Aggregatore di feed

Thanks,  Johnny Kramer.

The post Charlie Kirk’s Death — A Mortician Explains appeared first on LewRockwell.

Thanks, Ginny Garner.

I’ve got questions about Charlie Kirk’s assassination:

> He used to be an Israel loyalist
> He feared ‘Israel would kill him’
> He started *mildly* criticizing Israel
> He said Epstein was Mossad
> He said no Iran war on behalf of Israel
> He let anti-Zionists speak at his…

— Jackson Hinkle (@jacksonhinklle) September 12, 2025

The post Charlie Kirk Assassination Questions appeared first on LewRockwell.

Walter Frantz wrote:

On the rolling plains of Dixie ‘neath the sun-kissed sky, Proudly stands our Alma Mater, banners high. A black guy from Montgomery, Alabama, birthplace of so much of the evil the entire United States of America has lived under since the passing of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, apparently traveled down I-85 North, stopped off on the Loveliest Village of the Plains, and decided to take a stroll in park. There, he encountered Dr. Julie Gard Schnuelle, a White female professor in the Department of Clinical Sciences at Auburn University’s College of Veterinary Medicine. She was simply walking her dog

Read More Here.

 

The post Her name is Dr. Julie Gard Schnuelle: As She Walked Her Dog, White Female Auburn University Veterinary Professor Emerita Murdered by Black Male appeared first on LewRockwell.

Click Here:

Eugyppius

 

The post The Assassination of Charlie Kirk appeared first on LewRockwell.

Click Here:

Useful Idiots

 

The post Rep. Ro Khanna: “There’s Going To Be Consequences for Israel” appeared first on LewRockwell.

Johnny Kramer wrote:

Maybe I was wrong.

Glockleg on X: “@iansmithfitness I couldn’t take that shot, and I think a lot of these 2a people saying it’s an “easy shot” have never taken a shot quite like that. There’s only a tiny minority who can shoot 50 yards well, far fewer at 200, and far, far fewer who could do it under stress.” / X

On Fri, Sep 12, 2025 at 1:01 AM Johnny Kramer <[email protected]> wrote:

Former Sniper Explains How This Could Have Been A Professional Hit On Charlie Kirk

Reportedly from 200 yards and apparently right through his left carotid artery — either a professional sniper or another “lone nut,” and this time one who made one of the luckiest, probably one-in-a-million shots in history. (In other words, a professional sniper.)

 

The post Former Sniper Explains How This Could Have Been a Professional Hit on Charlie Kirk appeared first on LewRockwell.

Thanks, Rick Rozoff.

The post Andrew Tate: “I AM NEXT” After Charlie Kirk’s Death appeared first on LewRockwell.

 

Lawyer Robert Barnes reflects on the life of Turning Point founder Charlie Kirk and how his assassination is sparking discussion on political violence.

“I followed Charlie throughout his entire career … started out as sort of a normie conservative,” Mr Barnes told Sky News host James Morrow. “He was very accessible, he would do favours for friends … he’d do it for free all the time.”

III. Closing Argument: The Political Permission Slip for the Criminally Insane (Robert Barnes)

• Bloody Kansas. The turn of the century, a time when anarchy equated violence. The KKK’s notorious role post Civil War, then again at the turn of the century, returning to haunt America in the 1920s before being exposed, and then returning to harass civil rights petitioners in the 1950s and 1960s. And now today, when members of the woke left celebrate and cheer the assassination of Charlie Kirk. All founded on the acts of the criminally insane, but flourished when given a political permission slip by institutional actors within the broader culture and community.
• Any study of the history of such violence outbreaks will find the true cause of criminal depravity in the broken minds and stolen souls of the evil-occupied, mentally ill, minds long since divorced from reality as much as their souls divorce from humanity. But their fevered dreams of sick, twisted violent fantasies need a political permission slip from powerful actors in the broader community to convert such dark fantasies into a terrible reality for the rest of the culture.
• Consider the Klan. Their rise and fall didn’t come and go with a rise and decline of criminally ill minds and corroded souls in the broader society; those individuals just didn’t find the freedom in the broader culture to act out their sick fantasies or get directed to express them in violent exhibition during the declining eras of Klan violence, that rose and receded with the political permission slips afforded them, the political protection extended them, and the political patronage provided them. The Klan rose and fell directly proportional to the degree of cultural applause and institutional support they received. There’s a reason so many Islamic terrorists recruit from prisons rather than mosques.  The criminal rap sheet of Klansman, Antifa, communist and fascists alike express in explosions of politicized violence in the last century plus only when blessed by the political high priests of their common culture.
• To deter, we need to remember the Amish learned custom of shunning. The Bann, as they call it, excludes from the community life those who commit the most serious of moral offenses against the Ordnung, the Amish community rules. This conforms to the known utility, when used appropriately, of shunning. Shunning shames the bad actor for their actions, triggers empathy for those victimized by the person being shamed, and motivates correction and better empathy in the broader public. it puts a price on those trying to give political permission slips to the criminally insane to make them as guilty of solicitation, invitation, and accomplices to their moral horrors they politically permit.
• We need such shunning of all those who reward, welcome, embrace, encourage, promote or defend the political permission slip given psychopaths to engage in politicized violence against disfavored dissidents. Shame can enable humility, expand empathy, and heal the community from the pain inflicted by its bad actors, just as it can tie the community together to promote and protect the best of its virtues and values.
• Time to shame again, to restore the better angels of our nature in our civilized society. Debate, discussion, dialogue in civil and civic engagement without resort to violence remains a calling card of Dr. King, Gandhi and Charlie Kirk alike, and we recognize, respect, and reward their legacy by continuing that fine American tradition, trusting in the quality of arguments and the sincerity of the advocate not the tools of violence, as violence remains the worst form of censorship that exists. Saying no to politicized violence says no to censorship, and says yes to the legacy and life of Charlie Kirk, and those whose founding steps he followed.

The post Sky News Australia: ‘We’re Going to Face More of It’: Kirk Assassination Sparks Political Violence Discussion appeared first on LewRockwell.

There are more videos YouTube than there is time to watch them but, for me, when I’m looking for the simply explained truth on an important topic, I almost always start with Colonel Macgregor: I watch enough to learn the truth about the subject and then call it a day.

The post Veritas appeared first on LewRockwell.

Ricordo a tutti i lettori che su Amazon potete acquistare il mio nuovo libro, “Il Grande Default”: https://www.amazon.it/dp/B0DJK1J4K9 

Il manoscritto fornisce un grimaldello al lettore, una chiave di lettura semplificata, del mondo finanziario e non che sembra essere andato fuori controllo negli ultimi quattro anni in particolare. Questa una storia di cartelli, a livello sovrastatale e sovranazionale, la cui pianificazione centrale ha raggiunto un punto in cui deve essere riformata radicalmente e questa riforma radicale non può avvenire senza una dose di dolore economico che potrebbe mettere a repentaglio la loro autorità. Da qui la risposta al Grande Default attraverso il Grande Reset. Questa la storia di un coyote, che quando non riesce a sfamarsi all'esterno ricorre all'autofagocitazione. Lo stesso accaduto ai membri del G7, dove i sei membri restanti hanno iniziato a fagocitare il settimo: gli Stati Uniti.

____________________________________________________________________________________

di Francesco Simoncelli

(Versione audio dell'articolo disponibile qui: https://open.substack.com/pub/fsimoncelli/p/la-grande-battaglia-del-nostro-tempo)

Di recente mi è capitato di vedere questo video su uno dei bari più famosi in Italia. Niente di correlato con la mia attività divulgativa... almeno all'apparenza. Poi ho capito. Quando ho scritto i miei primi due libri, L'economia è un gioco da ragazzi e La fine delle fallacie economiche, ho esposto ai lettori le regole del gioco, quelle che tutti di base dovrebbero seguire. La metodologia Austriaca, da questo punto di vista, è ottima nella descrizione e nell'approccio. Ma rimane un mondo ideale, distaccato dalla realtà delle cose. Così come rimane distaccato dalla realtà il sito web del Mises Institute, poiché immagina che tutti seguano le regole del gioco e che queste ultime puniscano chi si discosta eccessivamente da esse. Infatti il problema è il tempo: quanto tempo passa prima di una correzione violenta e inarrestabile del sistema in questione? Non si sa... le stesse regole descritte con dovizia di particolari, logica e rigore si rivoltano contro chi le spiega dato che il tempo è un concetto fondamentale nell'analisi Austriaca.

E se barare fa parte dell'azione umana, bisogna prendere in considerazione questo aspetto nella propria metodologia d'indagine e analisi. Quindi ho innovato il modello iniziale e l'ho riproposto secondo la mia ottica, la mia evoluzione della teoria. L'ho condensato infine nell'ultimo libro pubblicato, Il Grande Default. L'ho applicato anche sul blog e su tutti gli spazi di divulgazione in cui opero, compreso questo, sin da quando, nel 2021, mi sono posto la domanda: “E se la FED stesse iniziando a proteggere il dollaro, adesso, piuttosto che distruggerlo?” Questa semplice domanda ha spiegato con coerenza tutti gli eventi successivi: il SOFR, il ciclo di rialzo dei tassi di Powell, i dazi, Tether, la liquidità dei titoli sovrani americani, l'inclusione di Bitcoin e oro a protezione del dollaro e dei Treasuries, ecc.

Il mio metodo, quindi, la mia lettura della realtà, la mia area di consulenza, non si pone come obiettivo l'arrogante e ridicola invettiva, con tanto di dito indice alzato e scosso nell'aria, di “far rispettare le regole”; invece rallenta la mano dei bari e cerca, quanto più accuratamente possibile, di suggerire a chi legge, e cerca consulenza, il modo per trarre un vantaggio competitivo rispetto a chi scioccamente agita il dito in aria pretendendo che l'intera umanità aderisca al suo mondo ideale. Un nobile obiettivo da perseguire, senza dubbio, ma nel frattempo... occhio al portafoglio perché è questo, invece, il mondo che abbiamo.

DAL DOGMA ALLA STRATEGIA

Se le basi della dottrina Austriaca sono radicate profondamente nell'azione umana, è altresì vero che il sistema bancario centrale di per sé è solo uno strumento. Ciò che conta sono gli esseri umani e ciò che ne fanno. Inutile dire che esso incentiva all'arbitrio sconsiderato, ma un conto è usare un coltello per attaccare solamente... un altro è usarlo per difendersi. Ripeto si tratta del mondo che abbiamo e in cui dobbiamo vivere, lavorare per renderlo un posto migliore per noi stessi è sacrosanto, nel frattempo è altrettanto sacrosanto cogliere quelle vittorie che ci portano un passo in più verso l'obiettivo finale: la sostituzione del sistema bancario centrale con qualcosa di più sostenibile. Perché se è vero che la bancarotta è un fenomeno che avviene dapprima lentamente e poi improvvisamente, allo stesso modo la solvibilità è qualcosa che si manifesta dapprima lentamente solo infine improvvisamente. Con il colpo di stato perpetrato dai globalisti durante la pandemia Covid, era evidente che ci fosse un cambio di linea di politica al vertice; qualcosa era cambiato e bisognava capire cosa. All'inizio non è stato facile mettere insieme i puntini, visto che il piano è stato svelato a mano a mano e soprattutto c'era la chiave di lettura da cambiare: dal mondo che vorrei/vorremmo al mondo che ho/abbiamo.

