor was Hans Van Sponeck, who watched as the UN unfurled the UNSCOM arms inspection regime, paid for by Iraqi oil sales.  US inspector Scott Ritter confirmed Iraqi suspicions that UNSCOM was gathering intelligence for CIA and Mossad.  UNSCOM was just the latest CIA tool.  In 1996 the Iraqi government claimed international relief agencies, including the World Food Program, which claimed to be helping the Kurds, were actually CIA operatives attempting to destabilize the country.

In fact the CIA had spent more than $20 million in its support of the Iraqi National Congress, led by long-time CIA surrogate Jalal Talibani’s PKK Kurdish faction. [19]  In January 1997 Iraq uncovered two Mossad spy rings in one month following the attempted assassination of Saddam Hussein’s son. [20]  Hans Van Sponeck had seen enough. He too resigned in protest.

In early 1999 it was revealed that the US had used UNSCOM to plant electronic bugging devices in the Iraqi Ministry of Defense.  Arms inspector Scott Ritter said the CIA was using UNSCOM to “provoke a crisis”.  In December 1998 UNSCOM, faced with the embarrassing accusations of espionage, pulled out of Iraq.  On December 15th the US launched a new round of bombing.  Ritter says intelligence gathered by UNSCOM was used for targeting. UNSCOM spokesman David Kay resurfaced in 2003 calling for a US invasion of Iraq. He now worked for SAIC, which landed numerous Pentagon contracts to rebuild Iraq.

[1] Behold a Pale Horse. William Cooper. Light Technology Press. Sedona, AZ. 1991. p.166

[2] Robot’s Rebellion: The Story of the Spiritual Renaissance. David Icke. Gateway Books. Bath, UK. 1994. p.305

[3] Cooper. p.166

[4] Ibid

[5] Rule by Secrecy: The Hidden History that Connects the Trilateral Commission, the Freemasons and the Great Pyramids. Jim Marrs. HarperCollins Publishers. New York. 2000. p.114

[6] Ibid. 116

[7] “Child Death Rate Jumps in Iraq”. AP. Great Falls Tribune. 9-24-92. p.8

[8] “Depleted Uranium”. Siegwart-Horst Gunther. Covert Action Quarterly. Winter 2001. p.2

[9] Cooper. p.369

[10] Icke. p.221

[11] Cooper. p.361

[12] Icke. p.223

[13] Inquirer. UK. 10-25-05

[14] PhysOrg News. 11-1-95 http://www.physorg.com/news7746.html

[15] “Greetings from Missile Street”. Free Speech TV. Boulder, CO. 12-23-01

[16] “US Economic Sanctions Taking Very Human Toll in Iraq”. Great Falls Tribune. 9-13-92.

[17] “Slamming Saddam”. Time. 9-16-96. p.31

[18] “The Unfinished War”. CNN. 1-6-02

[19] Evening Edition. National Public Radio. 9-10-96

[20] BBC World News. 1-8-97

Source

Chinese Medical Doctor is helping coronavirus patients with a powerful vitamin protocol [videos]

https://vids.theoven.lol/videoEmbed/1202/chinese-medical-doctor-is-helping-coronavirus-patients-with-a-powerful-vitamin-protocol?channelName=Anonymous

NCP (Novel Coronavirus Pneumonia) and Vitamin C

Discover what is really killing coronavirus patients

Dr. Richard Cheng is doing some magnificent work inside Wuhan, China for many of the people infected with the coronavirus. And, while government health agencies seem laser focused on just toxic medications and the hope of a vaccine, Dr. Cheng is doing much more than that.

The results are quite impressive. Listen now – in this video below – directly from Dr. Cheng.

We, at NaturalHealth365, have been reporting news about the coronavirus since its discovery in Wuhan, China. Naturally, there are many theories circulating about the origin of this virus from “just another flu strain” to speculation that this is a bioweapon designed in the Wuhan National Biosafety Laboratory (Level 4) or part of the “depopulation agenda” of some very disturbed individuals.

Wherever you stand on this topic, today’s news will prove to be invaluable because the mainstream media refuses to report on the single most important aspect of this virus. The solution!

Chinese medical doctor is helping coronavirus patients with a powerful vitamin protocol

Conventionally speaking, our modern healthcare system is merely focusing their attention on travel bans, testing and isolation of infected people. And, while that all may seem to be a “reasonable” response to a potential pandemic outbreak of the 2019-nCoV (novel coronavirus). Obviously, much more needs to be done to protect all of us.

In fact, the one thing that’s not talked about – nearly enough – is how to improve (and maintain) the health of the immune system. Can vitamin C – known to be an excellent vitamin for protecting immunity – actually help people infected with the coronavirus?

After a nationwide mention in the NY Post, MSN, and Business Insider, the 10-minute video reporting on the successful use of vitamin C for the coronavirus by doctors in Wuhan has been censored on the internet. No doubt, media manipulation that suppresses lifesaving information is alive and well in the “free” world.

Ask yourself this: why is this information being suppressed by the mainstream media and conventional medical “authorities.” Do they really believe that this vitamin therapy is useless? Or, could this just be an example of profits over public safety.

I’ll let you decide. But, ultimately, it’s up to each and every one of us to do everything we can to keep our immune system strong. After all, it is our best defense against disease.

Stay tuned to NaturalHealth365 https://www.naturalhealth365.com/breaking-news-coronavirus-3308.html as we continue to report on this evolving story.

Video: https://vids.theoven.lol/v/1202

Sources:

https://youtu.be/CvUejiNAm-w

https://ia801403.us.archive.org/25/items/lOOp4UpjM2M/Coronavirus%2C%20Vitamin%20C%2C%20Fake%20News%20and%20Censorship-lOOp4UpjM2M.mp4

http://archive.is/THBbC

Orthomolecular.org

Can we shake the Coronavirus to death? New Way to Kill Viruses: Shake Them to Death

Wuhan-Coronavirus enthält einzigartige Bestandteile des HIV-Virus

Hospital-based Intravenous Vitamin C Treatmentfor Coronavirus and Related Illnesses

The belief that Jews are superior in human character or ability to non-Jews is called loxism

Jewish supremacy

loxism

LOXISM — Noun. Pronounced (lok’ sizm).

(1) The belief that Jews are superior in human character or ability to non-Jews.

(2) Discrimination, prejudice, and hate expressed by Jews against non-Jews (goyim).

Synonyms: racism anti-American anti-human

Antonyms: jewcist anti-Semitism

Definition Loxism

Loxism Loxism

Loxism examples

Example Loxism

Jewish Trans-Atlantic Slave Ship Owners:

Abigail – owned by Aaron Lopez, Moses Levy and Jacob Franks

Crown – owned by Issac Levy and Nathan Simpson

Nassau – owned by Moses Levy

Four Sisters – owned by Moses Levy

Anne & Eliza – owned by Justus Bosch and John Abrams

Prudent Betty – owned by Henry Cruger and Jacob Phoenix

Hester – owned by Mordecai and David Gomez

Elizabeth – owned by Mordecai and David Gomez

Antigua – owned by Nathan Marston and Abram Lyell

Betsy – owned by Wm. De Woolf

Polly – owned by James De Woolf

White Horse – owned by Jan de Sweevts

Expedition – owned by John and Jacob Roosevelt

Charlotte – owned by Moses and Sam Levy and Jacob Franks

Caracoa – owned by Moses and Sam Levy

SOURCE: Elizabeth Donnan, 4 Volumes, “Documents Illustrative of the History of the Slave Trade to America” Washington D.C. 1930, 1935 Carnegie Institute of Technology, Pittsburgh, PA.

Prof. Dr. Tony Martin The Jewish Slave Trade of Africans

Terrorist Nelson Mandela and his jewish helpers

Mandela is not as depicted by the Disney Media

Nelson Mandela


Pictured right. Yossel Mashel Slovo (Joe Slovo). Slovo was born in a shtetl in Lithuania and grew up speaking Yiddish and studying the Talmud. He joined the ANC’s terrorist wing, the Umkhonto we Sizwe, in 1961 and eventually became its commander. He was named Secretary General of the South African Communist Party in 1986. (“Joe Slovo,” Jewish Chronicle, Jan. 13, 1995).
    Slovo had been the ” planner of many of the ANC terrorist attacks, including the 1983 car bomb that killed 19 people and injured many others… Slovo, who had traveled to the Soviet Union many times, was awarded a Soviet medal on his 60th birthday…Slovo is a dedicated Communist, a Marxist Leninist without morality of any kind, for whom only victory counts, whatever the human cost, whatever the bloodshed…Slovo disputes little of his image as ‘the Communist mastermind’ behind the ANC’s armed struggle. For him the fears of South Africa’s whites are both a measure of the ANC’s growing strength and a crucial factor in hastening what he believes will be its ultimate victory. ‘Revolutionary violence has created the inspirational impact that we had intended, and it has won for the ANC its leading position,’ Slovo said.” (“Rebel Strategist Seeks to End Apartheid,” L.A. Times, Aug. 16, 1987, p. 14). When Nelson Mandela’s ANC took over South Africa, Slovo was named Minister of Housing.http://whitelawtowers.blogspot.com/2010_08_01_archive.html

Mandela’s prison number seems to have morphed from 4664 to 46664 


a photo of Ronnie Kasrilswith two other good buddies: Joe Slovo – another White Communist. For decades, Joe Slovo (on the left) was the White man who led the South African Communist Party. He was said to have the rank of Colonel in the KGB. He directed all the Liberation Wars in Southern Africa at one time. When the ANC came to power they made him the Minister of Housing. He died shortly afterwards of cancer. The fellow on the right is Jacob Zuma who went on to become South Africa’s Vice President under Mbeki but whom Mbeki fired recently.http://www.africancrisis.co.za/Article.php?ID=6612&


46664 Bangle Bit of a giveaway.  Danny K, Lionel Richie and Leanne Liebenberg


Knights of Malta


Handshake  Nelson Mandela shares a Masonic handshake with South African Communist Party leader Oliver Tambo.


Vulcan Salute


Rotary symbol (& society)


AIDS-HIV racket  http://reducetheburden.org/ Celebrity sanitizing Psychopathy


David Cameron to honour Rivonia Terrorists in special ceremony – Goldberg, Ahmed and their black puppet will all be visiting Downing Street to meet our idiotic prime minister when they should all be put back in prison.

A Left wing British paper reports that,
‘’Denis Goldberg, Ahmed Kathrada & Andrew Mlangeni were political prisoners convicted at the Rivonia Trial.
 Rivonia trialists Andrew Mlangeni (r) and Denis Goldberg (l). Picture: EWN
LONDON – United Kingdom (UK) Prime Minister David Cameron will today honour three African National Congress (ANC) veterans in recognition of their contribution to the end of apartheid in South Africa.
Denis Goldberg, Ahmed Kathrada and Andrew Mlangeni, were political prisoners convicted at the Rivonia Trial for conspiring to overthrow the apartheid state through sabotage.
They stood together in the face of death 50 years ago and are now to be rewarded for their fight for justice.
The three men felt so passionately about the need for a multiracial-democracy in South Africa they were prepared to give up their lives for it.
The famous trial followed a police raid on an ANC safe house in Rivonia in 1963.
Kathrada and Goldberg were arrested and put in solitary confinement along with Mlangeni who’d been arrested at home.
Between them, the men spent 75 years in prison, but today they’ll be welcomed at Downing Street and at a gala event in aid of a charity which inspires young people to change the world.
Didn’t Cameron once wear a pro-Apartheid tshirt?
 

My thoughts about the Jewish Role in South Africa’s Demise

by Jack Sen
 
 
“Nelson Mandela was radicalised by an evil force from within his movement, with undeniable links to the Soviet Union. Even when the man set his sights on compromise, the radical Jewish element behind his pulpit, had no intention of allowing it. There was simply too much money at stake and ideological glory and capital to lose. The USSR were set on literally seizing all of South Africa’s wealth, as the communist Chinese have successfully done since. Jewish Marxist parasites like Slovo were their ticket.”
This is a truly important article the international media and mainstream historians dictating how we think, do not want you to read. So we can bring you more TRUTH, please be sure to subscribe to our FREE newsletter at the top right hand corner of this page before leaving us today.
So just how deep does Jewish Marxist involvement in Nelson Mandela’s African National Congress Party’s meteoric ascent to power run? Over the next few minutes you’ll meet the men and women behind the black-face of the party.
Before we commence with this most important exposé, I would like to state for the record that the victims of South Africa’s Jewish undoing are not solely white. While the wealthy Jews and white co-conspirators that ruined SA have since left for safer climes with sacks full of diamonds, gold, lithium and resources, the poor white, mulatto, Indian and black masses were left to die andand fight one another to the death.
Marxist hatred spares no one. It’s a group evolutionary strategy that seeks to transfer power and wealth from one group to another. Making it unique is the carnage that’s wrought  when Marxist revolution is the mechanism used to seize power….
One part hatred, one part greed and as the great Jewish Chess player (and critic of Judaism), Bobby Fischer once wrote, “as Jewish as Hanukah.” Jack
The Predominately Jewish Undoing of Once Glorious South Africa: Never Forget
by Jack Sen
Incredible article originally found in his book, How to get Suspended from UKIP and the BNP in 10 Articles and 2 Tweetssmaller book pormo k
 