Nel momento in cui ho capito che tutta quella storia verteva sullo smantellamento del sistema bancario commerciale così come lo conosciamo e l'implementazione della sorveglianza finanziaria (es. CBDC) per impedire alla popolazione di protestare nel momento in cui il “vecchio” debito sarebbe stato sottoposto a pesante haircut per poterne emettere di nuovo tramite i perpetual bond, riciclando quindi il “vecchio” sistema in quello “nuovo”, mi è stato chiaro quale fosse la guerra globale che si stava combattendo. Applicando questa visione delle cose agli eventi che accadevano, mi ha colpito l'ovvietà con cui Powell ha iniziato a restringere l'offerta di denaro americana ben prima delle altre banche centrali mettendo fine a una linea di politica coordinata tra queste istituzioni durata per più di dieci anni. Non solo, ma anche il modo con cui ha lottato per essere riconfermato per il secondo mandato: una realtà che si sarebbe manifestata solo con l'appoggio di istituti bancari come JP Morgan, Goldman Sachs, ecc.

Una volta che si accetta questo background, ed è stato relativamente facile accettarlo visto che per anni ho denunciato l'UE su queste pagine come la seconda venuta dell'URSS, si capisce che la vera minaccia era la centralizzazione progressiva messa in campo da questa presunta unione di stati. Una volta che questo background si applica al resto del mondo, si nota che la conformità con la regolamentazione selvaggia messa in campo dall'UE altro non è che un gigantesco colpo di stato mondiale affinché tutti si conformino ai suoi dettami. Non mancano ovviamente infiltrati nelle stanze dei bottoni dei governi esteri per facilitare questa progressione, come ad esempio lo è stata l'amministrazione Obama, prima, e quella Biden, dopo. L'effetto centripeta dell'UE si è dimostrato, di fatto, un modello predittivo a sé stante, in grado da fungere da proverbiale “palla di vetro” per gli eventi futuri. Se infatti si ha un modello è facile scremare il grano (fenomeni che contano) dalla pula (titoli dei giornali).

È così, quindi, che il mondo deve essere visto: un adattamento alla realtà della serie di romanzi Il Trono di Spade. Questo ovviamente serve a catturare l'attenzione delle giovani leve, per così dire, dato che esiste un adattamento migliore a livello di letteratura ed è rappresentato dai romanzi di Dune, i quali sono un manuale eccellente per chi volesse capire l'emergere della geopolitica moderna negli anni '50 e '60 del secolo scorso. Oltre agli aspetti sociologici, è assolutamente affascinante notare come la religione sia il primum movens che motiva la gente comune a scendere in battaglia e viene costantemente tenuta sotto controllo attraverso di essa mentre le fazioni al vertice della piramide sociale si danno battaglia per il potere politico. E visto che siamo in tema di letteratura, come non citare il Ciclo delle Fondazioni sull'ascesa e la caduta degli imperi, e le opere di Philip K. Dick sul takeover della tecnologia rispetto all'umanità delle persone e l'ascesa della tecnocrazia. Oltre a fornire il modello attraverso cui leggere le informazioni che arrivano dall'esterno, e non adattare le conclusioni alle proprie idee, tutti questi manoscritti servono anche a essere un buon comunicatore piuttosto che ad “avere ragione su tutto”.

Infatti le informazione che arrivano dalla sfera geopolitica sono talmente fungibili che praticamente tutti, soprattutto coloro senza un modello, giocano al gioco delle probabilità e delle percezioni plausibili.A tal proposito diventa enigmatico per queste stesse persone farsi un'idea di cosa stiano combinando Trump e Powell, rimanendo sulla chiave di lettura superficiale in cui il primo vuole far fuori, politicamente, il secondo. Poi, però, ci sono fatti come il licenziamento di Lisa Cook e lo smantellamento di quella cupola di infiltrati alla FED che nel 2021 aveva cercato di sabotare la riconferma di Powell e mettere al suo posto un pupazzo della cricca di Davos. L'emarginazione dei fidati di Powell (Clarida, Rosengren e Kaplan) mirava a spiazzare la presa sulla banca centrale americana di quella parte del FOMC che voleva rialzare i tassi e iniziare a prosciugare il mercato degli eurodollari, avvantaggiando personaggi come la Cook che invece volevano che il dollaro continuasse a essere svuotato. Quello che Powell ha fatto sin dal 2021 è stato preparare la scena per quello che poi avrebbe fatto Trump una volta in carica, o per meglio dire, i NY Boys una volta che il loro rampollo avrebbe preso la carica appoggiato dall'elettorato americano.

Alla fine, tutto si riduce a porsi le giuste domande... un buon modello, tutto sommato, non credete? Chiaramente la parte ardua è arrivare alle suddette e su questo vi da una mano uno spazio divulgativo come questo che ha accumulato negli anni esperienza su esperienza. Sostenere questo lavoro vi permette di risparmiare tempo, oltre all'originalità delle tesi proposte. Perché è importante? Presto detto. Torniamo un attimo alla FED, quindi, e poniamoci la domanda: come fa Powell, a capo di un'istituzione il cui mandato è un obiettivo d'inflazione al 2%, prezzi stabili e piena occupazione, a tagliare i tassi nel momento in cui il compito di Trump è introdurre l'economia americana in un periodo di prosperità economica? Lo stesso Powell non è mai stato d'accordo con un obiettivo specifico d'inflazione, ma è una linea di politica sedimentata ormai; così come prezzi stabili e piena occupazione sono chimere keynesiane usate per giustificare un intervento costante nell'economia. Se l'economia americana sta andando bene, come si evince dalla tesi di Trump, allora il lavoro della FED è quello di continuare a rialzare i tassi... perché questo è esattamente il suo lavoro. A meno che, ovviamente, non si cambia il ruolo della FED. 

E qui ritorniamo al ruolo di questo blog nella lettura del mondo: la maggior parte degli investitori, dei broker e dei consulenti finanziari guarda agli indicatori principali (es. Phillips Curve, ecc.) e ritiene, per formazione professionale, che la FED deve “impostare” il “prezzo” del denaro affinché tutti questi altri rapporti vengano “coordinati” e “armonizzati”. Come fa quindi ad abbassare i tassi quando, per definizione stessa del sistema attuale, c'è praticamente piena occupazione, i mercati azionari sono vicini ai picchi assoluti e le commodity sono ancora a prezzi inferiori rispetto a quando Powell è stato riconfermato? Fino allo scorso luglio la situazione fiscale e geopolitica era ancora in subbuglio... come avrebbe potuto tagliare i tassi Powell? Come avrebbe potuto farlo se prima Trump non avesse mostrato qualcosa di concreto al pubblico americano? Il petrolio stava schizzando in alto durante la crisi tra Iran e Israele, e la percezione comune, data dalla stampa internazionale, era che a Trump stavano sfuggendo le cose di mano. Powell doveva essere la voce della stabilità, far capire che avesse le cose sotto controllo. Poi Trump ha iniziato a segnare alcune vittorie sul suo tabellone: l'approvazione della Big Beautiful Bill, la pacificazione di varie aree in Medio Oriente (dal fondo della penisola arabica fin alla pace tra azeri e armeni), ha disinnescato l'escalation tra Israele e Iran, sta dimostrando che i dazi non sono inflazionistici, ecc. In sintesi, è ora di abbattere i miti keynesiani (piantati accuratamente dagli inglesi) nella testa di tutti quegli investitori e consulenti prima di procedere con il cambiamento strutturale del ruolo della FED.

Non è tanto una questione di “poliziotto buono” e “poliziotto cattivo”, bensì di “poliziotto caotico” e “poliziotto stabile”. Ma una domanda che segue naturalmente quella che ci siamo posti prima è: se Trump vuole i tassi bassi perché si preoccupa dell'economia nazionale, perché tutti gli altri si stracciano le vesti affinché segua questo percorso? L'eco che il resto del mondo fa a Trump sul taglio dei tassi da parte della FED equivale a uscire allo scoperto riguardo le loro vere intenzioni: hanno bisogno come l'acqua di liquidità in dollari. E qui casca l'asino keynesiano: è sempre servito per scopi diversi da quelli spacciati ai gonzi che hanno studiato questo ciarpame sui libri di testo. È questo il famoso redde rationem di cui si è tanto parlato su queste pagine in passato. E tutto ciò, ironia della sorte, supporta la tesi di Trump sui dazi! “L'indebolimento” del dollaro sin da quando s'è insediata la nuova amministrazione non è stato altro che una ri-dollarizzazione dell'economia mondiale perché le nazioni del mondo hanno rimpatriato i fondi quando la FED ha iniziato il ciclo di rialzi e Trump ha avviato le nuove politiche commerciali della nazione. Un doppio dazio per tutti, un ribilanciamento veloce del commercio mondiale! Se Powell avesse tagliato in precedenza, l'euro, ad esempio, sarebbe finito a 1.1 col dollaro e il comparto industriale tedesco avrebbe ottenuto un sollievo per quanto riguarda il suo languire.

L'altro lato dei dazi sono i tassi di cambio: davvero credete che la BCE non si preoccupi del tasso di cambio dell'euro? Non piace affatto che sia a 1.17 al momento della stesura di questo saggio. Quindi gli USA stanno fortificando il mercato dei titoli sovrani, indebolendo (strategicamente) il dollaro nel breve termine, stanno tenendo i tassi di riferimento alti forzando una stretta nel mercato delle garanzie collaterali, mentre il resto del mondo si arrabatta per impedire alle proprie divise di salire (vendere dollari e comprare titoli sovrani americani).

UN ASSET IN RAPIDO DEPREZZAMENTO: LA FED

Il mondo in divenire così come si sta configurando in base alle nuove necessità degli Stati Uniti non ha più bisogno di una Federal Reserve onnipresente per tutto e per tutti. Ritengo che Powell sia il primo a sostenere che la FED così com'è nel contesto attuale non è affatto necessaria e la campagna di relazioni pubbliche di Trump, che ha messo al centro dell'attenzione pubblica lo stesso Powell, rappresenta un modo per spiegare alla vulgata il motivo per cui non è necessaria una FED che salva tutto e tutti. Piuttosto che una Coordinated central banks policy, come accaduto fino al 2021, adesso abbiamo una Coordinated central banks submission, dove viene usato il potere della banca centrale americana per emanciparla dalle influenze estere che erano felici di ingrassare a scapito della ricchezza reale americana. Il post-Powell sarà caratterizzato da un dollaro onshore e da uno offshore; massima liquidità in patria, minima liquidità all'estero. La querelle Trump-Powell è una sceneggiata per impostare il dibattito pubblico lungo questi binari e introdurre le necessità di questo assetto al grande pubblico, giustificando la contrazione del mercato dell'eurodollaro e la sostituzione dello stesso con Tether.

Infatti l'infrastruttura messa in campo per le stablecoin esistenti e stablecoin emesse dalle banche commerciali rappresenterà il mezzo attraverso il quale gli USA vogliono tornare a una forma di “denaro privato” e una forma di “sistema bancario comunitario”. È così che si struttura una transizione da un mondo finanziario in cui la FED è la banca centrale del mondo a uno in cui è la banca centrale degli Stati Uniti. Il segno distintivo è stata la transizione dal LIBOR che prezzava il dollaro a livello mondiale in termini di eurodollari, al SOFR, che prezza il dollaro in termini di mercato americano.

La traiettoria è quella in cui la FED imposterà il valore del dollaro all'estero, mentre servirà per sostenere i mercati interni. Un ritorno alla sua concezione originale, un'istituzione eretta per fornire liquidità d'emergenza al commercial paper market, non una rete di salvataggio per istituti finanziari/bancari sull'orlo del fallimento. Infatti se l'economia americana è in buona salute, non ha bisogno di alcuna liquidità aggiuntiva dato che è in grado di fornirla da sé tramite suddetto commercial paper market, un'esclusività dell'economia statunitense. Inutile dire che questo a sua volta significa una decentralizzazione dell'emissione dei dollari.

Per il dollaro, ormai, essere una valuta di riserva mondiale è un peso; non lo è, invece, essere la valuta di saldo internazionale. Per l'appunto, le leggi incentrate sulle stablecoin vanno a rafforzare esattamente questo effetto di rete. Tutte le chiacchiere relative a un'ascesa dei BRICS e di una loro eventuale valuta di riserva mondiale sono gossip, esattamente perché gli USA non cercano più di imporre la propria valuta come riserva. Quel modello era stato creato per innescare cicli di boom/bust più violenti e trasferire, a prezzi stracciati, la ricchezza reale verso coloro che davvero gestiscono il sistema bancario centrale: la cricca di Davos, o più precisamente la City di Londra (il vecchio conglomerato di colonialisti londinese/olandese). L'imposizione di un fiat standard si riduce esclusivamente a questo: non erano gli americani a farlo, bensì questa rete di vecchi interessi bancari che per sostenere le varie valute fiat hanno soppresso il potenziale di oro, prima, e Bitcoin, poi, in modo da mantenere vivo un apparato di sottrazione di risorse in grado di soddisfare la sempiterna massima “vivere al massimo col minimo sforzo”. In fin dei conti è quel che fanno i colonialisti, solo che a lungo andare questo assetto finisce sempre in un declino per tutti, come scrisse anche Chodorov in uno dei suoi migliori libri. Emergono inevitabilmente i cosiddetti accordi vicendevolmente svantaggiosi (“lose-lose”) e c'è un fuggi-fuggi per dirigersi anticipatamente verso le uscite con quanto rimane del “malloppo”. L'euro digitale, per l'appunto, è la strategia d'uscita della cricca di Davos, dove la “exit liquidity” sono i risparmiatori europei.

Per farvi capire meglio cari lettori, attualmente il DAX tedesco viaggia intorno ai 24.000 perché gli investitori europei stanno vendendo Bund e comprano azioni tedesche. È una scommessa su quanto la BCE stamperà in futuro e quanto di questo denaro finirà nei bilanci dell'industria della difesa. Il rapporto P/E del DAX è circa 18; l'ultima volta che era a 16 si trattava del 2008 quando l'intero sistema finanziario era sottoposto a massiccia leva finanziaria. Pensate, quindi, che il mercato azionario tedesco sia sostenibile? Certo, il Dow Jones è trattato a un rapporto P/E superiore ma gli USA hanno prospettive a loro favore, vedono capitali scorrere verso di essi. Nessuno vuole inaugurare una nuova fabbrica in Germania, mentre invece tutti vogliono farlo negli Stati Uniti (il miglior paradiso fiscale “in chiaro” al mondo).

Under President Trump, capital markets are roaring back. Companies are taking calculated risks, spending, and pursuing deals in this economy.

Since June, $1.1 trillion in M&A has been announced, including nearly $300 billion in August—the busiest summer since 2021. pic.twitter.com/yWUZUSs7Ki

— Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent (@SecScottBessent) August 28, 2025

Oltre alla posizione fiscale, c'è anche quella normativa le cui prospettive di snellimento non fanno che migliorare con il lavoro messo in atto dal DOGE. Se a questo ci aggiungiamo che i dazi terminano anche il rent seeking estero tramite l'arbitraggio sulle valute, l'invito a delocalizzare negli USA è decisamente forte. Quello che stiamo osservando è una riorganizzazione del modello di business degli Stati Uniti e un'espressione dei propri vantaggi competitivi attraverso un dollaro più efficiente, ecco perché i vari stati del mondo stanno staccando accordi commerciali secondo i termini proposti da Trump. Questo renderà più facile il compito della FED e Powell ha fatto il suo lavoro: evidenziare il problema e buttare giù quel sistema che ha deformato l'economia statunitense. Ciò che arriverà dopo richiederà tutta una serie di altre capacità. Questo perché non sempre chi distrugge, prima, è anche un buon costruttore, poi, come ci ricordano anche Herbert, Tolkien, ecc.

LA NUOVA MAPPA DEL MONDO

La maggior parte delle volte che viene presentata la mappa del mondo, l'Europa è sempre il punto di partenza. Ora invece di aprire la mappa del mondo in questo modo predefinito, fatelo sull'oceano Pacifico. Per quanto possa essere noiosa la visuale ci sono tre grandi Paesi che si interconnettono: Russia, Cina e Stati Uniti. Questo nuovo assetto emergente serve a porre fine al sistema di estrazione di ricchezza che faceva confluire tutto a Londra e in Europa. Dopo Azerbaijan e Armenia, anche India e Cina si sono riappacificati. Cosa ha a che fare questo con suddetto nuovo assetto? Tutta la parte dell'Asia centrale è fondamentale perché la politica estera inglese ha tenuto sotto scacco la zona per centinaia di anni affinché non si integrasse. I titoli dei giornali si concentrano sul fatto che l'India, a causa della nuova politica commerciale americana, viene spinta “tra le braccia” della Cina, non che essa viene allontanata dalla sfera d'influenza inglese ed europea. Anche qui, il piano degli USA è quello di spingere l'UE e la cricca di Davos a mettere in gioco i propri di capitali per ricostruire ciò che resterà della demolizione “controllata” del tessuto socio-economico che hanno avviato nel 2020 (sulla scia della decisione epocale degli Stati Uniti di ridimensionare il mercato degli eurodollari, per la precisione la leva finanziaria spropositata in esso).

In debt based monetary system there is never enough money to satisfy the debt. This is why expression “you cannot taper a Ponzi” exists. And that is the case for Eurodollar market. So the idea the world can move from Eurodollar system to another new system without chaos/pain is… pic.twitter.com/tD1JbU4egY

— Santiago Capital (@SantiagoAuFund) September 6, 2025

Il gioco di estrarre ricchezza dal contribuente americano e ottenere “pasti finanziari gratis” con cui controllare capillarmente il mondo è finito: la Francia sta vedendo sbriciolarsi il suo impero in Africa centrale, la Germania è stata tagliata fuori dall'accesso a energia a basso costo per la sua industria, il Regno Unito sta perdendo il controllo sulle assicurazioni nel commercio navale e sui saldi nel mercato del Forex, ecc. Per la ricostruzione dell'Europa o la cricca di Davos mette sul tavolo i propri capitali stipati in banche offshore, oppure Russia-Cina-USA l'affamerà dal punto di vista dei finanziamenti tanto che non potrà far altro che ricorrere alla predazione dei risparmiatori europei... almeno inizialmente. Ecco perché sono importanti gli asset congelati russi per la stabilità dei bilanci europei. Finché la Lagarde rimarrà a capo della BCE sarà questo il piano: introdurre l'euro digitale e cambiare il modo in cui hanno sinora funzionato i mercati dei titoli sovrani europei per implementare l'integrazione fiscale e la nuova emissione degli stessi sotto il comando della Commissione europea.

I mercati, però, si stanno rivoltando contro l'idea di una Germania al centro dell'UE come evidenziano soprattutto i rendimenti dei titoli sovrani. Il differenziale di rendimento tra il decennale tedesco e quello italiano, ad esempio, adesso ammonta a 87. Questo significa che alla Meloni viene data la possibilità, se “ripulisce” Roma, di far diventare l'Italia il nuovo centro dell'Unione Europea; oppure di guidare il nuovo blocco del Mediterraneo che si staccherà dagli stati europei del Nord dividendo in due ciò che rimarrà dell'attuale UE.

Sarà interessante quando il differenziale di rendimento tra i titoli sovrani italiani e quelli inglesi/francesi/tedeschi si assottiglierà fino a (chissà) un "flippening". Il messaggio del mercato obbligazionario è: gli USA hanno un occhio di riguardo nei confronti dell'Italia. pic.twitter.com/n6mZQ2gf1c

— Francesco Simoncelli (@Freedonia85) August 26, 2025

La cricca di Davos, comunque, è composta da gente che non si da per vinta tanto facilmente. Ancora hanno operazioni sul suolo americano: Newsom è una di queste, Mamdani è un'altra. È una guerra che non finirà tanto presto, perché nel frattempo Trump sta usando la NATO come leva per stringere il cappio al collo di UE/UK. Adesso devono pagare se vogliono armi da inviare il quel buco nero chiamato Ucraina; così come Israele ha dovuto vedersela da solo quando ha attaccato l'Iran. Niente più pantani bellici per gli Stati Uniti in cui avrebbero speso enormi capitali solo per finanziare gli altri. E questa spero sia la miglior interpretazione di ciò che sta accadendo ora: Putin sta verificando se gli USA possono davvero tenere al guinzaglio l'UE, ricostruendo una fiducia andata persa a causa di tutte le macchinazioni nell'ombra ordite dallo Stato profondo americano.

Cina, Russia e Stati Uniti non saranno “grandi amiconi”, ma nemmeno nemici: saranno semplicemente quelle nazioni che rimodelleranno il mondo in quella che verrà ricordata come Yalta 2.0.

EFFETTI DI RETE E VALUTE

Nel campo monetario ognuno avrà il proprio sistema monetario e tale sistema sarà interoperabile. Non voglio essere qui colui che fa propaganda per altre crittovalute, ma non si può ignorare un fatto: Ripple sta emergendo come l'asset digitale da usare come mezzo di pagamento e mezzo per fornire liquidità. Ma quale sarà il collaterale? Titoli sovrani affidabili, oro, Bitcoin e altre commodity. Perché c'è questa frenesia intorno all'oro a livello di banche centrali? Perché oro e avanzo/disavanzo commerciale verranno tokenizzati a un certo punto, o attraverso una stablecoin ancorata al dollaro o attraverso Bitcoin. Per costruire un sistema del genere c'è bisogno di tempo. Perché Bitcoin ha vinto nel corso del tempo rispetto alla “concorrenza”? Effetto di rete. Perché il dollaro è la migliore valuta del mondo? Effetto di rete. Perché Tether è la stablecoin preferita per digitalizzare il dollaro a livello mondiale? Effetto di rete (400 milioni di utenti in tutto il mondo e in crescita). Qualunque sistema verrà scelto in Oriente (es. mBridge) e in Occidente essi saranno interoperabili.

Se i gold bug vogliono davvero che l'oro ritorni a essere centrale nell'attuale società, devono ficcarsi in testa che non si possono muovere centinaia di tonnellate d'oro. È per questo, tra gli altri motivi, per cui l'oro ha smesso di essere mezzo di pagamento ed è stato spostato, durante la Seconda guerra mondiale, dall'Europa agli Stati Uniti. Man mano che il mondo si sposta verso un sistema diverso, uno in cui le riserve saranno tokenizzate, la fiducia nei partner commerciali sarà determinata da cosa si deterrà in tali riserve. È, in sostanza, quello che stanno facendo adesso i cinesi: non stanno più riciclando i loro avanzi commerciali nei titoli sovrani americani, bensì in altre parti del mondo (es. comprano il nickel dall'Indonesia, ferro e carbone dall'Australia, ecc.). La Cina ha ancora una avanzo della bilancia commerciale nei confronti degli Stati Uniti, ma il suo peso nei titoli di stato americani detenuti all'estero è diminuito negli ultimi 3 anni. Dove stanno finendo quei soldi? Circolano nel resto del mondo, e più è interoperabile il sistema meno c'è bisogno di detenere riserve in valute locali... e una volta che la tokenizzazione degli asset farà il suo corso scompariranno anche le restanti frizioni che ancora si porta dietro il mondo analogico (spostare grandi capitali a livello digitale costa spiccioli).

Di nuovo, agli americani non interessa che il dollaro sia detenuto in riserva; interessa principalmente che il biglietto verde sia usato come mezzo di saldo principale nel commercio internazionale.

Bitcoin sarà collaterale, l'oro sarà collaterale, per il prestito locale e quello internazionale; entrambi saliranno di prezzo in relazione al valore nominale degli asset finanziari dove i flussi di denaro hanno imperversato per anni (es. mercato immobiliare, azionario, ecc.). Non credo che assisteremo a una deflazione dei prezzi di massa in questo sistema che si sta spostando verso una minore leva finanziaria come tutti si aspettano: gli hard asset saliranno in termini di prezzo nominale. Ora immaginate la loro inclusione nel circuito di Tether che sta integrando a più livelli gli asset del mondo reale: ciò farà lievitare anche i salari e quegli asset che da tempo immemore sono stati inseriti nelle scelte delle famiglie come “salvadanaio” (es. immobili). Infatti la possibilità di permettersi una casa è un guaio che le neonate famiglie si portano dietro da due decenni ed è qualcosa che si può risolvere o aumentando i salari, o aumentando il valore del collaterale a garanzia, o abbassando le tasse (Lutnick ha fatto sapere che uno degli obiettivi dell'attuale amministrazione è cancellare l'imposta sul reddito per coloro al di sotto dei $150.000 all'anno).