The American Jewish Times writes “that July 30th will celebrate the 50th anniversary of the raid on Lilisleaf Farm, which at the time served as the headquarters of the Umkonto we Sizwe-the covert and military wing of underground African National Congress. All five of the non-indigenous defendants in the case brought against the group-as was eerily also the case in Marxist Bolshevik Russia, were foreign born Jewish radicals.  Similarly, the majority of the non-black defendants in the earlier Treason Trial (1956) were also Jewish, as was lead counsel and, defense attorneys. Israel’s Haaretz confirms that the head count of white opponents of Apartheid reads like a census list from one of the old Jewish shtetl/ghettos in Lithuania  (from where many South African Jews originated): Joe Slovo, Harold Wolpe, Ruth First, Albie Sacha, Ronald Segal, Dennis Goldberg, Rusty Bernstein, Solly Sachs, Helen Suzman, Ray Alexander, Ronnie Kasrils, Raymond Suttner, Ray Simons, Moishe Geller (American Zionist hatemonger Pamela Geller’s grand father) Wolfie Kodish and many others.”
Let me preface this story-the most in depth study of Jewish involvement with the African National Congress on the web, that the EKP views Nelson Mandela as little more than a Jewish pawn. This article will elaborate on this much ignored element of convicted terrorist Nelson Mandela’s rise to power and the destruction it has left in it’s wake. We also want to state for the record, we are NOT anti-Semitic (intentional misnomer). One of our contributors is in fact a Jewish anti-Zionist & American patriot named Harvey Goldstein. The EKP merely want to disseminate truth.
The mainstream Zionist controlled media will lead you to believe that the fall of South Africa’s so-called ‘fascist’ Apartheid regime was the result of a non-violent, organic revolution led by one Nelson Mandela and his rag-tag band of black freedom fighters; but was it? Does anyone with even the slightest shred of intelligence honestly believe that a gang of black communists had the intelligence & resources to take down a state as powerful as South Africa? These are people that believe raping babies will inoculate them against HIV. South Africa at the time was the world’s 9th largest economy.
Like the American NAACP, SPLC and most global civil rights organisations, the African National Congress (ANC) was dominated by Ashkenazi Jewish Communist radicals. Like most radical & subversive movements, ANC ring leaders were hardly representative of the oppressed dark skinned “victims” one finds on the cover of international magazines. Jews were in total control of the anti-Apartheid movement from its’ inception and Jewish business interests benefited most when the nightmare that has become black rule became a reality.
Although he was a violent, complex, and somewhat contradictory historical figure, we believe Mandela should be viewed in an objective historical manner, & without sentiment. In spite of the fact that the man undeniably has the blood of  hundreds of thousands on his hands, to downplay the role Mandela’s Jewish communist owners had in his rise to power, is to deny history.
To simply demonise the man without exposing the people and ideology behind his action, would be irresponsible.  The EKP values truth above all & will always stay true to our ethos, regardless of its popularity. Unlike the perverse liberal media painting Mandela as a hero, on one hand, & ignorant members of the right vilifying the man without looking at the actual history, on the other, we at the EKP look at the bigger picture-relying on reason & fact, never  sentiment & conjecture. We know that history, like life and people is rarely if ever, black and white. And when it is black, there’s typically an anti-European, anti-Christian Jewish Marxist or anti-European Zionist behind it.
Fact: Nelson Mandela was radicalised by an evil force from within his movement, with links to the Soviet Union. Even when the man set his sights on compromise, the radical Jewish element behind his pulpit, had no intention of allowing it. There was simply too much money at stake and ideological glory to lose. Mandela was too thick to see this, growing more and more radicalised the longer he associated with the Jewish terrorists that had hand picked him for their master plan.
The USSR, with their plants in SA, were set on literally seizing all of South Africa’s wealth, as the communist Chinese have successfully done since. Marxist parasites like Slovo were their ticket.
We demonstrate this thesis beyond any shadow of a doubt in the timeline we have compiled below.
Fact: From Joe Slovo, to Nadine Gordimer, Nathan Sharansky and  Volfie Kodish and ALL of the lawyers that represented the man at home, abroad and across the globe-almost all were Jews.
This is not to say that ALL Jews are bad-something we stated earlier, or that Mandela is not to a certain extent, responsible for his own actions-just that the minds behind the muscle, were of Jewish origin.  In fact the reason why the international media still hides what’s transpiring to your families in South Africa, has a lot to do with who runs the media and controls the narrative. As South Africa in particular is seen by the American Jewish left as the last vestige of Northern European colonial evil;, and the Boer, the poster boys for it-the Zionist media, will do their best to conceal what’s happening to South Africa’s non-black minority. Always recall who in fact facilitated the genocidal conditions in South Africa, when formulating your position on Israel. Remember it is people like Israeli activist and Zionist media darling Pamela Geller, whose grandfather fought alongside black terrorists, that were originally behind bringing bloodshed  into your country.
I’d also like to add that for me South African Apartheid state did NOT represent the European fascist ideal any more than todays Israeli Likud regime do, and their inability to gauge the strength of their enemy,  and move quickly enough with the times, ultimately cost them their country.
A fascist is not only a Western European idealist, but a civic minded pragmatist that seeks to secure his nation’s interests first & foremost. He adjusts policy based on the needs and makeup of the nation. Although governing an overwhelmingly black majority requires an iron hand, the international stage required a bit more delicacy and diplomacy, ESPECIALLY with so many Eastern European/Ashkenazi Jewish radicals, like Geller, behind the scenes.
Blacks, a race of people undeniably incapable of self-governance, need structure and a firm but fair paternalistic government to rule over them and exploit their worth; via a well-intentioned policy, not one based on barbarity. Apartheid’s undoing has as much to do with its heavy handedness & flaws as it does the pawn Mandela and his Jewish owners efforts. If the government had handled the black population as South Africa’s white land and business owners did their labourers while exploiting their services, the country wouldn’t be in the predicament it is in now.
I also base my opinion on the manner in which they treated the country’s Hindu Indian population and other productive, law abiding, ethnic minorities of non=Negro origin. Although Indians and coloureds (mulattos) are slowly moving back to the nationalist parties, their support for the ANC, because of how they were treated under the Apartheid state, was hugely important.
Apartheid’s policies were based solely on race, rather than pragmatism. In fact even Adolf Hitler, the world’s most polarising figure, was far less rigid when it came to racial politics than SA’s apartheid government.  He recognised that policy had to adapt to meet the nation’s interest – granting universal exemptions for German mischlings (part Jews), thousands of patriotic Jews, and non-white soldiers volunteering their services for the German war effort etc. The nationalist governments inability to adjust policy, embrace SA’s other non-black people and soften restrictions fast enough, aided the Internationalist Jew in his global Marxist crusade against South Africa.
Although Mandela might not have fully understood why SA’s Jewish supremacist revolutionaries had taken up his cause -blacks typically aren’t aware of their Jewish masters ulterior motivations for adopting their plight, Mandela was no dupe. Still in contrast to Slovo, even Zuma, Mandela can be seen as an ideological moderate. In our opinion Nelson Mandela made a choice to accept funding and patronage from the first people that offered him  support and became radicalised because of his inability to see right from wrong-that’s it.
by Jack Sen
Article originally found in his book
How to get Suspended from UKIP and the BNP in 10 Articles and 2 Tweets
Most Comprehensive Timeline on the Web Focusing on Zionist Involvement in South Africa’s ANC Party 
April 2, 1985 – Black-Jewish Freedom Seders (Jewish ritual feasts), co-sponsored by the Zionist Jewish Reform movement’s UAHC and the American NAACP honor jailed Soviet Jewish and African dissidents/radicals, including Natan Sharansky and convicted murderer and terrorist, Nelson Mandela.
February 11, 1986 – Zionist criminal, Natan Sharansky is released from Soviet prison. Two days later, the Israeli JTA reports that in 1984, the South African government rejected a proposed prisoner exchange that would have freed both Mandela and Sharansky. Sharansky also comments on his hope that Mandela’s freedom will be secured, referring to Mandela as a “beacon of light in a world of racist tyranny”.
February 17, 1986 – Irwin Cotler, Canadian Jewish attorney representing Sharansky and Mandela, announces an international council of lawyers, most of whom are American Jews,  who will “work relentlessly for the release of all the Sharanskys and Mandelas now rotting in  various prisons in the USSR and South Africa.’”
March 7, 1986 – American Jewish organization, B’nai B’rith’s leader Gerald Kraft calls on South African President P.W. Botha to release Mandela. The ADL follow suit as do several powerful American Jewish organizations.
December 10, 1986 – Accepting the 1986 Nobel Peace Prize in Oslo, Zionist holocaust activist, Eli Wiesel refers to the imprisonment of Mandela, internal exile of Soviet Jew, Andrei Sakharov, and the denial of Polish Jewish leader, Lech Walesa’s freedom of speech a “disgrace of equal magnitude”.
February 2, 1990 – Following a speech by President F.W. de Klerk, in which Mandela’s release from prison was promised, the Jewish community in South Africa, publicly announces through Lithuanian born anti-apartheid Jewish Stalinist, Joe Slovo, that they are hopeful for political reform.
February 11, 1990 –  Nelson Mandela is freed from prison, four years to the day after Sharansky’release. World Jewry, as evidenced by press releases from the  ADL, BB, JDL, Zionist organizations from”sea to shining sea”, is elated
June 10, 1990 – Prior to a U.S. visit, Mandela meets with American Jewish leaders in Geneva, apologizes for calling Palestinian freedom fighters his “brothers in arms” and for any other statements he may have made that “might have offended Jewish groups.” The meeting, described as “warm, friendly and cordial,” reportedly played a role in preempting American Jewish protests against the African National Congress leader.
June 20, 1990 – Mandela welcomed by U.S. Jewish groups. The following night, in a nationally televised program on ABC, Mandela again refers to PLO leader Yassar Arafat as a “comrade in arms,” upsetting Jewish owned ABC television and American Jewish groups that had sponsored  his trip. On June 29, Sharansky meets with Mandela for the first time in Los Angeles asking him to tone down his pro PLO rhetoric. You can’t bite the hand that feeds, or should I say freed you, after all.
July 1, 1990 – A Johannesburg synagogue and Zionist school, is bombed and defaced with graffiti during early hours of the morning. Mysteriously no  casualties or injuries are reported.  Jewish leaders attribute the attack to scapegoating by right-wing nationalist groups, who oppose the community’s support for the anti-apartheid movement. No one takes responsibility for the “crime”. Rumours that the bombing was a false flag circulate.
September 14, 1990 – Despite objections and alleged threats from South African nationalists and some hardline Zionist jews, a Reform rabbi in Johannesburg goes forward with his plan to invite Mandela to speak at his synagogue. Addressing the Reform congregation, the yarmulka-clad Mandela said, “If Zionism means the right of the Jewish people to seize territory and deny the Palestinian people the right to self-determination, we condemn it, but if it means a homeland for our jewish brothers we support it.” The packed synagogue heard Mandela condemn all manifestations of anti-Semitism and declare that ANC membership is open to everyone regardless of race. White and Indian South Africans are skeptical
October 24, 1990 – Mandela arouses the anger of  Australian Jewish groups upon his arrival in Canberra, likening Israel to a “terrorist state” and accusing her of “slaughtering defenseless, innocent Arabs”, forgetting his pledge to Slovo, Sharansky and the American jewish organizations he pandered to during his last visit to the States.  He later backtracks after pressure from Joe Slovo, the ANC’s top Jewish leader and self described “brains” behind the African National Congress.
July 14, 1991 – Following U.S. lead, Israel lifts cultural and economic sanctions against  South Africa after four years of crippling economic warfare. Pandering to the South Africans and strong economic and military ties with the black government commences.
April 15, 1992 – On the eve of Passover, Mandela publicly acknowledges South African Jewry’s “particularly outstanding contribution” to his people’s “struggle for freedom and social justice” for the first time. Mandela states that Jewry “sees themselves in black causes” due to the fact Jews have suffered through “one long historical holocaust for more than two thousand years.” He believes that Jews can more easily identify with blacks than Whites and East Indians, the two groups offering the most opposition to the ANC. Thus commences the official “special relationship” between Mandela and his Jewish backers.
May 4, 1992- South Africa’s Jerusalem Club invites Black speaker to address attendees for the first time, helping to forge ties between the Jewish committee and the Mandela-led ANC. From this point forth Mandela is the offical spokesperson for the  “worlds oppressed”.
August 16, 1992 – As South Africa lifts its apartheid law banning suburban settlement by blacks, Mandela moves to the upscale Jewish suburb of Houghton. Mandela’s new neighbor, member of Parliament Tony Leon of the Democratic Party, brought a gift of chocolate cake, which he left with a member of the household staff in Mandela’s absence.
August 1993 – Addressing the annual conferece of  South African Jewish Board of Deputees, Mandela’s greeted by a standing ovation, confirming improved ties following the leader’s prior remarks about the PLO.
March 1994 – With one month to go before South Africa’s first democtratic presidential elections, a JTA report anticipates “Jewish support” for Mandela’s ANC. South African Jews face the country’s first democratic elections on April 27 with a “mixture of fear and faith for the future” in the country. In spite of the fact that Mandela and the ANC’s rise to power would never have been possible without international Jewry’s financial support., South African Jewry aren’t as convinced, empowering the black majority is in fact the right move. The fears among the approximately 100,000 members of the South African Jewish community primarily relate to the widespread increase in criminal violence, particularly in Johannesburg, where over half the country’s Jews live. Blowback has historically impacted Jewry more than any other people. Think of the Jewish led Bolshevik revolution and how that ultimately blew up in their faces. Gulags anyone?
May 2, 1994 – After several days of voting, Mandela elected president in South Africa’s first “all-race” democratic elections; Jewish sentiment is reported to be optimistic. That Saturday, Nelson Mandela attends Shabbat services at the Green & Sea Point Hebrew Congregation in Cape Town, by far the largest synagogue in the Southern hemisphere. From the pulpit, Mandela, Yamulka and all, appeals for the swift return of Jewish expatriates who left for security concerns.
May 12, 1994 – Mandela meets with Israeli President Ezer Weizman before greeting several international Jewish dignitaries at a meeting in Cape Town. PLO leader Yasser Arafat was invited to join them. “He calls Arafat by his first name, Yasser,” Weizman recalled. “They embraced, and he said he and Arafat were brothers. I said: ‘Then, Mr. President, we are cousins.’ More proof the Palestinians and Israelis, at least the Arab and Sephardic Jewish inhabtants of Israel, have more in common than the Ashkenazim let up
June 1994 – Following Mandela’s election, Israel lifts its seven-year arms embargo against South Africa. The original embargo was introduced by Israels hawkish neo conservative Jewish and WASP partners in Washington.
August 1994 – Mandela is awarded Anne Frank Medal (selected by Dutch Jewry) in Amsterdam for his contributions in advancing democracy in South Africa. Later that month, Mandela states, “The victory of the democratic forces in South Africa is a contribution to this worldwide effort to rid humanity of the evil of racism. It is Anne Frank’s victory. It’s for the people of the holocaust. It is an achievement of humanity as a whole,” Invoking the holocaust is becoming as much a trademark for the Zio-schooled Mandela as his extravgant button downed dress shirts.
November 1994 – Israeli professor Michael Wolfsohn reveals that in 1989, Mandela’s release was on the table as part of a large prisoner exchange for missing Israeli soldier Ron Arad until the Berlin Wall fell.
January 5, 1995 – Housing Minister Joe Slovo, the brains behind the ANC, and one of two Jews to become part of the Mandela’s cabinet, dies of bone marrow cancer. The other Jewish cabinet member, Ronnie Kasrils, would prove to be an even more polarizing figure.
February 1995 – South African Foreign Minister Alfred Nzo announces full South African diplomatic relations with the “State of Palestine,” prompting protest from the Israeli officials that had funded the ANC since its inception.. Blacks biting the jewish hand that fed them increasingly wears on the nerves of the ANC’s jewish backers.
October 1995 – Prior to national local elections, Nelson Mandela joins Jewish ANC candidates in an appeal to the Jewish community not to emigrate from South Africa due to fear of crime. In spite of the ANC’s enormous Jewish ties, many of South Africa’s Jewish population  appear to be ruing  the fall of apartheid and fleeing the country by the tens of thousands. Blowback is the quintessential bitch!
January 1996 – Two main South African Jewish organizations with ties to the Black ANC criticize Mandela’s meeting with Louis Farrakhan, leader of the Nation of Islam, famous for anti-Semitic remarks in the U.S. Mandela apologises publicly, with his Jewish handlers in toe.
February 1996 – Chief Rabbi Yirael Meir Lau shares stories of his imprisonment in a concentration camp with Mandela in Pretoria. Mandela equates apartheid with the “holocaust” for the umpteenth time.
September 20, 1996 – A leading Jewish Newspaper publishes a report citing crime as the greatest reason for Jews leaving South Africa. Jewish communities become more withdrawn as their ties to the ANC strengthen. Publicly black and Jewish solidarity is at it’s peak. Privately, Jews; like Indians, Arabs even some members of the “coloured” or mulatto community, are seen as whites by rampaging South African blacks, fear for their lives and embark on a mass exodus from the nation.
September 1997 – Mandela is presented with an honorary doctorate in philosophy from Israel’s, Ben Gurion University. Zionist organization’s award is presented in Cape Town “because Mandela has indicated he will not visit the Mid East until he is able to make a meaningful contribution to the peace process.”
April 1998 – Mandela appoints Richard Goldstone, a renowned Jewish egal scholar and jurist,  to investigate an alleged high-level plot to overthrow the country’s government involving Mandela’s former wife and several of his former “colleagues”.
July 18, 1998 – The country celebrates the president’s 80th birthday. Mandela also throws secret “wedding celebration”, letting Chief Rabbi Cyril Harris in on the secret a day early in a special ceremony. The ceremony has an  “Afro-Jewish” theme to it.
August 12, 1998 – Mandela and Arafat exchange medals and embrace in a ceremony. Jewish leaders are bemused. seems Mandela still doesn’t get it.
January 1999 –Mandela is a  frequent celebrity bar mitzvah guest at high profile Jewish bar mitzvahs in South Africa.
October 19, 1999 – Mandela arrives in Israel, his adopted homeland, for the first time. Jewish and newly empowered black South Africans anticipate that their president’s visit will yield better relations between the two nations. Having recently visited Iran, Syria, Jordan the backdrop of Iran holding thirteen Jewish prisoners as alleged spies, Mandela agrees to mediate between Israel and her neighbors, stating, “”I cannot conceive of Israel withdrawing if Arab states do not recognize Israel within secure borders.”Mandela is now officially Israels, b*&^%.
February 2000 – Following his presidency, Mandela is named patron in chief of Tikkun, a private Jewish-controlled social services project founded in 1996 providig interracial adult education, skills training and AIDS relief work. Although the agency is privately managed, it is subsidised by the new ANC government.
December 13, 2000 – Mandela is key speaker at opening ceremony of the new South African Jewish Museum.
January 2002 – In Durban, Mandela retracts statements supporting the U.S.-led war in Afghanistan and comments labeling Osama bin Laden a terrorist, upsetting the Jewish community. Although the Jews are a “peace loving folk”, international Jewry openly supports the war on terror and the millions of deaths its caused worldwide.
May 2002- Lazar Sidelsky, a Jewish lawyer who’d given a young Nelson Mandela a job as a clerk in the face of apartheid restrictions, dies in Johannesburg at age 90.
October 2002 –Wolfie Kodesh, Jewish founder of the armed wing of the ANC and former member of the South African Communist party, dies at age 84. Kodesh is praised by Mandela at his funeral in Cape Town. Mandela is a key speaker at the ceremony
December 2003  – Union of Orthodox Rabbis taps new chief rabbi, Warren Goldstein, 32, to succeed Harris in January 2005. Goldstein co-authored a book with Mandela’s grandson, Dumani. Links abound!
August 2004 – Chief Rabbi Cyril Harris accuses the country’s Jews of not sufficiently supporting MaAfrika Tikkun, the community’s privately run but publicly funded outreach initiative. “There’s an unfortunate reluctance, a sort of suspicion about interacting with the black majority — particularly on the part of the older generation — which is absurd,” he said, noting “a kind of restraint” when it comes to non-Jewish causes.
April 2004 – Top  Israeli paper celebrates Jewish and ANC partnership in “rebuilding” South Africa. The new ANC created constitutional court — headed by a Jew, Chief Justice Arthur Chaskalson is touted as the nation’s greatest achievement. The JTA writes that “After some years of demoralization, the Jewish community recently has begun to rebound. It has placed in key leadership positions young, dynamic people who are less burdened by the baggage of apartheid and who are vigorously engaging with symbols of the new South Africa.” It profiles Yehuda Kay, 28, national director of the South African Jewish Board of Deputies; Zev Krengel, 31, chairman of the board’s Johannesburg area council; Avrom Krengel, 35, chair of the South African Zionist Federation; Rabbi Craig Kacev, 32, acting director of the South African Board of Jewish Education; and Warren Goldstein, 32, recently chosen as the country’s chief rabbi.
September 2004 – A review of a book about Zimbabwe by Abe Abrahamson — honorary life president of South African Zionist Federation — mentions that Abrahamson was one of six high profile Jews to visit Nelson Mandela upon the latter’s release from prison.
September 13, 2005 – Former Chief Rabbi Cyril Harris dies of cancer at age 69, and was remembered for offering a prayer at Mandela’s inauguration in 1994.
January 2008 – Anti-apartheid activist Helen Suzman, who visited Mandela in prison on several occasions, and was instrumental in the fall of apartheid, dies.
White and East Indian African Genocide continues.
by Jack Sen

The Soviet Marxist Terrorists Behind Nelson Mandela – ‘Never Forget’

David Cameron to honour Rivonia Terrorists in special ceremony – Goldberg, Ahmed and their black puppet will all be visiting Downing Street to meet our idiotic prime minister when they should all be put back in prison.

A Left wing British paper reports that,

‘’Denis Goldberg, Ahmed Kathrada & Andrew Mlangeni were political prisoners convicted at the Rivonia Trial.

LONDON – United Kingdom (UK) Prime Minister David Cameron will today honour three African National Congress (ANC) veterans in recognition of their contribution to the end of apartheid in South Africa. 

Denis Goldberg, Ahmed Kathrada and Andrew Mlangeni, were political prisoners convicted at the Rivonia Trial for conspiring to overthrow the apartheid state through sabotage. 

They stood together in the face of death 50 years ago and are now to be rewarded for their fight for justice. 

The three men felt so passionately about the need for a multiracial-democracy in South Africa they were prepared to give up their lives for it.

The famous trial followed a police raid on an ANC safe house in Rivonia in 1963. 

Kathrada and Goldberg were arrested and put in solitary confinement along with Mlangeni who’d been arrested at home. 

Between them, the men spent 75 years in prison, but today they’ll be welcomed at Downing Street and at a gala event in aid of a charity which inspires young people to change the world.

Didn’t Cameron once wear a pro-Apartheid tshirt?

 

My thoughts about the Jewish Role in South Africa’s Demise 

by Jack Sen

 

 

“Nelson Mandela was radicalised by an evil force from within his movement, with undeniable links to the Soviet Union. Even when the man set his sights on compromise, the radical Jewish element behind his pulpit, had no intention of allowing it. There was simply too much money at stake and ideological glory and capital to lose. The USSR were set on literally seizing all of South Africa’s wealth, as the communist Chinese have successfully done since. Jewish Marxist parasites like Slovo were their ticket.”

This is a truly important article the international media and mainstream historians dictating how we think, do not want you to read. So we can bring you more TRUTH, please be sure to subscribe to our FREE newsletter at the top right hand corner of this page before leaving us today.

So just how deep does Jewish Marxist involvement in Nelson Mandela’s African National Congress Party’s meteoric ascent to power run? Over the next few minutes you’ll meet the men and women behind the black-face of the party.

Before we commence with this most important exposé, I would like to state for the record that the victims of South Africa’s Jewish undoing are not solely white. While the wealthy Jews and white co-conspirators that ruined SA have since left for safer climes with sacks full of diamonds, gold, lithium and resources, the poor white, mulatto, Indian and black masses were left to die andand fight one another to the death.

Marxist hatred spares no one. It’s a group evolutionary strategy that seeks to transfer power and wealth from one group to another. Making it unique is the carnage that’s wrought  when Marxist revolution is the mechanism used to seize power….

One part hatred, one part greed and as the great Jewish Chess player (and critic of Judaism), Bobby Fischer once wrote, “as Jewish as Hanukah.” Jack

The Predominately Jewish Undoing of Once Glorious South Africa: Never Forget

by Jack Sen

Incredible article originally found in his book, How to get Suspended from UKIP and the BNP in 10 Articles and 2 Tweetssmaller book pormo k

Please be sure to purchase a copy. All proceeds go to helping our efforts in South Africa and Britain. About half the book is in fact about South Africa. Free shipping to South Africa and Britain. 

 

The American Jewish Times writes “that July 30th will celebrate the 50th anniversary of the raid on Lilisleaf Farm, which at the time served as the headquarters of the Umkonto we Sizwe-the covert and military wing of underground African National Congress. All five of the non-indigenous defendants in the case brought against the group-as was eerily also the case in Marxist Bolshevik Russia, were foreign born Jewish radicals.  Similarly, the majority of the non-black defendants in the earlier Treason Trial (1956) were also Jewish, as was lead counsel and, defense attorneys. Israel’s Haaretz confirms that the head count of white opponents of Apartheid reads like a census list from one of the old Jewish shtetl/ghettos in Lithuania  (from where many South African Jews originated): Joe Slovo, Harold Wolpe, Ruth First, Albie Sacha, Ronald Segal, Dennis Goldberg, Rusty Bernstein, Solly Sachs, Helen Suzman, Ray Alexander, Ronnie Kasrils, Raymond Suttner, Ray Simons, Moishe Geller (American Zionist hatemonger Pamela Geller’s grand father) Wolfie Kodish and many others.”

Let me preface this story-the most in depth study of Jewish involvement with the African National Congress on the web, that the EKP views Nelson Mandela as little more than a Jewish pawn. This article will elaborate on this much ignored element of convicted terrorist Nelson Mandela’s rise to power and the destruction it has left in it’s wake. We also want to state for the record, we are NOT anti-Semitic (intentional misnomer). One of our contributors is in fact a Jewish anti-Zionist & American patriot named Harvey Goldstein. The EKP merely want to disseminate truth.

The mainstream Zionist controlled media will lead you to believe that the fall of South Africa’s so-called ‘fascist’ Apartheid regime was the result of a non-violent, organic revolution led by one Nelson Mandela and his rag-tag band of black freedom fighters; but was it? Does anyone with even the slightest shred of intelligence honestly believe that a gang of black communists had the intelligence & resources to take down a state as powerful as South Africa? These are people that believe raping babies will inoculate them against HIV. South Africa at the time was the world’s 9th largest economy.

Like the American NAACP, SPLC and most global civil rights organisations, the African National Congress (ANC) was dominated by Ashkenazi Jewish Communist radicals. Like most radical & subversive movements, ANC ring leaders were hardly representative of the oppressed dark skinned “victims” one finds on the cover of international magazines. Jews were in total control of the anti-Apartheid movement from its’ inception and Jewish business interests benefited most when the nightmare that has become black rule became a reality.

Although he was a violent, complex, and somewhat contradictory historical figure, we believe Mandela should be viewed in an objective historical manner, & without sentiment. In spite of the fact that the man undeniably has the blood of  hundreds of thousands on his hands, to downplay the role Mandela’s Jewish communist owners had in his rise to power, is to deny history.

To simply demonise the man without exposing the people and ideology behind his action, would be irresponsible.  The EKP values truth above all & will always stay true to our ethos, regardless of its popularity. Unlike the perverse liberal media painting Mandela as a hero, on one hand, & ignorant members of the right vilifying the man without looking at the actual history, on the other, we at the EKP look at the bigger picture-relying on reason & fact, never  sentiment & conjecture. We know that history, like life and people is rarely if ever, black and white. And when it is black, there’s typically an anti-European, anti-Christian Jewish Marxist or anti-European Zionist behind it.

Fact: Nelson Mandela was radicalised by an evil force from within his movement, with links to the Soviet Union. Even when the man set his sights on compromise, the radical Jewish element behind his pulpit, had no intention of allowing it. There was simply too much money at stake and ideological glory to lose. Mandela was too thick to see this, growing more and more radicalised the longer he associated with the Jewish terrorists that had hand picked him for their master plan.

The USSR, with their plants in SA, were set on literally seizing all of South Africa’s wealth, as the communist Chinese have successfully done since. Marxist parasites like Slovo were their ticket.

We demonstrate this thesis beyond any shadow of a doubt in the timeline we have compiled below.

Fact: From Joe Slovo, to Nadine Gordimer, Nathan Sharansky and  Volfie Kodish and ALL of the lawyers that represented the man at home, abroad and across the globe-almost all were Jews.

This is not to say that ALL Jews are bad-something we stated earlier, or that Mandela is not to a certain extent, responsible for his own actions-just that the minds behind the muscle, were of Jewish origin.  In fact the reason why the international media still hides what’s transpiring to your families in South Africa, has a lot to do with who runs the media and controls the narrative. As South Africa in particular is seen by the American Jewish left as the last vestige of Northern European colonial evil;, and the Boer, the poster boys for it-the Zionist media, will do their best to conceal what’s happening to South Africa’s non-black minority. Always recall who in fact facilitated the genocidal conditions in South Africa, when formulating your position on Israel. Remember it is people like Israeli activist and Zionist media darling Pamela Geller, whose grandfather fought alongside black terrorists, that were originally behind bringing bloodshed  into your country.

I’d also like to add that for me South African Apartheid state did NOT represent the European fascist ideal any more than todays Israeli Likud regime do, and their inability to gauge the strength of their enemy,  and move quickly enough with the times, ultimately cost them their country.

A fascist is not only a Western European idealist, but a civic minded pragmatist that seeks to secure his nation’s interests first & foremost. He adjusts policy based on the needs and makeup of the nation. Although governing an overwhelmingly black majority requires an iron hand, the international stage required a bit more delicacy and diplomacy, ESPECIALLY with so many Eastern European/Ashkenazi Jewish radicals, like Geller, behind the scenes.

Blacks, a race of people undeniably incapable of self-governance, need structure and a firm but fair paternalistic government to rule over them and exploit their worth; via a well-intentioned policy, not one based on barbarity. Apartheid’s undoing has as much to do with its heavy handedness & flaws as it does the pawn Mandela and his Jewish owners efforts. If the government had handled the black population as South Africa’s white land and business owners did their labourers while exploiting their services, the country wouldn’t be in the predicament it is in now.