CONCLUSIONE

I mercati dei capitali rappresentano una sorta di pensiero orientato al futuro: a loro non importa del passato. Il meccanismo di prezzo dei mercati dei capitali è scontare il futuro. Quindi gli Stati Uniti mettono in ordine i loro bilanci fiscali e i soldi si muoveranno verso di essi. È una questione di domanda: chi ha gridato allo scandalo quando nella Big Beautiful Bill è stato alzato il tetto del debito non ha pensato al fatto che i $5.000 miliardi in più di titoli emessi verranno venduti e il deficit di bilancio sarà sempre più esiguo. Questa domanda arriverà sulla scia di un miglioramento delle condizioni fiscali, un rafforzamento dello Stato di diritto, un ridimensionamento dello Stato amministrativo, un abbassamento delle imposte sul reddito, uno snellimento delle normative burocratiche, un vantaggio competitivo per coloro che investiranno negli USA (detrazioni fiscali, niente dazi), ecc.

Siamo stati raggirati quando ci è stato fatto credere che quello che ci stiamo lasciando alle spalle è il migliore sistema economico di sempre. L'era del colonialismo tramite l'arbitraggio delle valute è al tramonto e sarà un mondo completamente diverso. I mercati dei metalli (oro, argento e rame principalmente) sono un indicatore potente a tal proposito, non solo il loro aumento di prezzo, ma anche la decentralizzazione delle borse valori di riferimento. Dopo il SOFR, che ha mandato in pensione i tassi d'interesse mondiali gestiti dalla City di Londra, il nuovo exchange di San Pietroburgo manderà in pensione la LBMA e la relativa manipolazione pluridecennale del mercato dell'oro fisico tramite quello sintetico. Il compito arduo che s'è sobbarcata l'amministrazione Trump è quello di smantellare la piovra della cricca di Davos mediante una determinazione dei prezzi genuina in ogni ambito economico.

È una cosa per cui rallegrarsi. Non il mondo perfetto, ma uno migliore in cui vivere e costruire.

Supporta Francesco Simoncelli's Freedonia lasciando una mancia in satoshi di bitcoin scannerizzando il QR seguente.

Perhaps it’s just an association of ideas, but the slaughter of the Ukrainian girl, Iryna Zarutska on a Charlotte train, and President Trump writing “Here We Go!” on his Truth Social account in response to a breach of Polish airspace by Russian drones, made me wonder if the “Fourth Turning” is upon us.

The United States can’t even keep known homicidal maniacs off its public transportation, but it still wants to control the world. The murder of Iryna Zarutska from Kiev on a train in Charlotte is especially ironic, given that the U.S. has been fervently baiting the Russian Bear to attack Ukraine for at least a decade. As Hillary Clinton once stated, the objective of this Bear Baiting was to turn Ukraine into a Russian graveyard along the lines of the Soviet Afghanistan adventure in 1979, when the CIA armed “valiant Mujahideen” like Osama bin Laden to teach the Soviets a lesson.

For those unfamiliar with the “Fourth Turning” concept, it comes from Strauss–Howe generational theory, devised by William Strauss and Neil Howe, describing a recurring generation cycle in American and Western history.

The four turnings are as follows:

1. The High
   • Characteristics: An era of social cohesion, institutional strength, and confident expansion.
   • Societal Mood: Upbeat and collective.
   • Example: The post-World War II era in America.
2. The Awakening
   • Characteristics: A period of spiritual exploration, moral awakening, and social activism.
   • Societal Mood: Passionate, with a focus on individual values and renewal.
   • Example: The counterculture movement of the 1960s and 70s.
3. The Unraveling
   • Characteristics: A time when individualism flourishes, and institutions weaken or come under scrutiny.
   • Societal Mood: Discontented and cynical, with a focus on personal rights and consumerism.
   • Example: The period from the 1980s leading up to the 2008 financial crisis.
4. The Crisis (The Fourth Turning)
   • Characteristics: A period of profound crisis and upheaval, when the nation faces existential threats and must reinvent itself.
   • Societal Mood: Urgent, with a focus on collective action and rebuilding institutions.
   • Example: Events like World War II or the American Civil War, as well as the predicted period beginning in 2008.

American institutions have been unraveling for some time, and an alarmingly large number of Americans—especially those who infest the mainstream media—have been acting like scalded chimps with zero critical reasoning faculty.

Going to war with Russia over Ukraine would be the apotheosis of deranged folly. President Trump is apparently unwilling or unable to do what John and Robert Kennedy did in 1962, when they defused the Cuban Missile Crisis through a negotiated settlement with Soviet Russia.

In this respect, President Trump has proven to be a colossal disappointment. If it comes to war with Russia, all his achievements in domestic policy will have been for nought, and he will go down in history as just another stupid puppet of the military-industrial complex that Eisenhower warned about in 1961.

Could an immensely destructive war—along the lines of World War II, but with much bigger nukes—be the “Fourth Turning” that restores reason to the Americans who survive the conflagration?

An extremely unfortunate feature of the human race is that many of its most intelligent members are incapable of resisting our most destructive instincts. A notable example of this was the extraordinary genius, John von Neumann, who may have been the most intelligent man who has ever lived.

And yet, he vociferously advocated a first-strike nuclear attack on Russia, including Moscow, in the fifties. Von Neumann’s strategic idea of taking out the Soviet Union and totally destroying Moscow and all of its inhabitants was identical to Hitler’s reasoning when he launched Operation Barbarossa in 1941.

Von Neumann apparently inspired the titular character Dr. Strangelove in Stanley Kubrick’s 1964 masterpiece—the greatest depiction of human intelligence unmoored from reasoning, unable to resist our archaic impulses.

This article was originally published on Courageous Discourse.

The post Are We Approaching the ‘Fourth Turning’? appeared first on LewRockwell.

Abomination definition:

A thing that causes disgust or hatred
Extreme aversion or hatred

Desolate definition:
noun
a state of complete emptiness or destruction:
anguished misery or loneliness:

The state of being desolate, which includes devastation and ruin.
A feeling of loneliness and unhappiness, often associated with loss.
The condition of a place that is empty or destroyed.
The action of desolating, which implies widespread destruction.
In summary, desolation encompasses both physical devastation and emotional emptiness.

As events in the world become more turbulent and chaotic, people seek deeper answers to understand where we are heading and what all the events mean. The Bible mentions a great deal about the future, and as God’s word, predicts what will happen to humanity and how the events leading to the end of the age will unfold. Most people do not believe in God and therefore do not believe God. For this reason, they will be deceived by the many events that will take place and sadly, make the wrong decisions.  The most frightening book of the Bible is the Book or Revelation. It depicts in symbolic language, events that will occur, which will impact all who live on earth. Everybody wants to know the future, and there have been numerous interpretations of the events depicted in this book. Already we are seeing and hearing various people in the world making statements that seem to fulfill what was prophesied long ago in the pages of the Bible.

One of the themes of the Bible that is weaved across time is the principle of duality. There is an Old Covenant and a New Covenant; a first Adam and a second Adam. There was a first Elijah, and a second Elijah. And then there is the abomination that makes desolate (or abomination of desolation), first mentioned in the book of Daniel 11:31, and then mentioned again by Jesus Christ in the Gospel according to Matthew.

As the Middle East becomes more turbulent many wonder how the current events “fit” with the prophecies in the Bible. This has become even more acute as various politicians in Israel, the epicenter of the turmoil, have begun to publicly mention the rebuilding of the temple in Jerusalem.

Another important theme, which is directly related to what is occurring now in the geopolitical arena, is the Temple in Jerusalem. There is no temple now. The temple refers to the last temple that existed in Jerusalem at the time of Jesus Christ, which was subsequently destroyed in 70 A.D. by the Romans. This event looms large in church and Jewish history. The reason why the Jews were scattered all over the world is because of that event, and the results are still with us today.

The first mention of the abomination of desolation refers to a specific event that occurred in 167 BC[1]. The Syrian king, Antiochus IV Epiphanes, a descended of one of Alexander the Great’s generals, Seleucus I Nicator. Antiochus Epiphanes (he called himself Epiphanes which means “The Illustrious One, The Magnificent One” — it was his own appraisal of himself — but his courtiers called him Antiochus Epimanes, the Madman), is called “the Antichrist of the Old Testament,” a most despicable character, and yet a remarkable man in many ways. He reigned from 175 to 164 B.C.

He launched a campaign against Egypt, and led his army into Egypt, but this time the Egyptians had sent for help from the Romans. The Roman Senate sent a general named Popilius, who led a legion against Antiochus. They arrived in Roman galleys which are referred to in Daniel 11:30 as “ships of Kittim.” Popilius insisted that Antiochus return to his own land, keep the peace, and acknowledge the authority of Rome. Antiochus asked for time to consider these terms, but Popilius drew a circle around him with his sword and told him to decide before he stepped out of that circle. This is when the proverbial line in the sand first occurred.

So, Antiochus retreated and agreed to keep the peace, but on his way back to Syria returned to Jerusalem to take out his spite on the Jews. Instead of keeping peace, he did what is recorded in Daniel 11:31. Antiochus went up to Jerusalem, entered the temple, and erected there a pagan altar to Zeus. He offered a sow, an unclean animal to the Jews, upon the altar, took the broth of the pig and sprinkled it around the sanctuary, thus defiling it. Then he set up a statue of Zeus and insisted that the temple be dedicated to that pagan god. This is what is called “the abomination that makes desolate.” All this is extremely important because it was a preview of another abomination of desolation that was yet to come.

Note that Daniel was told that the vision was not concerning his own days but “pertains to many days hence.” The critics insist that this was fulfilled in the turbulent days of 70 A.D. when the Roman general Titus destroyed the temple in Jerusalem, which followed the same pattern of desecration of the temple by Antiochus Epiphanes. But though that was undoubtedly an historic fore view of a second, final “abomination of desolation” it could not have been the complete fulfillment of Daniel’s prophecy, for Jesus would not have said that men could yet expect to see “the desolating sacrilege spoken of by the prophet Daniel, standing in the holy place.”  The “holy place” associated with the temple ended after the crucifixion, when the Old Covenant and the sacrifices came to an end.

The second mention of the abomination that makes desolate is in the Gospel according to Matthew 24:15-22, where the Lord Jesus Christ mentions events that will occur at the time of the end of the age, when His return approaches. He specifically refers to and draws special attention to the events that will happen in Jerusalem, involving the temple and seemingly, acts that will put an end to sacrifices. However, he does not mention any stopping of sacrifices which would cause desolation of the temple, but rather He mentions only the abomination, or rather something that causes abomination.

Many interpret all these events to be similar, involving a literal temple made of stones, animal sacrifices, actual Levite priests. It is important to realize that several events have occurred and passed, rendering such interpretations improbable.

First, lets us examine in detail the events in 167 B.C. The Jews were under the Mosaic Law, the Old Covenant, which was a physical covenant between God and His people. What specifically, under the Old Covenant, made the actions of Antiochus an abomination?

He offered a sacrifice in the temple. What made the act abominable was that it was the wrong sacrifice offered by the wrong person. Pigs were considered unclean animals, to be avoided by God’s people. They were not the only unclean animals, just one of many. It was a means of distinguishing God’s people from the rest, to depict, in a physical way the difference between cleanliness (purity) and uncleanliness (impurity). A person became ceremonially unclean if exposed to unclean animal, but that was until evening that day; it had an expiration and it could be “corrected.”