I also base my opinion on the manner in which they treated the country’s Hindu Indian population and other productive, law abiding, ethnic minorities of non=Negro origin. Although Indians and coloureds (mulattos) are slowly moving back to the nationalist parties, their support for the ANC, because of how they were treated under the Apartheid state, was hugely important.

Apartheid’s policies were based solely on race, rather than pragmatism. In fact even Adolf Hitler, the world’s most polarising figure, was far less rigid when it came to racial politics than SA’s apartheid government.  He recognised that policy had to adapt to meet the nation’s interest – granting universal exemptions for German mischlings (part Jews), thousands of patriotic Jews, and non-white soldiers volunteering their services for the German war effort etc. The nationalist governments inability to adjust policy, embrace SA’s other non-black people and soften restrictions fast enough, aided the Internationalist Jew in his global Marxist crusade against South Africa.

Although Mandela might not have fully understood why SA’s Jewish supremacist revolutionaries had taken up his cause -blacks typically aren’t aware of their Jewish masters ulterior motivations for adopting their plight, Mandela was no dupe. Still in contrast to Slovo, even Zuma, Mandela can be seen as an ideological moderate. In our opinion Nelson Mandela made a choice to accept funding and patronage from the first people that offered him  support and became radicalised because of his inability to see right from wrong-that’s it.

by Jack Sen

Article originally found in his book

How to get Suspended from UKIP and the BNP in 10 Articles and 2 Tweets

Please be sure to purchase a copy. All proceeds go to helping our efforts in South Africa and Britain. About half the book is in fact about South Africa.

Most Comprehensive Timeline on the Web Focusing on Zionist Involvement in South Africa’s ANC Party 

April 2, 1985 – Black-Jewish Freedom Seders (Jewish ritual feasts), co-sponsored by the Zionist Jewish Reform movement’s UAHC and the American NAACP honor jailed Soviet Jewish and African dissidents/radicals, including Natan Sharansky and convicted murderer and terrorist, Nelson Mandela.

February 11, 1986 – Zionist criminal, Natan Sharansky is released from Soviet prison. Two days later, the Israeli JTA reports that in 1984, the South African government rejected a proposed prisoner exchange that would have freed both Mandela and Sharansky. Sharansky also comments on his hope that Mandela’s freedom will be secured, referring to Mandela as a “beacon of light in a world of racist tyranny”.

February 17, 1986 – Irwin Cotler, Canadian Jewish attorney representing Sharansky and Mandela, announces an international council of lawyers, most of whom are American Jews,  who will “work relentlessly for the release of all the Sharanskys and Mandelas now rotting in  various prisons in the USSR and South Africa.’”

March 7, 1986 – American Jewish organization, B’nai B’rith’s leader Gerald Kraft calls on South African President P.W. Botha to release Mandela. The ADL follow suit as do several powerful American Jewish organizations.

December 10, 1986 – Accepting the 1986 Nobel Peace Prize in Oslo, Zionist holocaust activist, Eli Wiesel refers to the imprisonment of Mandela, internal exile of Soviet Jew, Andrei Sakharov, and the denial of Polish Jewish leader, Lech Walesa’s freedom of speech a “disgrace of equal magnitude”.

February 2, 1990 – Following a speech by President F.W. de Klerk, in which Mandela’s release from prison was promised, the Jewish community in South Africa, publicly announces through Lithuanian born anti-apartheid Jewish Stalinist, Joe Slovo, that they are hopeful for political reform.

February 11, 1990 –  Nelson Mandela is freed from prison, four years to the day after Sharansky’release. World Jewry, as evidenced by press releases from the  ADL, BB, JDL, Zionist organizations from”sea to shining sea”, is elated

June 10, 1990 – Prior to a U.S. visit, Mandela meets with American Jewish leaders in Geneva, apologizes for calling Palestinian freedom fighters his “brothers in arms” and for any other statements he may have made that “might have offended Jewish groups.” The meeting, described as “warm, friendly and cordial,” reportedly played a role in preempting American Jewish protests against the African National Congress leader.

June 20, 1990 – Mandela welcomed by U.S. Jewish groups. The following night, in a nationally televised program on ABC, Mandela again refers to PLO leader Yassar Arafat as a “comrade in arms,” upsetting Jewish owned ABC television and American Jewish groups that had sponsored  his trip. On June 29, Sharansky meets with Mandela for the first time in Los Angeles asking him to tone down his pro PLO rhetoric. You can’t bite the hand that feeds, or should I say freed you, after all.

July 1, 1990 – A Johannesburg synagogue and Zionist school, is bombed and defaced with graffiti during early hours of the morning. Mysteriously no  casualties or injuries are reported.  Jewish leaders attribute the attack to scapegoating by right-wing nationalist groups, who oppose the community’s support for the anti-apartheid movement. No one takes responsibility for the “crime”. Rumours that the bombing was a false flag circulate.

September 14, 1990 – Despite objections and alleged threats from South African nationalists and some hardline Zionist jews, a Reform rabbi in Johannesburg goes forward with his plan to invite Mandela to speak at his synagogue. Addressing the Reform congregation, the yarmulka-clad Mandela said, “If Zionism means the right of the Jewish people to seize territory and deny the Palestinian people the right to self-determination, we condemn it, but if it means a homeland for our jewish brothers we support it.” The packed synagogue heard Mandela condemn all manifestations of anti-Semitism and declare that ANC membership is open to everyone regardless of race. White and Indian South Africans are skeptical

October 24, 1990 – Mandela arouses the anger of  Australian Jewish groups upon his arrival in Canberra, likening Israel to a “terrorist state” and accusing her of “slaughtering defenseless, innocent Arabs”, forgetting his pledge to Slovo, Sharansky and the American jewish organizations he pandered to during his last visit to the States.  He later backtracks after pressure from Joe Slovo, the ANC’s top Jewish leader and self described “brains” behind the African National Congress.

July 14, 1991 – Following U.S. lead, Israel lifts cultural and economic sanctions against  South Africa after four years of crippling economic warfare. Pandering to the South Africans and strong economic and military ties with the black government commences.

April 15, 1992 – On the eve of Passover, Mandela publicly acknowledges South African Jewry’s “particularly outstanding contribution” to his people’s “struggle for freedom and social justice” for the first time. Mandela states that Jewry “sees themselves in black causes” due to the fact Jews have suffered through “one long historical holocaust for more than two thousand years.” He believes that Jews can more easily identify with blacks than Whites and East Indians, the two groups offering the most opposition to the ANC. Thus commences the official “special relationship” between Mandela and his Jewish backers.

May 4, 1992- South Africa’s Jerusalem Club invites Black speaker to address attendees for the first time, helping to forge ties between the Jewish committee and the Mandela-led ANC. From this point forth Mandela is the offical spokesperson for the  “worlds oppressed”.

August 16, 1992 – As South Africa lifts its apartheid law banning suburban settlement by blacks, Mandela moves to the upscale Jewish suburb of Houghton. Mandela’s new neighbor, member of Parliament Tony Leon of the Democratic Party, brought a gift of chocolate cake, which he left with a member of the household staff in Mandela’s absence.

August 1993 – Addressing the annual conferece of  South African Jewish Board of Deputees, Mandela’s greeted by a standing ovation, confirming improved ties following the leader’s prior remarks about the PLO.

March 1994 – With one month to go before South Africa’s first democtratic presidential elections, a JTA report anticipates “Jewish support” for Mandela’s ANC. South African Jews face the country’s first democratic elections on April 27 with a “mixture of fear and faith for the future” in the country. In spite of the fact that Mandela and the ANC’s rise to power would never have been possible without international Jewry’s financial support., South African Jewry aren’t as convinced, empowering the black majority is in fact the right move. The fears among the approximately 100,000 members of the South African Jewish community primarily relate to the widespread increase in criminal violence, particularly in Johannesburg, where over half the country’s Jews live. Blowback has historically impacted Jewry more than any other people. Think of the Jewish led Bolshevik revolution and how that ultimately blew up in their faces. Gulags anyone?

May 2, 1994 – After several days of voting, Mandela elected president in South Africa’s first “all-race” democratic elections; Jewish sentiment is reported to be optimistic. That Saturday, Nelson Mandela attends Shabbat services at the Green & Sea Point Hebrew Congregation in Cape Town, by far the largest synagogue in the Southern hemisphere. From the pulpit, Mandela, Yamulka and all, appeals for the swift return of Jewish expatriates who left for security concerns.

May 12, 1994 – Mandela meets with Israeli President Ezer Weizman before greeting several international Jewish dignitaries at a meeting in Cape Town. PLO leader Yasser Arafat was invited to join them. “He calls Arafat by his first name, Yasser,” Weizman recalled. “They embraced, and he said he and Arafat were brothers. I said: ‘Then, Mr. President, we are cousins.’ More proof the Palestinians and Israelis, at least the Arab and Sephardic Jewish inhabtants of Israel, have more in common than the Ashkenazim let up

June 1994 – Following Mandela’s election, Israel lifts its seven-year arms embargo against South Africa. The original embargo was introduced by Israels hawkish neo conservative Jewish and WASP partners in Washington.

August 1994 – Mandela is awarded Anne Frank Medal (selected by Dutch Jewry) in Amsterdam for his contributions in advancing democracy in South Africa. Later that month, Mandela states, “The victory of the democratic forces in South Africa is a contribution to this worldwide effort to rid humanity of the evil of racism. It is Anne Frank’s victory. It’s for the people of the holocaust. It is an achievement of humanity as a whole,” Invoking the holocaust is becoming as much a trademark for the Zio-schooled Mandela as his extravgant button downed dress shirts.

November 1994 – Israeli professor Michael Wolfsohn reveals that in 1989, Mandela’s release was on the table as part of a large prisoner exchange for missing Israeli soldier Ron Arad until the Berlin Wall fell.

January 5, 1995 – Housing Minister Joe Slovo, the brains behind the ANC, and one of two Jews to become part of the Mandela’s cabinet, dies of bone marrow cancer. The other Jewish cabinet member, Ronnie Kasrils, would prove to be an even more polarizing figure.

February 1995 – South African Foreign Minister Alfred Nzo announces full South African diplomatic relations with the “State of Palestine,” prompting protest from the Israeli officials that had funded the ANC since its inception.. Blacks biting the jewish hand that fed them increasingly wears on the nerves of the ANC’s jewish backers.

October 1995 – Prior to national local elections, Nelson Mandela joins Jewish ANC candidates in an appeal to the Jewish community not to emigrate from South Africa due to fear of crime. In spite of the ANC’s enormous Jewish ties, many of South Africa’s Jewish population  appear to be ruing  the fall of apartheid and fleeing the country by the tens of thousands. Blowback is the quintessential bitch!

January 1996 – Two main South African Jewish organizations with ties to the Black ANC criticize Mandela’s meeting with Louis Farrakhan, leader of the Nation of Islam, famous for anti-Semitic remarks in the U.S. Mandela apologises publicly, with his Jewish handlers in toe.

February 1996 – Chief Rabbi Yirael Meir Lau shares stories of his imprisonment in a concentration camp with Mandela in Pretoria. Mandela equates apartheid with the “holocaust” for the umpteenth time.

September 20, 1996 – A leading Jewish Newspaper publishes a report citing crime as the greatest reason for Jews leaving South Africa. Jewish communities become more withdrawn as their ties to the ANC strengthen. Publicly black and Jewish solidarity is at it’s peak. Privately, Jews; like Indians, Arabs even some members of the “coloured” or mulatto community, are seen as whites by rampaging South African blacks, fear for their lives and embark on a mass exodus from the nation.

September 1997 – Mandela is presented with an honorary doctorate in philosophy from Israel’s, Ben Gurion University. Zionist organization’s award is presented in Cape Town “because Mandela has indicated he will not visit the Mid East until he is able to make a meaningful contribution to the peace process.”

April 1998 – Mandela appoints Richard Goldstone, a renowned Jewish egal scholar and jurist,  to investigate an alleged high-level plot to overthrow the country’s government involving Mandela’s former wife and several of his former “colleagues”.

July 18, 1998 – The country celebrates the president’s 80th birthday. Mandela also throws secret “wedding celebration”, letting Chief Rabbi Cyril Harris in on the secret a day early in a special ceremony. The ceremony has an  “Afro-Jewish” theme to it.

August 12, 1998 – Mandela and Arafat exchange medals and embrace in a ceremony. Jewish leaders are bemused. seems Mandela still doesn’t get it.

January 1999 –Mandela is a  frequent celebrity bar mitzvah guest at high profile Jewish bar mitzvahs in South Africa.

October 19, 1999 – Mandela arrives in Israel, his adopted homeland, for the first time. Jewish and newly empowered black South Africans anticipate that their president’s visit will yield better relations between the two nations. Having recently visited Iran, Syria, Jordan the backdrop of Iran holding thirteen Jewish prisoners as alleged spies, Mandela agrees to mediate between Israel and her neighbors, stating, “”I cannot conceive of Israel withdrawing if Arab states do not recognize Israel within secure borders.”Mandela is now officially Israels, b*&^%.

February 2000 – Following his presidency, Mandela is named patron in chief of Tikkun, a private Jewish-controlled social services project founded in 1996 providig interracial adult education, skills training and AIDS relief work. Although the agency is privately managed, it is subsidised by the new ANC government.

December 13, 2000 – Mandela is key speaker at opening ceremony of the new South African Jewish Museum.

January 2002 – In Durban, Mandela retracts statements supporting the U.S.-led war in Afghanistan and comments labeling Osama bin Laden a terrorist, upsetting the Jewish community. Although the Jews are a “peace loving folk”, international Jewry openly supports the war on terror and the millions of deaths its caused worldwide.

May 2002- Lazar Sidelsky, a Jewish lawyer who’d given a young Nelson Mandela a job as a clerk in the face of apartheid restrictions, dies in Johannesburg at age 90.

October 2002 –Wolfie Kodesh, Jewish founder of the armed wing of the ANC and former member of the South African Communist party, dies at age 84. Kodesh is praised by Mandela at his funeral in Cape Town. Mandela is a key speaker at the ceremony

December 2003  – Union of Orthodox Rabbis taps new chief rabbi, Warren Goldstein, 32, to succeed Harris in January 2005. Goldstein co-authored a book with Mandela’s grandson, Dumani. Links abound!

August 2004 – Chief Rabbi Cyril Harris accuses the country’s Jews of not sufficiently supporting MaAfrika Tikkun, the community’s privately run but publicly funded outreach initiative. “There’s an unfortunate reluctance, a sort of suspicion about interacting with the black majority — particularly on the part of the older generation — which is absurd,” he said, noting “a kind of restraint” when it comes to non-Jewish causes.