Sacrificing a pig was therefore the wrong sacrifice. It was not only wrong, but it was meant as a direct insult against God and against the people of God. Antiochus knew this but did it anyway. It was a deliberate act of blasphemy. Nonetheless, the consequences were temporary, and eventually the effect of the act would pass. It would not have a permanent effect on people, and in that sense, it was not unredeemable.

The second factor that made the desecration of the temple an abomination was that the wrong person made the sacrifice. Only Levites were allowed to serve in the temple, to perform priestly duties. No one else was allowed to serve as priest. Appointment of non-Levites as priests was condemned by the prophets as idolatrous and rebellious (1 Kings 12:31).

The events that occurred in 167 B.C. will be “mirrored” or repeated later, in fact prior to the end of the age and the return of Christ. The description in Daniel of the abomination of desolation uses such extreme language, that it leaves the strong impression that the historical events that have already occurred somehow do not reach the magnitude and seriousness of what is described. The events that will occur at the end will be worse, and more consequential than the previous ones. Jesus himself mentions (or perhaps Matthew inserts it; some translations attribute (let the reader understand) to the writer, Matthew). In Matthew 24:15-16, Jesus said

So, when you see the abomination of desolation spoken of by the prophet Daniel standing in the holy place (let the reader understand), then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains.

That there will be a terrible event that will lead directly to great world upheaval and eventually culminate in His return. This event will be so awful, that those in Judea are told to flee to the mountains to escape what will happen. This was interpreted to pertain to the events in 70 A.D. when Jerusalem was destroyed by the Romans, but clearly, the comments that follow imply an upheaval in the entire world prior to the end. Most readers, commentators and scholars of the Bible assume that that there will be a temple in Jerusalem, that there will be a priestly class who will offer sacrifices that will have some kind of theological meaning. Interruption of these sacrifices will usher terrible consequences.
Notice that Jesus did not specify that these elements will exist in identical ways as under the Old Covenant, but rather said that it will be like the prophet Daniel described. So, we must analyze and discern how will the events yet to occur be the same but different from the ones in 167 B.C.

So, at the time of the end, there will arise a series of events that will be an abomination that brings desolation. Broadly speaking, there will be an attempt to offer sacrifice to God, but it will be the wrong sacrifice made by the wrong person, just as in 167 B.C. It will not be Antiochus Epiphanes, but another person doing this. Many believe that the person fulfilling this role is the person whom the Bible calls the Antichrist.
How will it be?

The Old Covenant

The Old Covenant that was initiated at Sinai by Moses has ended at the cross. Jesus Christ came into the world to atone for man’s sins, the ultimate sacrifice that brings forgiveness and reconciliation with God. This event was demonstrated physically after Jesus died on the cross, when the curtain that separated the Holy of Hollies was torn (Matthew 27:50-51).

And Jesus cried out again with a loud voice and yielded up his spirit.
And behold, thecurtain of the temple was torn in two, from top to bottom.

This event signified that the separation between God and people due to sin no longer existed, and that now there was no longer any obstacle for man to enter God’s presence. This event atoned for sin once and for all and ended the old covenant with its animal sacrifices. There is never to be a return to that. Jesus Christ, with his death on the cross, established a New Covenant, which is discussed in detail in the Book of Hebrews (Hebrews 8:13).

In speaking of a New Covenant, he makes the first one obsolete. And what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away.

So, any mention of the reinstitution of an animal sacrificial system based on the Old Covenant would never be according to God’s will.

But this is exactly what some Jews in Israel are planning, and, sadly, some alleged Christians in the world support these efforts. If the wrong sacrifice by the wrong person was the cause of the first abomination of desolation, in a similar way, the wrong sacrifice by the wrong person will cause the second abomination of desolation which will be so awful that it will lead to world calamity culminating in the end of the age and the return of Christ.

Who is the wrong person to offer sacrifices?

Under the Old Covenant, only the Levites were authorized to officiate in the temple to offer sacrifices on behalf of the people, whom they represented before God. The High Priest only was allowed to enter the Holy of Hollies, and only once a year, on the Day of Atonement, to make a sin offering. The Levitical priesthood was abolished with the Old Covenant.
We now have the real high priest, Jesus Christ, as written in the Book of Hebrews 8:1-2:

Now the point in what we are saying is this: we have such a high  priest, one who is
seated at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in heaven, a minister in the holy
places, in the true tent that the Lord set up, not man.

Our High Priest is Jesus Christ. He is the only one who can and has made true atonement for man’s sins, and only He can officiate before God. Anybody else who tries to perform, in effect usurp, His duties, is guilty of blasphemy and would in effect be an abomination. Such a person would set himself up in the place of Christ, as if he were equal or better than Christ, the Son of God (Hebrews 4:14-15).

Since then, we have a great high priest who has passed through the heavens, Jesus, the
Son of God, let us hold fast our confession.

What is the wrong sacrifice?

The purpose of the animal sacrifices under the Old Covenant was to atone for sin. They were a temporary measure, a shadow of things to come, to be offered by the priests continuously on behalf of God’s people. They were a temporary substitute, pointing to the actual effective sacrifice, that Jesus would make (Hebrews 9:11-15).

But when Christ appeared as a high priest of the good things that have come, then through the greater and more perfect tent (not made with hands, that is, not of this creation) he entered once for all into the holy places, not by means of the blood of goats and calves but by means of his own blood, thus securing an eternal redemption.
For if the blood of goats and bulls, and the sprinkling of defiled persons with the ashes of a heifer, sanctify for the purification of the flesh, how much more will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without blemish to God, purify our conscience from dead works to serve the living God.
Therefore, he is the mediator of a new covenant, so that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance, since a death has occurred that redeems them from the transgressions committed under the first covenant.
The mediator of the New Covenant is Jesus Christ, who, having offered a perfect sacrifice of his own blood, forever purified God’s people. There is no need for further sacrifices or for any repetition (Hebrews 11:24-28).
For Christ has entered, not into holy places made with hands, which are copies of the true things, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God on our behalf. Nor was it to offer himself repeatedly, as the high priest enters the holy places every year with blood not his own, for then he would have had to suffer repeatedly since the foundation of the world. But as it is, he has appeared once for all at the end of the ages to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself. And just as it is appointed for man to die once, and after that comes judgment, so, Christ, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time, not to deal with sin but to save those who are eagerly waiting for him.

Any return to the Old Covenant is blasphemy, a true abomination. It would be a complete rejection of the blood of Christ, and insult to God. In effect, the ones attempting to do this declare that the blood of the Son of God is not enough, no, that we need to offer animal blood instead. Based on what was mentioned in this article, clearly, such a scenario is completely wrong. As stated in Hebrews 10:14-18:

For by a single offering, he has perfected for all time those who are being sanctified. And the Holy Spirit also bears witness to us; for after saying, “This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, declares the Lord: I will put my laws on their hearts, and write them on their minds,” then he adds, “I will remember their sins and their lawless deeds no more.” Where there is forgiveness of these, there is no longer any offering for sin.

When the resumption of sacrifices will occur, as it is being planned now, that will be the abomination of desolation. It will be an act of supreme blasphemy, which God will not tolerate or allow to continue. It will trigger severe retaliation (Hebrews 10:26-31)

For if we go on sinning deliberately after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, but a fearful expectation of judgment, and a fury of fire that will consume the adversaries. Anyone who has set aside the law of Moses dies without mercy on the evidence of two or three witnesses.
How much worse punishment, do you think, will be deserved by the one who has spurned the Son of God, and has profaned the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and has outraged the Spirit of grace?
For we know him who said, “Vengeance is mine; I will repay.” And again, “The Lord will judge his people.” It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.

These warnings should not be ignored. The apostle Paul echoed the same warning when he addressed the Galatians, whom he called foolish and bewitched, for returning to practicing “the works of the law.”

The abomination of desolation will be the resumption of animal sacrifices. It will be a blasphemous act or rebellion against God and Jesus Christ. But will those doing this not realize that? The Jews who are planning this know what Jesus did and what he represents. But because they rejected Him and His word, they will deliberately offer animal sacrifices to show their contempt, in the same way Antiochus Epiphanes showed his contempt for God and His people, now the Church. It is deliberate rebellion, to insult and mock. Those who participate will come under the direct and immediate wrath of God. The events that lead to the sacrifices will lead further to the cataclysmic events described in the Bible in the book of Revelation.

Will there be another temple?

We are now in the ministry of the spirit. God is a spirit and as Jesus said in John 4:21:

God is a spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth.

The relationship between God and His people is now a spiritual one, far deeper than the ministry of the Old Covenant could offer. God does not dwell in buildings made by human hands. The temple that was destroyed in 70 A.D. had outlived its purpose. There was no further need for it, and in fact its usefulness ended at the cross. Any mention of temples in the New Testament must be viewed through a spiritual lens.

The first such indication can be found in John 2: 18-21:

So, the Jews said to him, “What sign do you show us for doing these things?” Jesus answered them, “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.” The Jews then said, “It has taken forty-six years to build this temple, and will you raise it up in three days?” But he was speaking about the temple of his body.

Here we see Jesus referring to his body as the temple. Why? Because where God is, that is where the temple of God is. This is further clarified in 1 Corinthians 6:19-20

Or do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit within you, whom you have from God? You are not your own, for you were bought with a price. So, glorify God in your body.

So, in the New Covenant, the real temple of God is the body of Christ, or the Church, because the Holy Spirit dwells in all believers. With that in mind, when the prophecy of the book of Daniel and Revelation are examined, whatever will occur will occur in the Church, where the Antichrist will appear and seek to reinstitute the animal sacrifices pretending to honor God, but in effect adding or seeking to replace the sacrifice that Christ made.

This will be the abomination that makes desolate (or the Abomination of Desolation), which will bring about the wrath of God, manifesting in the terrible events before the end of the age. True believers will never participate in these practices, but those heading for judgement in the lake of fire will.

Footnotes:

1.Stedman, R ”The Time of the End,” Ray Stedman.org, https://www.raystedman.org/old-testament/daniel/the-time-of-the-end.

[1]

The post Abomination appeared first on LewRockwell.

Introduction

During a Democratic fundraiser at the New York Historical Society Library on September 9th, 2016, then-presidential candidate Hillary Clinton made disparaging remarks about half the country. Half of Trump’s voting base, she believes, are a “basket of deplorables,” with the other half needing compassion because they believe the government has let them down. By doing this, Hillary Clinton had effectively alienated herself as an out-of-touch elite, a member of the swamp, and someone who needed to be drained from the system. But there is something Hillary was correct on: many felt that the system in which they lived actively worked against them. The financial crash in 2008, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the spying on U.S. citizens by the NSA-to the average American, all were actions of a hateful elite, and so Donald Trump was elected, a slap in the face to the system. Then there is another aspect in which Hillary is correct, those “deplorables” who would crusade for Trump would defend this new revolution not from the halls of Congress, but in studios and street corners, far away from the centers of power. They were deplorable for this very reason, a revolution cannot be stopped outside of power, meaning the system would have to contain it. Oswald Spengler, in his essay “Prussian Socialism,” had predicted the disastrous consequence of the German revolution of 1914 and 1918, events that European academics scoffed at, saying that such actions could not even be considered “revolutionary.” Spengler writes in 1919:

“Make no mistake, the revolution is not yet ended. No matter how you interpret it, as senseless or significant, as a failure or as an auspicious beginning, as the prelude to a world revolution or merely as a mob uprising in a single country. The fact that we are in the midst of a crisis. And like everything organic, like every disease, this crisis will follow a typical course that cannot be influenced by artificial means.”

Frenchmen may be disgusted at such a notion that the 2016 election of Donald Trump could even be considered a revolution, but the events since that election have proved to be unstoppable; although there were no guillotines, it was a revolution nonetheless. The populist movements of the Tea Party and Occupy Wall Street had no basis of power, not even in the media. Trump, being a member of the elite, started an America First revolution, and like a living organism, will eventually end. To understand why this revolution will continue to fail, we must first understand who the leaders were, the men and women at the forefront of the movement, who were merely members of the fourth estate. They failed to truly grasp the concept of Power, and had also failed to understand the mass mind and human nature of the modern American. Finally, confronting the truth that America, much like the Soviet Union, is in a state of collapse. What happened in the Soviet revolution of 1985 had culminated in a fifteen year revolution that ended with Putin, America is already on the same path.

The Fourth Estate

The warriors of this aimless revolution were members of the journalist class, the fourth estate. In the early days of 2016, the pantheon consisted of people like Ben Shapiro, Steven Crowder, Charlie Kirk, and many other conservative podcasters. During this time, these independent podcasters and public speakers had attacked the mainstream news outlets, who they claimed merely spread fake news and liberal propaganda; they attacked Antifa and BLM, along with blue-haired feminists on college campuses. But they failed to realize that all these groups and institutions were merely instruments of power. The elite theorist, Gaetano Mosca, understood that the media, whether it be newspapers or on the radio, were ultimately instruments for the ruling class to both promote its political formula and to engineer perception against the masses-an instrument for the organized minority against the disorganized majority. Putin understood this when, in the summer of 2000, he gathered 21 of the richest oligarchs in the country, the men who hollowed out Russia in the 1990s and created a situation where four out of ten Russians lived below the poverty line. He gave them an option: cooperate, or lose everything. Since then, Putin has remained in power, unchallenged in politics and in the media; he understood the nature of power.

But in America, these independent media outlets, who were the loudest voices for Trump, believed themselves to be in a civil war with the mainstream media, a fruitless endeavor that can be well seen today. Spengler highlights this class’s weakness when establishing socialism in Germany, writing:

“Instead of initiating action, they bellowed the slogans “soviet,” “dictatorship,” and “republic” so often that within two years time they will have become a laughing stock. The only “action” that occurred was the overthrow of the monarchy. And yet a republican form of government has nothing at all to do with socialism. All this proves, as opposed to the rest of the people, the fourth estate, which is actually a negative concept, is incapable of constructive action.”

The American conservatives were too mesmerized with the opportunity to debate college liberals on street corners, make fun of crying SJWs, and fall for the cultural war rage bait of BLM. They had helped Trump get elected twice, their energy spent on promises of a golden age; now that Trump is in office, he has nearly dragged America into war with Iran on behalf of Israel, rejected any notion of the Epstein files, and failed in his promises to end the war in Ukraine. The old guard of 2016, like Ben Shapiro and Charlie Kirk, conduct damage control for Trump still, showing their unrelenting support for Israel and splitting the base into multiple disorganized factions, still within the confines of the fourth estate. They lacked the basic understanding of power, putting ideology and dogma over realism, but they also lacked the basic understanding of the American masses.

The American vs The “Race”

Is there any benefit to listening to your enemies? Or at the very least, those who may be ideologically opposed to your ideas? Julius Evola, the traditionalist philosopher; Envr Hoxah, the communist dictator of Albania; and Ayman Zawahiri, Osama Bin Laden’s right-hand man, may seem like a disparate trio; yet all three, despite radically different world views, had come to the same conclusion about America. The liberalism that was built into its people was subversive to their nations and humanity. Julius Evola had argued in his book “The Bow and the Club” that much of the degenerate culture that flooded into Germany and Italy by the 1920s was a result of American eroticism; the jazz that flooded the dance halls had no soul and corrupted the youth into sexualized dancing. He had questioned if the inhabitants of America could even be considered European; he notes:

“Emigrating to America, Men of the most diverse peoples receive the same imprint; after two generations, except in rare cases, they lose almost all of their original characteristics, reproducing a type which is fairly homogeneous in terms of mentality, sensibility, and behavior; the American type.”

By race, thinkers like Evola and Spengler did not mean it in the biological zeitgeist of our era or the racism of the Nazis. It was referring to a spirit belonging to different groups of people: the Chinese spirit, which had produced Confucius; the Latin spirit which had produced the Roman Empire; and the Western spirit which had developed our modern world. The Americans, being a part of a “melting pot,” had seemingly melted the identity of any original culture within a generation. The culture America produced could even stretch over oceans. The communist dictator of Albania railed against this in his 1969 speech against Soviet revisionism, saying:

“Of what fight against bourgeois ideology can the Soviet revisionists speak while revisionism is nothing else by a manifestation of the bourgeois ideology in theory and practice, while egoism and individualism, the running after money and other material benefits are thriving in the Soviet Union, while careerseeking and bureaucratism, technocratism, economism and intellectualism are developing, while villas, motor-cars and beautiful women have become the supreme ideal of men, while literature and art attack socialism, everything revolutionary, and advocate pacifism and bourgeois humanism, the empty and dissolute living of people thinking only of themselves, while hundreds of thousands of western tourists that visit the Soviet Union every year, spread the bourgeois ideology and way of life there, while western films cover the screens of the Soviet cinema halls, while the American orchestras and jazz bands and those of the other capitalist countries have become the favorite orchestras of the youth, and while parades of western fashions are in vogue in the Soviet Union? If until yesterday the various manifestations of bourgeois ideology could be called remnants of the past, today bourgeois ideology has become a component part of the capitalist superstructure which rests on the state capitalist foundation which has now been established in the Soviet Union.”

Even the radical Islamist and number two man of Al-Qaeda, Ayman Zawahiri, wrote in his manifesto “Knights Under the Prophets Banner” that saw American culture as an external threat towards Islam that needed to be met on the battlefield. He said:

“Sayyed Qutb affirmed that the issue of unification in Islam is important and the battle between Islam and its enemies is primarily an ideological one over the issue of unification. It is also a battle over to whom authority and power should belong – to God’s course and Shari’ah, to man-made laws and material principles, or to those who claim to be intermediaries between the creator and mankind”

What should this tell the American conservatives? Many wish to return to a more traditional way of life, with family, marriage, morality, and church at the center. Yet the way each American views these concepts is inherently liberal. From a divorce rate of 0.7% in 1900 to 40% in 2024, modern music and clothes are immodest, but the super freak songs and cross-dressing rock stars of the 1980s were the pinnacle of culture. What the American conservatives want is untenable; if a jihadist, a communist, and a super-fascist all come to the same conclusion, then perhaps there is truth in what they say.

Right Containment

During the 1991 Soviet election, Boris Yeltsin, the leader of the Democratic Russia movement, faced off against four other opponents. His main opponent was Mikael Gorbachev, the General Secretary of the Soviet Union and head of the CPSU. But Yeltsin faced an unexpected problem: another candidate, Vladimir Zhirinovsky, also ran on an anti-communist platform with a strident Russian chauvinism. Rumors spread that the KGB purposefully ran Zhirinovsky to split the vote between Yeltsin’s coalition of republic separatists and the Russian nationalists’ disdain for the republics that had relied upon Russian taxes collected by the Center. In Vlaislov Zubok’s book “Collapse,” he notes that Gennady Burbulis, who managed Yeltsin’s campaign, believed that Yeltsin’s rivals had been “carefully chosen” to appeal to every major niche in Soviet society. The revolution that started in 1985 with Perestroika entered a new phase with the election of Boris Yeltsin, but it did not end. Similarly in America, Trump was reelected, but he has by all counts been absorbed by the system. His base that once supported him has split into multiple factions, accommodating every niche aspect of American society, whether it be Nick Fuentes, Tucker Carlson, Judging Freedom, or the Daily Wire.

Yeltsin’s eventual victory and subsequent years in office were met with disarray, corruption, crime, and poverty. In every revolution, no matter the past fanaticism of the ideology, the people will eventually demand security over freedom. When this point is reached, the revolution has ended; the masses would prefer a strong man over an ineffective parliament. This is what happened to Russia when a KGB agent rose to power, and similarly, America will enter into a post-revolutionary era.

The post The Pitiful Revolution Ongoing Since 2016 appeared first on LewRockwell.

International Man: The US government recently took a 15% stake in MP Materials and a 10% stake in Intel to counter China’s dominance in rare earth elements and revive the domestic semiconductor industry.

Are these national security necessities, or a fundamental break from free-market capitalism?

Doug Casey: First, whenever you hear the term “national security,” rest assured, some grifter is selling you on a fraud.

It’s natural for the State, like all living entities, to want to grow. The problem is that the State has coercive power, unlike other entities in society. Force and coercion are antithetical to free market capitalism. Worse than that, people think that the State is something magical. They think that “we the people” own the State. So they’re favorably inclined toward State-owned industries, idiotically believing they’re “stakeholders.” Sure. Just like Soviet citizens were stakeholders.

Trump is making some huge mistakes with what you just mentioned about MP Materials and Intel. As well as taking a so-called golden share in US Steel, and forcing Nvidia to pay 15% of its revenue on sales to China. This is all right out of Mussolini’s playbook.

Most people don’t know that Mussolini coined the word “fascism.” In ancient Rome, an ax, which represented the State, was surrounded by rods called fasces, which strengthened it. Mussolini’s idea was that the State and large corporations would be hand in glove, working together in a “public-private” partnership. Unfortunately, everything that Trump is doing these days is headed in that direction.

International Man: Government equity stakes risk blurring the line between politics and business. Do they build real long-term resilience, or are they politically driven projects destined to fail without state support?

Doug Casey: The State does things because they’re politically productive, not because they’re economically productive. And when you do things that are economically counterproductive, no matter how popular they may be with the hoi polloi, the result will be the failure of the enterprise and a lower standard of living for everybody.

The State is not oriented to political power, not economic profit. And because the State isn’t oriented to profit, nobody has a real stake in the success of its ventures. It’s naturally inefficient. It destroys capital. Trump seems to think that, because he is in charge, things will be different. He’s wrong. MP and US Steel will start to resemble the Post Office or the DMV.

Or the US railroad industry. High levels of regulation caused passenger trains to fail. The government then put them together as Amtrak—losses went higher, efficiency went lower.

Or NASA, which had a day in the sun when it first started. That was before, like all state enterprises, it devolved into a bureaucracy. That’s why almost everything is being done now by SpaceX and other private enterprises.

What I’m afraid of is that Trump will inadvertently, unwittingly, Sovietize the US economy. His idea of negotiating a good deal is to increase the size of the State.

His most recent cockamamie scheme is to have a “Sovereign Wealth Fund.” Which means the bankrupt US Government must borrow money in order to capitalize companies. Great idea. Print money so the State can have ownership and control of even more of the economy.

International Man: Under Peronism, Argentina took similar stakes in the name of sovereignty—with disastrous results.

Do you see parallels today, and what lessons should Americans learn?

Doug Casey: Under Juan and Evita Perón, Argentina actively modeled itself on Mussolini’s fascist Italy. Everything was about State intervention. The State was involved in absolutely everything. Argentina went from being one of the world’s richest countries to just another dysfunctional Third World backwater.

Trump’s big thing right now is massive, arbitrary tariffs. They amount to a national sales tax, thereby reducing the average American’s standard of living. But worse than that, they cut the US off from foreign products and innovations, which become too expensive to bring in. Worse yet, they bureaucratize international trade. As Tacitus said 1900 years ago, “The more corrupt the State, the more numerous the laws.” It’s equally true that the more numerous the laws, the more corrupt the State…

One of the reasons Trump has put on these tariffs is that he thinks it’ll bring manufacturing to the US. That’s what Mussolini and Peron thought, too. But the way to do that is to cut taxes and regulations. High taxes and regulations were major factors driving manufacturing out of the US. Trump seems to think putting 100% duties on Guatemalan bananas will result in a domestic banana industry.

International Man: Reports suggest nuclear energy may be next in line for US government equity stakes. How does that shape your outlook on uranium?