April 2004 – Top  Israeli paper celebrates Jewish and ANC partnership in “rebuilding” South Africa. The new ANC created constitutional court — headed by a Jew, Chief Justice Arthur Chaskalson is touted as the nation’s greatest achievement. The JTA writes that “After some years of demoralization, the Jewish community recently has begun to rebound. It has placed in key leadership positions young, dynamic people who are less burdened by the baggage of apartheid and who are vigorously engaging with symbols of the new South Africa.” It profiles Yehuda Kay, 28, national director of the South African Jewish Board of Deputies; Zev Krengel, 31, chairman of the board’s Johannesburg area council; Avrom Krengel, 35, chair of the South African Zionist Federation; Rabbi Craig Kacev, 32, acting director of the South African Board of Jewish Education; and Warren Goldstein, 32, recently chosen as the country’s chief rabbi.

September 2004 – A review of a book about Zimbabwe by Abe Abrahamson — honorary life president of South African Zionist Federation — mentions that Abrahamson was one of six high profile Jews to visit Nelson Mandela upon the latter’s release from prison.

September 13, 2005 – Former Chief Rabbi Cyril Harris dies of cancer at age 69, and was remembered for offering a prayer at Mandela’s inauguration in 1994.

January 2008 – Anti-apartheid activist Helen Suzman, who visited Mandela in prison on several occasions, and was instrumental in the fall of apartheid, dies.

White and East Indian African Genocide continues.

by Jack Sen

Source

Karl Marx: Racist Supremacist, Enemy of Humanity & Hypocrite

Visit ResistanceRadio.tv Today!

Julian Assange’s Ties to Nazi Jew illuminati Cult

December 27, 2010

by Richard Evans
(for henrymakow.com) 

Julian Assange was born in 1971. His birth parents ran a touring theatre company but his father abandoned them.

When Julian was 8-years-old, his mother, Christine, married a member of “The White Brotherhood” – aka “The Family” or San­ti­nike­tan Park Asso­ci­a­tion, a private psychiatric hospital on the outskirts of Melbourne Australia.

In the 1960’s-1980’s, the Santiniketan Park Association received CIA-Sandoz LSD-25.

The psychiatric hospital was part of a New Age colony with about 200 members. They were all professionals:  psychiatrists, medical doctors – 25% were nurses – lawyers, and ranking civil servants and social workers.

The allegations were that these people used their authority to “collect” (kidnap) children. As many as twenty eight children had been ‘collected’ under the custody of the director, Anne Hamilton-Byrne, a theosophist.  Children were selected for their Aryan traits.

This cult is well documented from the Australian investigations and court proceedings highlighted in the Oz media at the time.

According to Assange, his parents broke with the cult in 1982 and until 1990, they lived ‘on the run’  moving dozens of times. During this period, Julian was charged with computer hacking by the Australian police.  That’s all Assange has said about it, claiming that he doesn’t remember Hamilton-Byrne or anything about the cult.

Cult members have disclosed the children were collected for a “scientific experiment”. Though  Hamilton-Byrne (left, insert) remained silent, members disclosed that Hamilton-Byrne predicted a global holocaust which wipe out most of humanity.  She was preparing the cult children to be “inheritors of the earth”.

Anne Hamilton-Byrne is definitely MTF(male to female) transgender fake woman, and is really a man, ‘dragqueen’.

CIA has often managed and grown it’s agents from births, nurtured into transgenders by Eugenics Programs. So, Anne and her/his husband are all CIA cult programmer transgenders! Unfortunately, Assange has big possibility of his real ‘Identity’ of gender, too!

I ‘ve researched ‘Transgender Agenda’, and I think that Assange will be revealed to be a FTM(female to male) transgender transman born originally female. And the most important thing is that his mother, Christine is definitely a MTF transgender and transgenderings are generational!

It was already unveiled that Edward Snowden is a special FTM transgender agent for power-game of CIA and NSA.

Assange has female skull- structure, faminine face, jawline and small mouth, small hands….. and so on.These are all woman’s traits. If he is turned out to be a transgender with more researches, he/she must be a member of the dirty scum, CIA, and so forth.

According to Hamilton-Byrne’s real daughter Sarah Moore the children hadn’t been told about that.  What they were told was that Anne Hamilton-Byrne was their birth mother, even though their number and ages made that impossible.  The were told all other members of the cult were their ‘uncles or aunties’ – even though some of these were the real birth parents of a few of them.

The “Family” was related to the Nazi “Lebensborn e. V.” organization   founded in December, 1935 as a “registered association” ostensibly to foster population increase in ‘declining’ ‘pure Aryan’ stock in Europe.

German FTR movie LEBENSBORN, Nazi Lebensborn Film Brochure, Nazi Jew propaganda film, Lebensborn eV, SS doctor, Maria Perschy, Renate Kumlister, Birgitt Bergen, Elke Eichwede

Lebensborn e. V was under the authority of the SS “race and settlement bureau”.  Lebensborn is best remembered as a breeding program for SS ‘studs’ with select Aryan female volunteers.  The project included social workers of the settlement bureau screening schools and hospitals in Germany and occupied Europe looking for infants and children that fit the Nazi eugenics profile of traits.

Thousands of such children were ‘drafted’ into the program – kidnapped – and sent to  to remote hospital/academy locations for mind control programming.  There were over 30 of these facilities throughout Europe, which processed as many as 30,000 new births.

However, many more older children taken from other countries were sent to special facilities for “Aryanisation” re-programming.  The best source of information is the record of the 8th Nuremberg Trial, United States of America v. Ulrich Greifelt, et al., or the RuSHA Trial.

Daniel Assange the secret Son of Julian Assange

The infamous Dr. Josef Mengele is generally remembered for lethal ‘experiments’ on children at Auschwitz . It’s often overlooked that the purpose of his butchery was the scientific improvement of pre-existing methods of Illuminati trauma based mind programming of children, and his techniques were instituted in Lebensborn “Aryanisation’” facilities.

Mengele was an architect of MK-ULTRA.   Mengele was protected by Office of Strategic Services (OSS) ‘Operation Paperclip’ and went to work for the CIA’s top secret MK-ULTRA projects. .

Hamiliton-Byrne’s White Brotherhood operation apparently was a continuation of Lebensborn.   Hamilton-Byrne’s obsession with white-blonde uniformity to the point of blearching the children’s hair and identical styles and dress is a bit too close to Lebensborn to dismiss.

ASSANGE’S ACCUSER

Anna Ardin’s, who accused Assange of ‘rape’ went AWOL from the Swedish feminist prosecutor December 9th to surface on the West Bank in the Palestinian Territories, as a member of “The Brotherhood,” allegedly a “Christian outreach group” that protests Israeli “settlers”in Palestinian territory.
http://www.the-peoples-forum.com/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=21830   Feminist twitter tweets have been ablaze accusing Ardin of being a CIA Christian Nazi.

(Ardin, left, ten years ago and today)

Ardin’s action was such a wild disconnect that one has to wonder if maybe her real handlers aren’t the left-wing arm of the Swedish (national) Socialist Party.

Isn’t it tempting to connect those dots.  The dots between Wikileaks residing on Pirate Bay‘s P2P servers in Stockholm, which are owned by Carl Lund­strom, the self professed  Swedish neo-Nazi and financial backer of Sweden’s fas­cist polit­i­cal party, the Socialistiska partiet.

Before WWII that party used to be Sweden’s Communist Party, the Sveriges kommunistiska, but they converted to National Socialism during the war and remained that way ever since.

The Swedish Socialist Party is not to be confused with the leftist Social Democratic Party which employed Anna Ardin as press secretary.  It certainly begins to appear that Ardin is a double agent.    Her actions are worthy of the Goddess Eris who  tossed the ‘Apple of Discord’ in the proximity of three goddesses, seeing it is inscribed “Kallisti – for the most beautiful one” .  The Cat Fight of the Goddesses
http://www.democracynow.org/seo/2010/12/20/naomi_wolf_vs_jaclyn_friedman_a

Here’s where things get weird.  Pirate Bay Lundstrom’s family was linked with Sandoz pharmaceuticals. Sandoz had been a division of Nazi corp I.G. Farben during WWII, patented the only pharmaceutical LSD in the world.

These revelations provide more evidence of Assange’s ties with the Illuminati, as if any were needed. Hamilton-Byrne’s family was probably one of many cells in a post-war Nazi “Lebensborn” program assisted by the CIA and MK-ULTRA.

Links
============================== on Mt. Olympus ensued. Hence last week’s  Pacifica Media “Democracy NOW” broadcast with “End of America” enthusiast Naomi Wolf in a shouting match cat fight with rabid radical Feminista “My Sluthood Myself” author Jacklyn Friedman.

===========================

Excerpt from book by Hamilton-Bryne Daughter

Anne Hamilton-Byrne “The Family” cult. 
http://www.rickross.com/groups/thefamily.html

Anne Hamilton-Byrne, Leader of The Family unrepentant but ready to die. 
http://www.news.com.au/national/anne-hamilton-byrne-leader-of-the-family-unrepentant-but-ready-to-die/story-e6frfkvr-1225762020614

Der Lebensborn – Pramen života ( Czech film festival, 2000)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DtrUYbyVQFw&feature=related

Great White Brotherhood, Blavatsky, Aryans, VRIL & SS
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kv6Lg5qj8F4&feature=related

Swedish Nazi Patron 

c. 2010 http://www.henrymakow.com

– See more at:

http://www.henrymakow.com/stranger_than_fiction_life_of.html#sthash.p52HxYZE.dpuf

Wikileaks Is Zionist Poison I

Wikileaks Is Zionist Poison II: Deconstruction Of The Myth

George Hunt – The New World Bank, Religion, and Rulers 1987

George Hunt became aware of the environmental fraud after attending the Wilderness Conference in Colorado in 1987.

From then until his death Dec 23rd 2013 George dedicated himself to exposing the environmental fraud, masterminded by Maurice Strong and his boss, Baron Edmund de Rothschild.

Video The Oven

Video TheirTube

Website The Bernician

If you are interested in knowing who, how and why the plans for ‘sustainable development’ were founded and by whom, look no further than George’s courageous expose.

The Big Bad Bank
The expose documentary by George Washington Hunt of a secret bank created over the past 25 years.

The Big Bad Bank – Intro
The Big Bad Bank Intro George Washington Hunt introduces us to the World Conservation Bank. Mr. Hunt also explains his background and how he discovered the plan for this bank. One of the handouts included the Brundtland Report “Our Common Future” as well George reveals what the bank will need to get it’s feet off the ground.

The Big Bad Bank – Responsibility to Educate
The Big Bad Bank by George Washington Hunt, in this part he goes further into his background on how he assumed the vast education responsibility to educate us about the World Conservation Bank. We listen to the voice of David Lang, and elitist who tells us how the common people shouldn’t be told about this bank. Then we look at the wilderness inventory and what the US stands to lose as part of conservation projects that the bank will control. George Hunt goes into further explanation of how the Rich Evil Elitists are like and what they will own and how they can handle things.

The Big Bad Bank – Your Educator
The Big Bad Bank – George Washington Hunt is your educator, it’s his goal to educate millions of people about this bank. George also points out that the banks requiring bailouts should not have been saved and cost the tax payers dearly. The Big Bad Bank or The World Conservation Bank was formed at the 4th World Wilderness Congress in Estes Park in September 1987, the bank could be capitalized by the shares of stock and trusts of the members. The big problems are that the currency unit will rise to high, prices will skyrocket, and the worst part is that the bank will purposely go bust and all of the assets will be left in the hands of the shareholders in this bank. Also in this part of the video we hear from Baron Edmond James de Rothschild about technologies that the bank will use to ultimately come to its demise.

The Big Bad Bank – Conservation
The Big Bad Bank – George Washington Hunt tells us how he was selected as an official host at the 4th World Wilderness Congress. Thinking it was an environmental event he attended but his attention was shifted to bank matters, some of the people George met were the international bankers including David Rockefeller, Baron Edmond James de Rothschild, the Prime Minister of Norway Gro Harlem Brundtland and Maurice Strong.

The Big Bad Bank – Greed and Power
The Big Bad Bank – This section focus on Greed and Power of the largest international bankers, the most famous was J.P. Morgan. George Washington Hunt’s Great Grandfather, Also GW Hunt, was building a railroad, at the same time Edward Henry Harriman was also building a railroad in the same direction and Harriman was able to go to JP Morgan for funds to continue his railroad and beat GW Hunt to the pass because he had the money to do so. More on the rich and powerful we get a little history on the Rothschild family as well as the Rockefeller family. “The custodian of the Planet” Maurice Strong is also a big player in the politics of this bank. Strong was working to take water from the San Luis Valley in Colorado and sell it at high profit margins to other cities in the US.

The Big Bad Bank – Reviewing the Scenario
The Big Bad Bank – Reviewing the Scenario, George Washington Hunt reminds us of what is involved with this bank and how they plan on making a whole lot of money by doing things such as those of Maurice Strong and how he was planning on destroying the wilderness in the San Luis Valley of Colorado but at the same time was also working as an environmentalists with the big investors in this Big Bad Bank. We also hear the voice of Maurice Strong speaking about this conservation bank and introducing Baron Edmond de Rothschild.

The Big Bad Bank – The Rich Elite
The Big Bad Bank – Here we see an article about David Rockefeller and William Ruckleshaus speaking about this bank, we also learn more about the Rothschild family, Nathan Rothschild had inside knowledge of the outcome of Battle of Waterloo in the war of 1816 and was able to quickly turn the events out in his favor and wound up owning the Bank of England overnight. One possible solution to turning this Big Bad Bank over to good has would be if the G-77 Countries of the world took charge and hired the best talent, rather than a private bank which could turn on the people.

The Big Bad Bank – Closing Statements
The Big Bad Bank – Bailouts, One big Bad Bank and more problems that America has, including the debt to the Federal Reserve. John F Kennedy tried to solve America’s problem with the Federal Reserve by having more money printed, but that’s a whole other theory. Wrapping up the show and quickly touching on what George Washington Hunt has presented to us in this video as well as a few last points about current events and theories about expensive and harmful environment projects.

Source

Governments and Biowarfare: A Brief History by James Corbett

James Corbett
The Corbett Report

1 May, 2009

As questions continue to mount about the origins of the mysterious Mexican flu which is pushing the world into mass hysteria, some are noting that its genetic fingerprint suggests it was created in a laboratory while those who are tracking the small number of confirmed deaths from the outbreak—all of the victims so far being Mexican nationals—are questioning if this is a race-specific bioweapon. While some in the controlled corporate media dismiss such inquiry out of hand, serious researchers know that there is a long and well-documented history of governments experimenting with, deploying and even creating bioweapons to use as a means of warfare, population control and consolidation of governmental power.

Biowarfare itself goes back to the earliest periods of recorded human history. The ancient Hittites over 3000 years ago drove plague victims into enemy lands with the intent of infecting the enemy population. Athenians poisoned the water supply of their enemies in Kirrha with a toxic plant called hellebore sometime around 590 BC. Scythians in 4th century BC learned to smear their arrow tips with snake venom, blood and even animal feces in order to infect their enemy’s wounds. In the 18th century, the British commander Lord Amherst famously wrote about a plan to infect Native Americans by giving them smallpox-infected blankets, and researcher Kevin Annett has documented similar actions by the Canadian government, which acted in coordination with the Catholic, Anglican and United churches in Canada’s residential school system to facilitate the genocide of Canadian natives.

Of course, as science began to make progress in understanding and manipulating naturally occurring biological agents, so too did biowarfare become more deadly. The modern age of biowarfare began in earnest in WWI, with the Germans beginning to use anthrax as a stealth weapon against key targets in enemy countries. Accords such as the Geneva Protocol of 1925 attempted to prohibit the use of biowarfare, but that didn’t stop any of the major powers, including the Germans, the Japanese, the Americans, the Canadians or the British from pursuing biowarfare capabilities. The excuse was always that these biowarfare programs were merely for defensive purposes, but of course there is no material difference between a defensive and an offensive biowarfare program.

The American government’s approach to biowarfare is notable for its unabashed use of unwitting American citizens as guinea pigs in biological weapons research. The very people who helped establish the U.S. biological weapons programs openly bragged about their experiments on unwitting human test subjects. Dr. Cornelius Rhoads, who founded the U.S. Army Biological Warfare facilities in Maryland, Utah and Panama purposefully infected test subjects with cancer cells while in the employ of the Rockefeller Institute for Medical Investigations. He later wrote letters about the tests. With that as a starting point for the American bioweapons research program, what follows is a list of experimental horrors too long to reproduce, but which includes:

  – 1932: The Tuskegee Syphilis Study begins. 200 black men diagnosed with syphilis are never told of their illness, are denied treatment, and instead are used as human guinea pigs in order to follow the progression and symptoms of the disease. They all subsequently die from syphilis, their families never told that they could have been treated. Follow this link for more info.

  – 1950: In an experiment to determine how susceptible an American city would be to biological attack, the U.S. Navy sprays a cloud of bacteria from ships over San Franciso. Monitoring devices are situated throughout the city in order to test the extent of infection. Many residents become ill with pneumonia-like symptoms. Follow this link for more info.

  – 1955: The CIA, in an experiment to test its ability to infect human populations with biological agents, releases a bacteria withdrawn from the Army’s biological warfare arsenal over Tampa Bay, Fl. Follow this link for more info.

  – 1956: U.S. military releases mosquitoes infected with Yellow Fever over Savannah, Ga and Avon Park, Fl. Following each test, Army agents posing as public health officials test victims for effects. Follow this link for more info.

  – 1965: Prisoners at the Holmesburg State Prison in Philadelphia are subjected to dioxin, the highly toxic chemical component of Agent Orange used in Viet Nam. The men are later studied for development of cancer, which indicates that Agent Orange had been a suspected carcinogen all along. Follow this link for more info.

  – 1966: U.S. Army dispenses Bacillus subtilis variant niger throughout the New York City subway system. More than a million civilians are exposed when army scientists drop lightbulbs filled with the bacteria onto ventilation grates. Follow this link for more info.

  – 1990: More than 1500 six-month old black and Hispanic babies in Los Angeles are given an “experimental” measles vaccine that had never been licensed for use in the United States. CDC later admits that parents were never informed that the vaccine being injected to their children was experimental. Follow this link for more info.

  – 1994: With a technique called “gene tracking,” Dr. Garth Nicolson at the MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston, TX discovers that many returning Desert Storm veterans are infected with an altered strain of Mycoplasma incognitus, a microbe commonly used in the production of biological weapons. Incorporated into its molecular structure is 40 percent of the HIV protein coat, indicating that it had been man-made. Follow this link for more info.

As horrifying as these admitted tests of biological weapons on unwitting subjects are, perhaps even more frightening is the knowledge that governments have a documented history of using biological agents against their own citizens in bioterror false flag operations. It is no coincidence that two of the most well-known and devastating biological releases this decade have traced back to Fort Detrick (the home of the U.S. biological weapons research program since the 1950s and the current home of USAMRIID) and Porton Down (Fort Detrick’s British equivalent). 

In the late Winter of 2001, an outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease ravaged the British farming industry, requiring the government-mandated destruction of millions of animals. The losses to British farmers were nearly incalculable with a number of cases of farmers ending their own lives in anguish over their loss of livelihood. In April of 2001, the Sunday Express reported that the outbreak came just months after an audit of Porton Down—a top secret government bioweapons research facility housing such agents as TB, anthrax and smallpox—found that phials containing foot-and-mouth samples were missing from the lab. Authorities tried to play down the report by suggesting that “animal rights activists” had stolen and released the samples from the maximum security government laboratory. Authorities failed to explain why animal rights activists would be interested in releasing a biological agent that would result in the destruction of millions of animals, or how they were able to penetrate the multiple layers of defenses in the heavily defended laboratory.

Just months later, anthrax-laced letters began to show up in the offices of the Bush Administration’s most vocal media opponents and political rivals in the U.S. The administration and their puppets in the corporate-controlled media immediately began to theorize that the anthrax used in the letters was a crude concotion that an Al-Qaeda operative could have mixed in a bathtub. It later emerged that these anthrax spores were in fact the most sophisticated weaponized form of the deadly plague ever seen and the particular strain used in its production was traced back to Fort Detrick. It later emerged that key members of the Bush Administration had been on Cipro, the anti-anthrax drug, since the morning of 9/11. The entire story of the anthrax investigation is lengthy and convoluted, but extremely important for a better understanding of false flag bioterrorism.

Of course, these are only the well-known examples from the past decade, but naturally there are others (including the 2007 foot-and-mouth outbreak in England, which was also found to come from a government lab). Even worse than these examples is the knowledge that the types of bioweapons that governments around the world have been developing far outstrip anthrax or foot-and-mouth in sophistication and effectiveness. Although the full extent of American bioweapons research remains classified, it is public knowledge that the American military was already experimenting with race-specific bioweapons at least since 1970, a technology that the Apartheid South African government was known to possess and which Israel was developing last decade. It does not take much imagination to envision why those two governments would have been interested in the technology, but it may be surprising to learn that the American government has not only been developing race-specific bioweapons, but that key government officials have advocated their use as a way of furthering American foreign policy. In September 2000 a neocon think-tank called Project for a New American Century released a policy paper, “Rebuilding America’s Defenses”, that contained the following chilling quotation: “advanced forms of biological warfare that can “target” specific genotypes may transform biological warfare from the realm of terror to a politically useful tool.” Prominent PNAC members included Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Jeb Bush and Scooter Libby.

Given all of the foregoing, the suggestion that the current flu pandemic may in fact be a government-engineered race-specific bioweapon is not only plausible, but the first possibility that any rational investigator would consider when examining the never before seen flu strain which only seems to be killing Mexicans. The natural question at this point is not whether the government could do such a thing, but why they would do such a thing.

Naturally, governments deploy biological agents for a number of different reasons. The 2001 foot-and-mouth outbreak ushered in a new era of internationally-standardized farming procedures and guidelines in the name of ‘food safety’ and the protection of trade interests, ultimately leading to such Orwellian programs as the National Animal Identification System (which is now being administered in other countries under different names). The 2001 anthrax attack not only helped to silence Bush media critics and Democrats who showed any sign of resisting the Bush Administration’s “War on Terror” policies, but it also ensured the passage of the Patriot Act, which was rushed through Congress as the height of the anthrax scare before anyone even had a chance to read it.

So if this new flu is indeed a bioweapon, and if it has been released on purpose, the question remains: What motive would a western government have for this release, especially considering the new flu now threatens the entire globe? The answers to that question are numerous, but can be located in such things as the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America, as well as the precedent-setting consolidation of power in the hands of agencies like the WHO during this crisis. The Corbett Report will be covering these possible motives behind the attack in a series of forthcoming articles, but for now readers are advised to further familiarize themselves with the concept of false flag bioterror by listening to Episode 060 of The Corbett Report.

Episode 060 – A bioterror false flag

Right click and “save as” to download the mp3 or listen directly.

Source

A blueprint for Tyranny – Report from Iron Mountain


© see below (fair use)

Report report_from_iron_mountain.pdf

Report from Iron Mountain; Using fear to make people subservient to government.

***************

© 2002 by G. Edward Griffin

Freedom Force International

This is taken from Chapter 24 of The Creature from Jekyll Island

(When added to The Freedom Manifesto, this material should be expanded to include the concept of deliberate waste. With that included, it will make an excellent chapter.)

The substance of these stratagems [for the weakening of the United States so it can be more easily merged into a global government based on the model of collectivism] can be traced to a think-tank study released in 1966 called the Report from Iron Mountain. Although the origin of the report is highly debated, the document itself hints that it was commissioned by the Department of Defense under Defense Secretary, Robert McNamara and was produced by the Hudson Institute located at the base of Iron Mountain in Croton-on-Hudson, New York. The Hudson Institute was founded and directed by Herman Kahn, formerly of the Rand Corporation. Both McNamara and Kahn were members of the CFR.

The self-proclaimed purpose of the study was to explore various ways to “stabilize society.” Praiseworthy as that may sound, a reading of the Report soon reveals that the word society is used synonymously with the word government. Furthermore, the word stabilize is used as meaning to preserve and to perpetuate. It is clear from the start that the nature of the study was to analyze the different ways a government can perpetuate itself in power, ways to control its citizens and prevent them from rebelling. It was stated at the beginning of the Report that morality was not an issue. The study did not address questions of right or wrong; nor did it deal with such concepts as freedom or human rights. Ideology was not an issue, nor patriotism, nor religious precepts. Its sole concern was how to perpetuate the existing government. The Report said: 

Previous studies have taken the desirability of peace, the importance of human life, the superiority of democratic institutions, the greatest “good” for the greatest number, the “dignity” of the individual, the desirability of maximum health and longevity, and other such wishful premises as axiomatic values necessary for the justification of a study of peace issues. We have not found them so. We have attempted to apply the standards of physical science to our thinking, the principal characteristic of which is not quantification, as is popularly believed, but that, in Whitehead’s words, “…it ignores all judgments of value; for instance, all esthetic and moral judgments.” (1)

The major conclusion of the report was that, in the past, war has been the only reliable means to achieve that goal. It contends that only during times of war or the threat of war are the masses compliant enough to carry the yoke of government without complaint. Fear of conquest and pillage by an enemy can make almost any burden seem acceptable by comparison. War can be used to arouse human passion and patriotic feelings of loyalty to the nation’s leaders. No amount of sacrifice in the name of victory will be rejected. Resistance is viewed as treason. But, in times of peace, people become resentful of high taxes, shortages, and bureaucratic intervention. When they become disrespectful of their leaders, they become dangerous. No government has long survived without enemies and armed conflict. War, therefore, has been an indispensable condition for “stabilizing society.” These are the report’s exact words:

The war system not only has been essential to the existence of nations as independent political entities, but has been equally indispensable to their stable political structure. Without it, no government has ever been able to obtain acquiescence in its “legitimacy,” or right to rule its society. The possibility of war provides the sense of external necessity without which no government can long remain in power. The historical record reveals one instance after another where the failure of a regime to maintain the credibility of a war threat led to its dissolution, by the forces of private interest, of reactions to social injustice, or of other disintegrative elements. The organization of society for the possibility of war is its principal political stabilizer…. It has enabled societies to maintain necessary class distinctions, and it has insured the subordination of the citizens to the state by virtue of the residual war powers inherent in the concept of nationhood. (2)

A NEW DEFINITION OF PEACE

The report then explains that we are approaching a point in history where the old formulas may no longer work. Why? Because it may now be possible to create a world government in which all nations will be disarmed and disciplined by a world army, a condition which will be called peace. The report says: “The word peace, as we have used it in the following pages, … implies total and general disarmament.” (3)

Under that scenario, independent nations will no longer exist and governments will not have the capability to wage war. There could be military action by the world army against renegade political subdivisions, but these would be called peace-keeping operations, and soldiers would be called peace keepers. No matter how much property is destroyed or how much blood is spilled, the bullets will be “peaceful” bullets and the bombs – even atomic bombs, if necessary – will be “peaceful” bombs.

The report then raises the question of whether there can ever be a suitable substitute for war. What else could the regional governments use – and what could the world government itself use – to legitimize and perpetuate itself? To provide an answer to that question was the stated purpose of the study.

The Report from Iron Mountain concludes that there can be no substitute for war unless it possesses three properties. It must (1) be economically wasteful, (2) represent a credible threat of great magnitude, and (3) provide a logical excuse for compulsory service to the government.

A SOPHISTICATED FORM OF SLAVERY

On the subject of compulsory service, the Report explains that one of the advantages of standing armies is that they provide a place for the government to put antisocial and dissident elements of society. In the absence of war, these forced-labor battalions would be told they are fighting poverty or cleaning up the planet or bolstering the economy or serving the common good in some other fashion. Every teenager would be required to serve – especially during those years in which young people are most rebellious against authority. Older people, too, would be drafted as a means of working off tax payments and fines. Dissidents would face heavy fines for “hate crimes” and politically incorrect attitudes so, eventually, they would all be in the forced-labor battalions. The Report says:

We will examine … the time-honored use of military institutions to provide anti-social elements with an acceptable role in the social structure. … The current euphemistic clichés – “juvenile delinquency” and “alienation” – have had their counterparts in every age. In earlier days these conditions were dealt with directly by the military without the complications of due process, usually through press gangs or outright enslavement. …

Most proposals that address themselves, explicitly or otherwise, to the postwar problem of controlling the socially alienated turn to some variant of the Peace Corps or the so-called Job Corps for a solution. The socially disaffected, the economically unprepared, the psychologically uncomfortable, the hard-core “delinquents,” the incorrigible “subversives,” and the rest of the unemployable are seen as somehow transformed by the disciplines of a service modeled on military precedent into more or less dedicated social service workers. …

Another possible surrogate for the control of potential enemies of society is the reintroduction, in some form consistent with modern technology and political processes, of slavery. … It is entirely possible that the development of a sophisticated form of slavery may be an absolute prerequisite for socialcontrol in a world at peace. As a practical matter, conversion of the code of military discipline to a euphemized form of enslavement would entail surprisingly little revision; the logical first step would be the adoption of some form of “universal” military service. (4)

BLOOD GAMES

The Report considered ways in which the public could be preoccupied with non-important activities so that it would not have time to participate in political debate or resistance. Recreation, trivial game shows, pornography, and situation comedies could play an important role, but blood games were considered to be the most promising of all the options. Blood games are competitive events between individuals or teams that are sufficiently violent in nature to enable the spectators to vicariously work off their frustrations. As a minimum, these events must evoke a passionate team loyalty on the part of the fans and must include the expectation of pain and injury on the part of the players. Even better for their purpose is the spilling of blood and the possibility of death. The common man has a morbid fascination for violence and blood. Crowds gather to chant “Jump! Jump!” at the suicidal figure on a hotel roof. Cars slow to a near stop on the highway to gawk at broken bodies next to a collision.