Doug Casey: The utility industry is already a creature of the State. It’s highly regulated, and commissions set the prices that utilities charge. That limits their ability to build more generation and transmission capacity.

There’s no question that nuclear power is the safest, the cheapest, and the cleanest form of mass power generation. Small modular reactors, roughly the size of those on nuclear submarines, are undoubtedly the answer. Hundreds of them could be built and placed where needed, to basically run on a set-and-forget basis for 10 years. Energy is critical to the advancement of any economy, but the US has been falling behind in energy generation for many years.

Therefore, I remain extremely bullish on uranium, which is currently around $75 per pound. And the companies that mine uranium.

Not only do the fundamentals favor nuclear, but, as we speak, the mining industry is totally out of favor with investors. Miners’ proportion of the US stock market is at the lowest level in history, about 1% of market capitalization. In the past, it averaged more like 8% to 12%. Things revert to the mean. That includes mining stocks in general, and uranium stocks in particular. They’ll go from something that everybody hates to something that everybody loves. It’s already happening…

International Man: Where is this trend ultimately headed, and what are the implications for investors and speculators?

Doug Casey: It seems the United States– and therefore the whole world—now revolves around Trump. Harris Kupperman, the hedge fund manager, did a hilarious piece that appeared in Zero Hedge. An investor’s whole day amounts, involuntarily, to just reacting to what Trump does and says.

It’s funny, of course, but it’s also scary. In an increasingly politicized world, everybody feels they can’t act without second-guessing The Donald.

Remember how MAGA started out talking about abolishing the IRS, with no tax for anybody who earned less than $200,000? And how anybody who lived offshore would be tax-free? We don’t hear about these things anymore. We also heard about how MAGA was going to have no wars, ending the Ukraine war overnight. But the US is still sending billions of dollars and thousands of missiles to the Zelensky regime.

It looks like Israel will become the 51st state, with the US bombing Iran. And if that’s not enough, the Navy has a flotilla off Venezuela, sinking a speedboat containing 11 people, without warning, in international waters, with a Hellfire missile. Iran and Venezuela are likely the next tar babies the US will get stuck in.

DOGE started off great—and it still exists, of course—but it’s lost all momentum. Instead, we’re building a new bureaucracy in the form of ICE. Although it serves a useful purpose right now in getting rid of illegal migrants and lawbreakers, when the current crisis is hopefully solved, it will still exist. Like the TSA, it won’t go away. It will be another dangerous armed bureaucracy that can be redeployed in the wrong direction.

Meanwhile, the government is running multi-trillion-dollar deficits, financed by printing money. I’m afraid that MAGA isn’t even talking the talk anymore, forget about walking the walk.

The Greater Depression approaches. As does WW3, and something like a civil war in the US. I suggest fastening your seat belt.

Reprinted with permission from International Man.

The post Why Trump’s Policies Are Right Out of Mussolini’s Playbook appeared first on LewRockwell.

Recent hours have seen too much Israeli depravity to write about, including an assassination strike in Qatar to sabotage peace talks, a second drone attack on the Global Sumud Flotilla, and a Guardian article featuring an IDF sniper who discussed killing civilians like a trophy hunter talking about game animals.

The IDF bombed a Doha residential building on Tuesday in an attempt to assassinate Hamas officials who had gathered to discuss US-Israeli ceasefire proposals, reportedly killing a Qatari security officer and four Hamas aides, as well as the son of the acting Hamas political bureau chief.

President Trump publicly criticized the Israeli attack, but Middle East Eye reports that according to US and regional officials the president had actually “blessed” the strike in advance. These would be the same Hamas officials who Trump had just been aggressively threatening to accept his ceasefire proposal or face severe consequences.

Hamas said the following in a statement:

“Targeting the negotiating delegation, as they discussed US President Donald Trump’s latest proposal, confirms beyond doubt that Netanyahu and his government do not want to reach any agreement and are deliberately seeking to thwart all opportunities and thwart international efforts, disregarding the lives of their prisoners held by the resistance, the sovereignty of states, or the security and stability of the region.

“We hold the US administration jointly responsible with the occupation for this crime, due to its ongoing support for the aggression and crimes of the occupation against our people.”

It’s hard to argue with any of this. Clearly nobody who’s calling the shots in Washington and Tel Aviv has any interest in actually ending this genocide. Which should surprise no one, since people who are committing genocide aren’t typically interested in negotiating ceasefire talks with their victims.

People really need to stop taking seriously the idea that Israel has any intention of ever agreeing to a ceasefire. They’ve made it clear that they’re not going to stop until they’ve kicked all the Palestinians out of Gaza and annexed it, and the Trump administration has made it clear they’re going to support this agenda. It’s time to start believing them.

NEW — Footage of the reported drone attack of the “Alma” ship on the Sumud Gaza aid flotilla.

The boat was sailing under the British flag. Fire damage seen in this video.

Comes after the “Family” was attacked yesterday in Tunisian waters.

Fire since extinguished. Crew safe. pic.twitter.com/SANljqf1qn

— Prem Thakker (@prem_thakker) September 9, 2025

The Global Sumud Flotilla reports that there has been another drone attack on another activist ship bringing aid to Gaza, with video footage clearly showing something incendiary hitting the boat from above and starting a fire.

The day before, the boat that had been carrying Greta Thunberg and other activists was struck in the same way. A video was released showing something on fire being dropped on the boat from above. Another showed an activist reacting to seeing a drone drop the incendiary object and saying later that he clearly saw a drone. Another video picked up whirring sounds immediately prior to the fire.

Yesterday my social media notifications were ablaze with hasbarists trying to claim the first attack was an internal mechanical fire or a cigarette fire, and then when the subsequent footage emerged they shifted to trying to claim it showed a misfired flare from the boat’s own occupants. The evidence is overwhelming that the Sumud flotilla is being attacked by drones, but we can expect the usual spinmeisters to keep pretending to believe obvious lies about it.

These activists are truly risking their lives with their efforts to break the Israeli siege. Their selflessness gives me hope for our species.

A Guardian article titled “The Gaza family torn apart by IDF snipers from Chicago and Munich” is creating a lot of buzz today because of the incredibly psychopathic quotes it includes from a sniper from Chicago named Daniel Raab.

A joint investigation by the Guardian, Arab Reporters for Investigative Journalism (ARIJ) and Paper Trail Media, Der Spiegel and ZDF connected footage of unarmed civilians being murdered by Israeli snipers in Gaza with social media posts and recorded admissions from the perpetrators. Raab had been tricked by Palestinian journalists into confessing to his crimes in Hebrew under the false promise of anonymity, with footage of his admissions published online last year.

An excerpt from the article:

Daniel Raab shows no hesitation as he watches footage of 19-year-old Salem Doghmosh crumpling to the ground beside his brother in a street in northern Gaza.

“That was my first elimination,” he says. The video, shot by a drone, lasts just a few seconds. The Palestinian teenager appears to be unarmed when he is shot in the head.

Raab, a former varsity basketball player from a Chicago suburb who became an Israeli sniper, concedes he knew that. He says he shot Salem simply because he tried to retrieve the body of his beloved older brother Mohammed.

“It’s hard for me to understand why he [did that] and it also doesn’t really interest me,” Raab says in a video interview posted on X. “I mean, what was so important about that corpse?”

Another:

“They’re thinking: ‘Oh I don’t think [I’ll get shot] because I’m wearing civilian clothes and I am not carrying a weapon and all that, but they were wrong,” said Raab, who majored in biology at the University of Illinois before joining the Israel Defense Forces. “That’s what you have snipers for.”

After Salem was shot, his father, Montasser, 51, rushed to the site, and tried to collect his sons’ bodies for burial, but was also fatally injured by a sniper.

If I had murdered people for trying to retrieve the bodies of their loved ones who I had also murdered, I’d definitely be asking myself a lot of questions, but “what was so important about that corpse?” would definitely not be among them.

Gaza has become a hunting ground which is visited by psychopathic individuals who want to experience what it’s like to kill human beings, and it’s always open season. Those bloodthirsty monsters then re-enter our communities and walk among us without consequences.

They get to go commit atrocities and then come back and resume their lives as though nothing happened, like going off to some kind of genocide summer camp. It’s about the most horrific thing you can imagine.

Israel poisons the entire world.

___________________

The best way to make sure you see everything I write is to get on my free mailing list. My work is entirely reader-supported, so if you enjoyed this piece here are some options where you can toss some money into my tip jar if you want to. Click here for links for my social media, books, merch, and audio/video versions of each article. All my work is free to bootleg and use in any way, shape or form; republish it, translate it, use it on merchandise; whatever you want. All works co-authored with my husband Tim Foley.

The post Some Days There’s Just Too Much Israeli Psychopathy To Write About appeared first on LewRockwell.

I am sitting here trying to process everything that just happened. I was doing research for this article, and then I got the news that Charlie Kirk had just been shot. I am going to try to find the words to express what I am feeling at this moment, and I will be putting together a full article about this horrifying tragedy later today. Meanwhile, NATO is literally closer to all-out war with Russia than it has ever been before. Last night 19 Russian drones entered Polish airspace, and NATO fighter jets shot down several of them…

Polish fighter jets, with help from NATO allies, shot down multiple Russian drones that entered its eastern border early Wednesday, Sept. 10. It was the first time the NATO member directly engaged with Russian military assets in its airspace since Moscow’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022.

Polish officials said 19 objects entered its airspace during a large Russian air attack on Ukraine. Polish jets shot down at least three of the aircraft.

No casualties have been reported.

This is crazy.

Just yesterday I wrote about 13 major World War III developments that had just occurred in a 48 hour period.

And now this has happened.

Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk is warning that his nation is dangerously close to a direct military conflict with Russia…

Poland’s prime minister, Donald Tusk, said the country is closer to military conflict “than at any time since the second world war” as Warsaw and Nato allies weighed a response to an incursion of Russian drones into Polish airspace.

Poland scrambled its own and Nato air defences, shooting down at least three drones, as Russia’s attack on Ukraine spread to Nato territory early on Wednesday in the most significant way since the full-scale invasion more than three years ago.

This is an extremely serious situation.

Following the incident with the drones, Poland formally invoked Article 4 of the NATO treaty…

Poland and the United States are members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which at its core is a mutual defense pact formed after WWII to deal with the threat posed by the Soviet Union, meaning an attack on one may be considered an attack on all.

Tusk said he had activated Article 4 of NATO’s treaty, under which alliance members can demand consultations with their allies, and that he was in touch with NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte, who called the incursion “reckless behavior,” irrespective of whether it was deliberate.

A NATO official confirmed to NBC News that Poland had “requested consultations under Article 4 of the Washington Treaty,” only the 8th time that the article — which does not trigger a military reaction — has been invoked since NATO was established in 1949.

Invoking Article 4 does not mean that we are going to war.

Instead, what it means is that members of NATO will now discuss what steps should be taken next…

This is not the better-known Article Five, which activates obligatory collective defence from all members, but rather one that triggers a consultation process. Per NATO itself: “Any member country can formally invoke Article 4 of the North Atlantic Treaty. As soon as it is invoked, the issue is discussed and can potentially lead to some form of joint decision or action on behalf of the Alliance. Whatever the scenario, fellow members sitting around the Council table are encouraged to react to a situation brought to their attention by a member country.”

As NATO leaders talk things through, hopefully cooler heads will prevail.

The Russians are insisting that they had absolutely no intention of attacking any targets inside Poland…

Russia labeled the accusations “groundless” and said it did not plan to attack any targets in Poland.

The Russian Defense Ministry said it had attacked the “military-industrial complex of Ukraine” in a “large-scale strike” but that “there were no targets envisioned for destruction on the Polish territory,” pointing to the flight range of the drones it said it used against western Ukraine.

It said it was “ready to hold consultations with the Polish Ministry of Defense on this matter.”

The Russians obviously do not want NATO to get directly involved in the war in Ukraine.