A schoolyard fight instantly draws a circle of spectators. Boxing matches and football games and hockey games and automobile races are telecast daily, attracting millions of cheering fans who give rapt attention to each moment of danger, each angry blow to the face, each broken bone, each knockout, each carrying away of the unconscious or possibly dying contestant. In this fashion, their anger at “society” is defused and focused, instead, on the opposing team. The emperors of Rome devised the Circuses and gladiator contests and public executions by wild beasts for precisely that purpose.

Before jumping to the conclusion that such concepts are absurd in modern times, recall that during the 1985 European soccer championship in Belgium, the spectators became so emotionally involved in the contest that a bloody riot broke out in the bleachers leaving behind 38 dead and more that 400 injured. U.S. News & World Report gives this account:

The root of the trouble: A tribal loyalty to home teams that surpasses an obsession and, say some experts, has become a substitute religion for many. The worst offenders include members of gangs such as Chelsea’s Anti-Personnel Firm, made up of ill-educated young males who find in soccer rivalry an escape from boredom.

Still, the British do not have a patent on soccer violence. On May 26, eight people were killed and more than 50 injured in Mexico City,… a 1964 stadium riot in Lima, Peru, killed more than 300 – and a hotly disputed 1969 match between El Salvador and Honduras led to a week-long shooting war between the two countries, causing hundreds of casualties.

The U.S. is criticized for the gridiron violence of its favorite sport, football, but outbursts in the bleachers are rare because loyalties are spread among many sports and national pride is not at stake. Said Thomas Tutko, professor of psychology at California’s San Jose State University: “In these other countries, it used to be their armies. Now it’s their competitive teams that stir passions.” (5)

Having considered all the ramifications of blood games, The Report from Iron Mountain concluded that they were not an adequate substitute for war. It is true that violent sports are useful distracters and do, in fact, allow an outlet for boredom and fierce group loyalty, but their effect on the nation’s psyche could not match the intensity of war hysteria. Until a better alternative could be found, world government would have to be postponed so that nations could continue to wage war.

FINDING A CREDIBLE GLOBAL THREAT

In time of war, most citizens uncomplainingly accept their low quality of life and remain fiercely loyal to their leaders. If a suitable substitute for war is to be found, then it must also elicit that same reaction. Therefore, a new enemy must be found that threatens the entire world, and the prospects of being overcome by that enemy must be just as terrifying as war itself. The Report is emphatic on that point:

Allegiance requires a cause; a cause requires an enemy. This much is obvious; the critical point is that the enemy that defines the cause must seem genuinely formidable. Roughly speaking, the presumed power of the “enemy” sufficient to warrant an individual sense of allegiance to a society must be proportionate to the size and complexity of the society. Today, of course, that power must be one of unprecedented magnitude and frightfulness. (6)

The first consideration in finding a suitable threat to serve as a global enemy was that it did not have to be real. A real one would be better, of course, but an invented one would work just as well, provided the masses could be convinced it was real. The public will more readily believe some fictions than others. Credibility would be more important than truth.

Poverty was examined as a potential global enemy but rejected as not fearful enough. Most of the world was already in poverty. Only those who had never experienced poverty would see it as a global threat. For the rest, it was simply a fact of everyday life.

An invasion by aliens from outer space was given serious consideration. The report said that experiments along those lines already may have been tried. Public reaction, however, was not sufficiently predictable, because the threat was not “credible.” Here is what the report had to say:

Credibility, in fact, lies at the heart of the problem of developing a political substitute for war. This is where the space-race proposals, in many ways so well suited as economic substitutes for war, fall short. The most ambitious and unrealistic space project cannot of itself generate a believable external menace. It has been hotly argued that such a menace would offer the “last best hope of peace,” etc., by uniting mankind against the danger of destruction by “creatures” from other planets or from outer space. Experiments have been proposed to test the credibility of an out-of-our-world invasion threat; it is possible that a few of the more difficult-to-explain “flying saucer” incidents of recent years were in fact early experiments of this kind. If so, they could hardly have been judged encouraging. (7)

This report was released in 1966 when the idea of an alien presence seemed far fetched to the average person. In the ensuing years, however, that perception has changed. A growing segment of the population now believes that intelligent life forms may exist beyond our planet and could be monitoring our own civilization. Whether that belief is right or wrong is not the issue here. The point is that a dramatic encounter with aliens shown on network television – even if it were to be entirely fabricated by high-tech computer graphics or laser shows in the sky – could be used to stampede all nations into world government supposedly to defend the Earth from invasion. On the other hand, if the aliens were perceived to have peaceful intent, an alternative scenario would be to form world government to represent a unified human species speaking with a single voice in some kind of galactic federation. Either scenario would be far more credible today than in 1966.

THE ENVIRONMENTAL-POLLUTION MODEL

The final candidate for a useful global threat was pollution of the environment. This was viewed as the most likely to succeed because it could be related to observable conditions such as smog and water pollution– in other words, it would be based partly on fact and, therefore, be credible. Predictions could be made showing end-of-earth scenarios just as horrible as atomic warfare. Accuracy in these predictions would not be important. Their purpose would be to frighten, not to inform. It might even be necessary to deliberately poison the environment to make the predictions more convincing and to focus the public mind on fighting a new enemy, more fearful than any invader from another nation – or even from outer space. The masses would more willingly accept a falling standard of living, tax increases, and bureaucratic intervention in their lives as simply “the price we must pay to save Mother Earth.” A massive battle against death and destruction from global pollution possibly could replace war as justification for social control.

Did The Report from Iron Mountain really say that? It certainly did – and much more. Here are just a few of the pertinent passages:

When it comes to postulating a credible substitute for war … the “alternate enemy” must imply a more immediate, tangible, and directly felt threat of destruction. It must justify the need for taking and paying a “blood price” in wide areas of human concern. In this respect, the possible substitute enemies noted earlier would be insufficient. One exception might be the environmental-pollution model, if the danger to society it posed was genuinely imminent. The fictive models would have to carry the weight of extraordinary conviction, underscored with a not inconsiderable actual sacrifice of life. … It may be, for instance, that gross pollution of the environment can eventually replace the possibility of mass destruction by nuclear weapons as the principal apparent threat to the survival of the species. Poisoning of the air, and of the principal sources of food and water supply, is already well advanced, and at first glance would seem promising in this respect; it constitutes a threat that can be dealt with only through social organization and political power. …

It is true that the rate of pollution could be increased selectively for this purpose. … But the pollution problem has been so widely publicized in recent years that it seems highly improbable that a program of deliberate environmental poisoning could be implemented in a politically acceptable manner.

However unlikely some of the possible alternative enemies we have mentioned may seem, we must emphasize that one must be found of credible quality and magnitude, if a transition to peace is ever to come about without social disintegration. It is more probable, in our judgment, that such a threat will have to be invented. (8)

AUTHENTICITY OF THE REPORT

The Report from Iron Mountain states that it was produced by a Special Study Group of fifteen men whose identities were to remain secret and that it was not intended to be made public. One member of the group, however, felt the Report was too important to be kept under wraps. He was not in disagreement with its conclusions. He merely believed that more people should read it. He delivered his personal copy to Leonard Lewin, a well-known author and columnist who, in turn, negotiated its publication by Dial Press. It was then reprinted by Dell Publishing.

This was during the Johnson Administration, and the President’s Special Assistant for National Security Affairs was CFR member Walt Rostow. Rostow was quick to announce that the report was a spurious work. Herman Kahn, CFR director of the Hudson Institute, said it was not authentic. The Washington Post – which was owned and run by CFR member Katharine Graham – called it “a delightful satire.” Time magazine, founded by CFR-member Henry Luce, said it was a skillful hoax.

Then, on November 26, 1967, the Report was reviewed in the book section of the Washington Post by Herschel McLandress, which was the pen name for Harvard professor John Kenneth Galbraith. Galbraith, who also had been a member of the CFR, said that he knew firsthand of the Report’s authenticity because he had been invited to participate in it. Although he was unable to be part of the official group, he was consulted from time to time and had been asked to keep the project a secret. Furthermore, while he doubted the wisdom of letting the public know about the Report, he agreed totally with its conclusions. He wrote:

As I would put my personal repute behind the authenticity of this document, so would I testify to the validity of its conclusions. My reservations relate only to the wisdom of releasing it to an obviously unconditioned public. (9)

Six weeks later, in an Associated Press dispatch from London, Galbraith went even further and jokingly admitted that he was “a member of the conspiracy.”(10)

That, however, did not settle the issue. The following day, Galbraith backed off. When asked about his “conspiracy” statement, he replied: “For the first time since Charles II The Times has been guilty of a misquotation. … Nothing shakes my conviction that it was written by either Dean Rusk or Mrs. Clare Booth Luce.” (11)

The reporter who conducted the original interview was embarrassed by the allegation and did further research. Six days later, this is what he reported: Misquoting seems to be a hazard to which Professor Galbraith is prone. The latest edition of the Cambridge newspaper Varsity quotes the following (tape recorded) interchange:

Interviewer: “Are you aware of the identity of the author of Report from Iron Mountain?”

Galbraith: “I was in general a member of the conspiracy but I was not the author. I have always assumed that it was the man who wrote the foreword – Mr. Lewin.” (12)

So, on at least three occasions, Galbraith publicly endorsed the authenticity of the Report but denied that he wrote it. Then who did? Was it Leonard Lewin, after all? In 1967 he said he did not. In 1972 he said that he did. Writing in The New York Times Book Review Lewin explained: “I wrote the ‘Report,” all of it. … What I intended was simply to pose the issues of war and peace in a provocative way.” (13)

But wait! A few years before that, columnist William F. Buckley told the New York Times that he was the author. That statement was undoubtedly made tongue-in-cheek, but who and what are we to believe? Was it written by Herman Kahn, John Kenneth Galbraith, Dean Rusk, Clare Booth Luce, Leonard Lewin, or William F. Buckley?

In the final analysis, it makes little difference. The important point is that The Report from Iron Mountain, whether written as a think-tank study or a political satire, explains the reality that surrounds us. Regardless of its origin, the concepts presented in it are now being implemented in almost every detail. All one has to do is hold the Report in one hand and the daily newspaper in the other to realize that every major trend in American life is conforming to the blueprint. So many things that otherwise are incomprehensible suddenly become clear: foreign aid, wasteful spending, the destruction of American industry, a job corps, gun control, a national police force, the apparent demise of Soviet power, a UN army, disarmament, a world bank, a world money, the surrender of national independence through treaties, and the ecology hysteria. The Report from Iron Mountain is an accurate summary of the plan that has already created our present. It is now shaping our future.

ENVIRONMENTALISM A SUBSTITUTE FOR WAR

It is beyond the scope of this study to prove that currently accepted predictions of environmental doom are based on exaggerated and fraudulent “scientific studies.” But such proof is easily found if one is willing to look at the raw data and the assumptions upon which the projections are based. More important, however, is the question of why end-of-world scenarios based on phony scientific studies – or no studies at all – are uncritically publicized by the CFR-controlled media; or why radical environmental groups advocating collectivist doctrine and anti-business programs are lavishly funded by CFR-dominated foundations, banks, and corporations, the very groups that would appear to have the most to lose. The Report from Iron Mountain answers those questions.

As the Report pointed out, truth is not important in these matters. It’s what people can be made to believe that counts. “Credibility” is the key, not reality. There is just enough truth in the fact of environmental pollution to make predictions of planetary doom in the year two-thousand-something seem believable. All that is required is media cooperation and repetition. The plan has apparently worked. People of the industrialized nations have been subjected to a barrage of documentaries, dramas, feature films, ballads, poems, bumper stickers, posters, marches, speeches, seminars, conferences, and concerts. The result has been phenomenal. Politicians are now elected to office on platforms consisting of nothing more than an expressed concern for the environment and a promise to clamp down on those nasty industries. No one questions the damage done to the economy or the nation. It makes no difference when the very planet on which we live is sick and dying. Not one in a thousand will question that underlying premise. How could it be false? Look at all the movie celebrities and rock stars who have joined the movement.

While the followers of the environmental movement are preoccupied with visions of planetary doom, let us see what the leaders are thinking. The first Earth Day was proclaimed on April 22, 1970, at a “Summit” meeting in Rio de Janeiro, attended by environmentalists and politicians from all over the world. A publication widely circulated at that meeting was entitled the Environmental Handbook. The main theme of the book was summarized by a quotation from Princeton Professor Richard A. Falk, a member of the CFR. Falk wrote that there are four interconnected threats to the planet – wars of mass destruction, overpopulation, pollution, and the depletion of resources. Then he said: “The basis of all four problems is the inadequacy of the sovereign states to manage the affairs of mankind in the twentieth century.” (14)

The Handbook continued the CFR line by asking these rhetorical questions: “Are nation-states actually feasible, now that they have power to destroy each other in a single afternoon?… What price would most people be willing to pay for a more durable kind of human organization – more taxes, giving up national flags, perhaps the sacrifice of some of our hard-won liberties?” (15)

In 1989, the CFR-owned Washington Post published an article written by CFR member George Kennan in which he said: “We must prepare instead for … an age where the great enemy is not the Soviet Union, but the rapid deterioration of our planet as a supporting structure for civilized life.” (16)

On March 27, 1990, in the CFR-controlled New York Times, CFR member Michael Oppenheimer wrote: “Global warming, ozone depletion, deforestation and overpopulation are the four horsemen of a looming 21st century apocalypse. … as the cold war recedes, the environment is becoming the No. 1 international security concern.” (17)

CFR member, Lester Brown, heads up another think tank called the Worldwatch Institute. In the Institute’s annual report, entitled State of the World 1991, Brown said that “the battle to save the planet will replace the battle over ideology as the organizing theme of the new world order.” (18)

In the official publication of the 1992 Earth Summit, we find this: “The world community now faces together greater risks to our common security through our impacts on the environment than from traditional military conflicts with one another.”

How many times does it have to be explained? The environmental movement was created by the CFR. It is a substitute for war that they hope will become the emotional and psychological foundation for world government.

HUMANITY ITSELF IS THE TARGET

The Club of Rome is a group of global planners who annually release end-of-world scenarios based on predictions of overpopulation and famine. Their membership is international, but the American roster includes such well-known CFR members as Jimmy Carter, Harlan Cleveland, Claiburne Pell, and Sol Linowitz. Their solution to overpopulation? A world government to control birth rates and, if necessary, euthanasia. That is a gentle word for the deliberate killing of the old, the weak, and of course the uncooperative. Following the same reasoning advanced at Iron Mountain, the Club of Rome has concluded that fear of environmental disaster could be used as a substitute enemy for the purpose of unifying the masses behind its program. In its 1991 book entitled The First Global Revolution, we find this:

In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill. … All these dangers are caused by human intervention. … The real enemy, then, is humanity itself. (19)

Collectivist theoreticians have always been fascinated by the possibility of controlling population growth. It excites their imaginations because it is the ultimate bureaucratic plan. If the real enemy is humanity itself, as the Club of Rome says, then humanity itself must become the target. Fabian Socialist Bertrand Russell expressed it thus:

I do not pretend that birth control is the only way in which population can be kept from increasing. … War, as I remarked a moment ago, has hitherto been disappointing in this respect, but perhaps bacteriological war may prove more effective. If a Black Death could be spread throughout the world once in every generation, survivors could procreate freely without making the world too full. …

A scientific world society cannot be stable unless there is world government. … It will be necessary to find ways of preventing an increase in world population. If this is to be done otherwise than by wars, pestilences and famines, it will demand a powerful international authority. This authority should deal out the world’s food to the various nations in proportion to their population at the time of the establishments of the authority. If any nation subsequently increased its population, it should not on that account receive any more food. The motive for not increasing population would therefore be very compelling. (21)

Very compelling, indeed. These quiet-spoken collectivists are not kidding around. For example, one of the most visible “environmentalists” and advocate of population control was Jacques Cousteau. Interviewed by the United Nations UNESCO Courier in November of 1991, Cousteau spelled it out. He said:

What should we do to eliminate suffering and disease? It is a wonderful idea but perhaps not altogether a beneficial one in the long run. If we try to implement it we may jeopardize the future of our species. It’s terrible to have to say this. World population must be stabilized, and to do that we must eliminate 350,000 people per day. This is so horrible to contemplate that we shouldn’t even say it, but it is just as bad not to say it. (22)

GORBACHEV BECOMES AN ECOLOGY WARRIOR

We can now understand how Mikhail Gorbachev, formerly the leader of one of the most repressive governments the world has known, became head of a new organization called the International Green Cross, which supposedly is dedicated to environmental issues. Gorbachev has never denounced collectivism, only the label of a particular brand of collectivism called Communism. His real interest is not ecology but world government with himself assured a major position in the collectivist power structure. In a public appearance in Fulton, Missouri, he praised the Club of Rome, of which he is a member, for its position on population control. Then he said:

One of the worst of the new dangers is ecological. … Today, global climatic shifts; the greenhouse effect; the “ozone hole”; acid rain; contamination of the atmosphere, soil and water by industrial and household waste; the destruction of the forests; etc. all threaten the stability of the planet. (23)

Gorbachev proclaimed that global government was the answer to these threats and that the use of government force was essential. He said: “I believe that the new world order will not be fully realized unless the United Nations and its Security Council create structures … authorized to impose sanctions and make use of other measures of compulsion.” (24)

Here is an arch criminal who fought his way up through the ranks of the Soviet Communist Party, became the protégé of Yuri Andropov, head of the dreaded KGB, was a member of the USSR’s ruling Politburo throughout the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, and who was selected by the Politburo in 1985 as the supreme leader of world Communism. All of this was during one of the Soviet’s most dismal periods of human-rights violations and subversive activities against the free world. Furthermore, he ruled over a nation with one of the worst possible records of environmental destruction. At no time while he was in power did he ever say or do anything to show concern over planet Earth.

All that is now forgotten. Gorbachev has been transformed by the CFR-dominated media into an ecology warrior. He is calling for world government and telling us that such a government will use environmental issues as justification for sanctions and other “measures of compulsion.” We cannot say that we were not warned.

U.S. BRANDED AS ECOLOGICAL AGGRESSOR

The use of compulsion is an important point in these plans. People in the industrialized nations are not expected to cooperate in their own demise. They will have to be forced. They will not like it when their food is taken for global distribution. They will not approve when they are taxed by a world authority to finance foreign political projects. They will not voluntarily give up their cars or resettle into smaller houses or communal barracks to satisfy the resource-allocation quotas of a UN agency. Club-of-Rome member Maurice Strong states the problem:

In effect, the United States is committing environmental aggression against the rest of the world. … At the military level, the United States is the custodian. At the environmental level, the United States is clearly the greatest risk. … One of the worst problems in the United States is energy prices – they’re too low. …

It is clear that current lifestyles and consumption patterns of the affluent middle class … involving high meat intake, consumption of large amounts of frozen and `convenience’ foods, ownership of motor-vehicles, numerous electric household appliances, home and work-place air-conditioning … expansive suburban housing … are not sustainable. (25)

Mr. Strong’s remarks were enthusiastically received by world environmental leaders, but they prompted this angry editorial response in the Arizona Republic:

Translated from eco-speak, this means two things: (1) a reduction in the standard of living in Western nations through massive new taxes and regulations, and (2) a wholesale transfer of wealth from industrialized to under-developed countries. The dubious premise here is that if the U.S. economy could be reduced to, say, the size of Malaysia’s, the world would be a better place. … Most Americans probably would balk at the idea of the U.N. banning automobiles in the U.S. (26)

Who is this Maurice Strong who sees the United States as the environmental aggressor against the world? Does he live in poverty? Does he come from a backward country that is resentful of American prosperity? Does he himself live in modest circumstances, avoiding consumption in order to preserve our natural resources? None of the above. He is one of the wealthiest men in the world. He lives and travels in great comfort. He is a lavish entertainer. In addition to having great personal wealth derived from the oil industry in Canada – which he helped nationalize – Maurice Strong was the Secretary-General of the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio; head of the 1972 UN Conference on Human Environment in Stockholm; the first Secretary-General of the UN Environment Program; president of the World Federation of United Nations; co-chairman of the World Economic Forum; member of the Club of Rome; trustee of the Aspen Institute; and a director of the World Future Society. That is probably more than you wanted to know about this man, but it is necessary in order to appreciate the importance of what follows.

A PLOT FOR ECONOMIC CRISIS

Maurice Strong believes – or says that he believes – the world’s ecosystems can be preserved only if the affluent nations of the world can be disciplined into lowering their standard of living. Production and consumption must be curtailed. To bring that about, those nations must submit to rationing, taxation, and political domination by world government. They will probably not do that voluntarily, he says, so they will have to be forced. To accomplish that, it will be necessary to engineer a global monetary crisis which will destroy their economic systems. Then they will have no choice but to accept assistance and control from the UN.

This strategy was revealed in the May, 1990, issue of West magazine, published in Canada. In an article entitled “The Wizard of Baca Grande,” journalist Daniel Wood described his week-long experience at Strong’s private ranch in southern Colorado. This ranch has been visited by such CFR notables as David Rockefeller, Secretary-of-State Henry Kissinger, founder of the World Bank Robert McNamara, and the presidents of such organizations as IBM, Pan Am, and Harvard.

During Wood’s stay at the ranch, the tycoon talked freely about environmentalism and politics. To express his own world view, he said he was planning to write a novel about a group of world leaders who decided to save the planet. As the plot unfolded, it became obvious that it was based on real people and real events. Wood continues the story:

Each year, he explains as background to the telling of the novel’s plot, the World Economic Forum convenes in Davos, Switzerland. Over a thousand CEOs, prime ministers, finance ministers, and leading academics gather in February to attend meetings and set economic agendas for the year ahead. With this as a setting, he then says: “What if a small group of these world leaders were to conclude that the principal risk to the earth comes from the actions of the rich countries? And if the world is to survive, those rich countries would have to sign an agreement reducing their impact on the environment. Will they do it? … The group’s conclusion is `no.’ the rich countries won’t do it. They won’t change. So, in order to save the planet, the group decides: Isn’t the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn’t it our responsibility to bring that about? …

This group of world leaders,” he continues, “form a secret society to bring about an economic collapse. It’s February. They’re all at Davos. These aren’t terrorists. They’re world leaders. They have positioned themselves in the world’s commodity and stock markets. They’ve engineered, using their access to stock exchanges and computers and gold supplies, a panic. Then, they prevent the world’s stock markets from closing. They jam the gears. They hire mercenaries who hold the rest of the world leaders at Davos as hostages. The markets can’t close. The rich countries…” And Strong makes a slight motion with his fingers as if he were flicking a cigarette butt out the window.

I sit there spellbound. This is not any storyteller talking, this is Maurice Strong. He knows these world leaders. He is, in fact, co-chairman of the Council of the World Economic Forum. He sits at the fulcrum of power. He is in a position to do it.“I probably shouldn’t be saying things like this,” he says. (27)

Maurice Strong’s fanciful plot probably shouldn’t be taken too seriously, at least in terms of a literal reading of future events. It is unlikely they will unfold in exactly that manner – although it is not impossible. For one thing, it would not be necessary to hold the leaders of the industrialized nations at gun point. They would be the ones engineering this plot. Leaders from Third-World countries do not have the means to cause a global crisis. That would have to come from the money centers in New York, London, or Tokyo. Furthermore, the masterminds behind this thrust for global government have always resided in the industrialized nations. They have come from the ranks of the CFR in America and from other branches of the International Roundtable in England, France, Belgium, Canada, Japan, and elsewhere. They are the ideological descendants of Cecil Rhodes and they are fulfilling his dream.

It is not important whether or not Maurice Strong’s plot for global economic collapse is to be taken literally. What is important is that men like him are thinking along those lines. As Wood pointed out, they are in a position to do it. Or something like it. If it is not this scenario, they will consider another one with similar consequences. If history has proven anything, it is that men with financial and political power are quite capable of heinous plots against their fellow men. They have launched wars, caused depressions, and created famines to suit their personal agendas. We have little reason to believe that the world leaders of today are more saintly than their predecessors.

Furthermore, we must not be fooled by pretended concern for Mother Earth. The call-to-arms for saving the planet is a gigantic ruse. There is just enough truth to environmental pollution to make the show “credible,” as The Report from Iron Mountain phrased it, but the end-of-earth scenarios which drive the movement forward are bogus. The real objective in all of this is world government, the ultimate doomsday mechanism from which there can be no escape. Destruction of the economic strength of the industrialized nations is merely a necessary prerequisite for ensnaring them into the global web. The thrust of the current ecology movement is directed totally to that end.

***********

by G. Edward Griffin.

It may be obtained at www.realityzone.com.

References:

1

Leonard Lewin, ed., Report from Iron Mountain on the possibility and the Desirability of Peace

(New York: Dell Publishing, 1976), pp.13-14.

2

Ibid. pp. 39, 81.

3

Ibid. p. 9. 3

4

Ibid., pp. 41-42,68, 70.

5

“British Soccer’s Day of Shame,” U.S. News & World Report, June 10, 1985, p. 11.

6

Lewin, Report, p. 44. 6

7

Ibid., p. 66. 7

8

Ibid., pp. 66-67, 70-71. When the Report was written, terrorism had not yet been considered as a substitute for war. Since then, it has become the most useful of them all.

9

“News of War and Peace You’re Not Ready For,” by Herschel McLandress, Book World, in The

Washington Post, Nov. 26, 1967, p. 5.

10

“The Times Diary,” London Times, Feb. 5, 1968, p.8.

11

“Galbraith Says He Was Misquoted, “ London Times, Feb. 6, 1968, p. 3.

12

“Touche, Professor,” London Times, Feb. 12, 1968, p, 8. 9

13

“Report from Iron Mountain,” New Your Times, March 19, 1968, p. 8. 10

14

Garrett de Bell, ed., The Environmental Handbook (New York: Ballantine / Friends of the Earth,

1970), p. 138.

15

Ibid., p. 145.

16

A Europe Now Free from A Confining Cold War Vision,” by George Kennan, (Washington Post

syndication, Sacramento Bee, Nov. 14, 1989, p. B7.

17

The New York Times has been one of the principal means by which CFR policies are inserted into

the mainstream of public opinion. The paper was purchased in 1896 by Alfred Ochs, with financial

backing from CFR pioneer J.P. Morgan, Rothchild agent August Belmont, and Jacob Schiff, a partner in Kuhn, Loeb & Co. It is now owned by CFR member Arthur Sulzberger, who is also the

publisher, and it is staffed by numerous CFR editors and columnists. See Shadows of Power by

James Perloff (Appleton, Wisconsin: Western Islands, 1988), p. 181.

18

Lester R. Brown, “The New World Order,” in Lester R. Brown et al., State of the World 1991; A

Worldwatch Institute Report on Progress Toward A Sustainable Society (New York: W.W. Norton,

1991), p. 3.

19

Alexander King and Bertrand Schneider, The First Global Revolution, A Report by the Council of

the Club of Rome, (New York: Pantheon Books, 1991). P. 115.

20

See Martin, Rose, Fabian Freeway; High Road to Socialism in the U.S.A. (Boston: Western

Islands, 1966), pp. 171, 325, 463-69.

21

Bertrand Arthur William Russell, The Impact of Science on Society (New York: Simon and

Schuster, 1953), pp. 103-104, 111.

22

Interviewed by Bahgat Eluadi and Adel Rifaat, Courrier de l’Unesco, Nov. 1991, p. 13.

23

Michail Gorbachev, “The River of Time and the Necessity of Action,” 46thJohn Findley Greed

Foundation Lecture, Westminster College, Fulton, Missouri, May 6, 1992, transcript from

Westminster College Department of Press Relations, p. 6.

24

Ibid., p. 9. 14

25

“Ecology Remedy Costly,” (AP), Sacramento Bee, March 12, 1992, p. A8. Also Maurice Strong,

Introduction to Jim MacNeil, Pieter Winsemius, and Taizo Yakushiji, Beyond Interdependence,

(New York: Oxford University Press, 1991), p. ix.

26

“Road to Ruin,” Arizona Republic, March 26, 1992.

27

“The Wizard of Baca Grande.” By Daniel Wood, West magazine, May 1990, p. 35.


http://farmwars.info/?p=4881

Source

https://archive.org/details/ReportFromIronMountain135/page/n3