So why did Russian drones end up flying into Poland?

The Belarusian military is claiming that the Russian drones “lost their track as a result of the impact of the parties’ electronic warfare assets”…

The Belarusian military earlier reported having given their Polish counterparts early warning that some drones used by Ukrainian and Russian forces for mutual attacks “lost their track as a result of the impact of the parties’ electronic warfare assets.”

“This allowed the Polish side to respond promptly to the actions of the drones by scrambling their forces on duty,” said General Pavel Muraveiko, the chief of the general staff of Belarus.

The general added that some of the stray aircraft had been intercepted by Belarusian air defenses. He stressed that the exchanges with Poland were part of regular communications about incoming threats, with the Polish side regularly informing officials in Belarus about aircraft detected in Ukrainian airspace.

Yes, it is entirely plausible that electronic warfare caused the Russian drones to accidentally veer off course.

But I think that there is also a possibility that electronic warfare could have been used to purposely direct those drones into Polish airspace.

There are those that are absolutely determined to drag NATO into the war in Ukraine by any means possible.

One of those individuals is Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.  Following the drone incident in Polish airspace, he immediately proposed “a joint air defense system” that would “create an effective air shield over Europe”…

There are several reasons for this brazen behavior of Russia, and they are absolutely obvious to everyone. We need to work on a joint air defense system and create an effective air shield over Europe. Ukraine has long proposed this, and we have concrete solutions. We must respond together to all current challenges and be ready for potential threats to all Europeans in the future. Likewise, we need to significantly increase joint funding for the production of interceptor drones. They have already proven their effectiveness.

In other words, he wants NATO to provide air defense for Ukraine.

But it wouldn’t end there.

Zelensky knows that Ukraine can never defeat Russia alone.  So he is desperate to get NATO ground forces involved, and it is interesting to note that French hospitals have been instructed to prepare for mass casualties by March 2026…

French hospitals have been told to prepare a potential armed conflict in Europe by next year, local media reported.

In a letter sent to regional health agencies, revealed by Le Canard Enchaîné , the Ministry of Health asked hospitals to prepare for a “major (military) engagement” by March 2026.

The newspaper warned that between 10,000 and 50,000 men could be expected in hospitals over a period of 10 to 180 days.

Ultimately, the direction that NATO takes in the months ahead is going to be largely determined by the Trump administration.

Following the drone incident in Poland, President Trump posted a very ominous message on his Truth Social account…

Here we go?

I don’t like the sound of that at all.

And President Trump is also proposing that the U.S. and the EU should slap extremely high punitive tariffs on China and India because they are still conducting normal levels of trade with Russia…

The United States is ready to broaden tariffs targeting buyers of Russian oil — if the EU takes similar moves — to hit at revenue Moscow needs for the war in Ukraine.

Dialing in to talks between United States and European Union officials, President Donald Trump raised the possibility of tariffs between 50 percent and 100 percent on oil buyers such as China and India, said the official, who was not authorized to discuss these details publicly.

The talks come as EU sanctions envoy David O’Sullivan, who has spearheaded the bloc’s global outreach on preventing Moscow’s evasion of sanctions, is leading a delegation in Washington for meetings on Monday and Tuesday.

U.S. tariffs on most Chinese imports are already above 50 percent.

If those tariffs are raised by another 50 percent or more, it is likely that the flow of most goods coming over from China will simply stop.

That would lead to the sort of shortages that I warned about a few months ago when tariffs on Chinese imports briefly spiked to 145 percent.

In addition, much higher tariffs on Chinese goods would be a critical blow to our rapidly deteriorating relationship with China.

U.S. policies over the past decade have driven the Chinese and the Russians into one another’s arms, and now they are very united in their opposition to us.

This is a scenario that we should have tried very hard to avoid for obvious reasons.

Peace with the Russians is still possible, but it is not going to be produced by threatening the Russians.

I have tried to make that point as strongly as I can, but now time is running out.

Reprinted with permission from The Economic Collapse.

The post Now That Poland Has Formally Invoked Article 4, NATO Is Closer To All-Out War With Russia Than Ever appeared first on LewRockwell.

Twenty-four years after that bright September morning turned black, the catechism still drones: they hate us for our freedom. Yet post-9/11 America has taught dogma differently—freedom as permission slip, freedom as a hall pass subject to revocation, freedom as something administered by a clipboard and credentials.

Such freedom is not something to be envious of. But Osama bin Laden and his nineteen henchmen were never concerned about freedom in the first place. Not our kind anyway.

“Fifteen days,” they said at the outset of the coronavirus farce. Then it was fifteen months of rituals, mandates, and the astonishing revelation that The Science was settled until it wasn’t. Dissent—once considered violence—suddenly became a public-health necessity on select streets for select causes.

The managerial catechism mutated, but the liturgy remained: obey first, ask questions never.

Which brings us to the rifle shot that cracked a campus courtyard and the soul of a movement. Whether history ultimately records Charlie Kirk’s death on Wednesday afternoon as an assassination, the intent was not ambiguity but elimination—a bullet as argument, a muzzle flash as veto. Today’s revolutionaries prefer to outsource their convictions to explosives and epithets, to arson and algorithms.

When debate fails, deplatform. When deplatforming fails, destroy. This is not an accident of the modern Left—it is its inheritance.

The left–right axis, born in the seating chart of the French Revolution, was not about tax rates but metaphysics. To the left of the president of the National Assembly sat the Jacobins, apostles of abstract virtue and practical terror: equality in theory, the guillotine in practice.

The Revolution ate not only its children but also its parents and fed on the marrow of priests and peasants who kept inconvenient loyalties—to God, to parish, to province, to the little platoons that Edmund Burke warned were being dynamited by the new political chemistry.

Say what one wishes about powdered wigs, they didn’t require powdered remains.

Then came the Bolsheviks, who promised bread but delivered rations. Revolutionaries who preached peace while staffing the secret police. Those who spoke of liberation yet constructed the barbed-wire vocabulary of the twentieth century.

The Bolshevik arithmetic was elegant in its cruelty: subtract a class to add a utopia.

On Spanish streets in the 1930s, the Red Terror targeted the habits of the old civilization—smashing altars, executing nuns, while parish priests disappeared as if tradition itself were a felony. The revolutionary project knew its enemy: not a party but a patrimony.

Fast-forward to our performative present, where being clad in black while maintaining the useless covid-mask has become the uniform of “Antifa.” The canard of “anti-fascism” serves these blood-soaked monsters as the get-out-of-jail-free card for the billions of dollars in damage it has inflicted. Blocks burned, precincts surrendered, businesses boarded up like blank obituaries.

Portland, Oregon—God love its rainfall and roses—was treated as a laboratory for demolition-by-slogan. Leftist politicians filmed their monologues while the networks wrote the fanfiction. When the bill came due, it was itemized in shutters and sirens, the city’s once-vibrant hum replaced with plywood poetry and security grates squealing shut at dusk.

This is how the revolution modernized its branding, but not its methods.

Jack Callahan, barkeep emeritus of common sense, put down his dish towel and cut through the jargon: “You can always tell a counterfeit by what it can’t afford. The counterfeit of freedom can’t afford dissidents.” Then he took another swig off his bottle of Budweiser and added, “Princes love the word freedom. They love it most when they’re spelling it for you.”

Jack is right, as usual. Put not your trust in princes, especially those who govern by waiver in a culture where inherent rights have suddenly become waiverable. Freedom administered is freedom denied. Freedom standardized is freedom sterilized.

Come Thursday morning, twenty-four years on, the mirror still judges.

Recall. The men who hijacked those planes were not conservative in any meaningful sense. They were autocrats with a theology, utopians with detonators.

This was a revolutionary vanguard whose politics were leftward in method if not in manifesto: the individual subordinated to an abstract cause, the old order torched for a promised new dawn, the sacred stripped and redressed as state utility. The tactics—shock, spectacle, submission—have been franchised domestically, but in softer packaging.

We call it “safety.” They call it “progress.”

Jack Callahan calls it “the long con.”

So, Charlie Kirk was shot and killed because words are now considered wounds and wounds have somehow become arguments. Nevertheless, the press corps rehearses its summaries about rhetoric and temperature while quietly indexing which temperatures are proper to raise and which to cool.

The same chorus that, in 2020, tut-tutted high-school quarterbacks for the gall to breathe fresh air, today holds vigils for smashed windows and scolds fathers for wanting their daughters to walk downtown without a chaperone named Glock.

Notice how quickly they discover federalism when rioters need indulgences and how swiftly they rediscover central power when neighborhoods demand tranquility or parents seek sanity.

The counterrevolution will not be televised, because it isn’t a show.

It’s a stewardship. It’s sheriffs who know their counties by the creek beds and not the census tracts, pastors who care more for souls than for seating charts, mothers who burn the script of fear and teach their children to kneel only before God, and fathers who understand that courage is a habit, not a headline.

This is subsidiarity reasserting itself—responsibility traveling downhill, accountability living next door, charity speaking in first names. It’s a republic being rebuilt from the neighborhood outward.

We can mourn—God knows we must—and still refuse the lesson our princes prefer. They say the solution to violence is silence, to danger is docility, to fear is more fear.

No.

The answer to bullets is not whispers but truth, and the answer to arson is not ashes but order. The torch that lit the modern Left has burned too many sanctuaries, too many streets, too many reputations. It is time to douse the sacramental gasoline and rebuild the altars—familial, communal, divine.

Reflect. Hope is not an ideology. It is a Person.

Freedom is not a permission. It is a gift. And a free people does not bow the neck, but it does bow the knee, genuflecting to the rightly ordered, rightly named, and rightly guarded.

This Thursday, remember the heroes who died, reject the lies, and recommit to the only revolution worth having: the restoration of what is true, good, and beautiful—so that when the counterfeit comes knocking, the house is already in order and the lights, at last, are on.

This article was originally published on The O’Leary Review.

The post From 9/11 to Today: The Counterfeit of “Safety” Exposed appeared first on LewRockwell.

One of the nightmares that periodically jolt me awake is the image of an American jumping from the inferno-ravaged upper stories of New York’s World Trade Center into the dust-plumed streets below.  He is tormented and maybe praying and then gone.  More than anything else, that horror from 9/11 haunts me.

In the first few years after the Islamic terror attack, news programs would replay some of those desperate moments caught on video, when workers trapped between floors of fire were forced to make a final decision about how they would die.  Many of the videos showed pairs (co-workers, friends, strangers?) holding hands as they leaped from billowing smoke into the bright sunlight of that Tuesday morning, their bodies clearly visible against the blue sky before vanishing into the grayness below.

As the years went by, those videos disappeared.  Even during the annual memorials for 9/11, the sight of Americans falling from the sky was gradually obscured in the historical record.  When I finally noticed those erasures, I realized that the significance of the Islamic attacks on the United States was being rewritten in real time.  People who had the means to shape public “narratives” no longer wanted Americans to relive the agony of 9/11.  They did not want us to reflect upon the horror of Americans being forced to choose between dying from flames or a thousand foot drop onto city streets.  They wanted us to forget.

I was in favor of the post-9/11 wars because I naïvely believed that Western civilization was finally prepared to defend itself from the barbarians at the gate.  After 9/11, Americans generally agreed about two things: (1) We were in a civilizational war, and (2) militant Islamists were our enemies.  President Bush defined America’s military response to the attack as a “crusade.”  For a while, it felt as if Western civilization would fight for survival.

That feeling did not last.  In hindsight, even our government’s designation of the conflict as a “Global War on Terrorism” indicated early on that American leaders were not prepared to defend Western civilization from Islamic jihad.  “Terrorism” is a nebulous and dangerous word.  It is nebulous because almost anything can be described as an act of terrorism.  It is dangerous because almost anyone can be described as someone else’s terrorist.

During the Obama and Biden presidencies, the federal government redirected resources from the “war on terrorism” abroad to target political conservatives here at home.  After the January 6, 2021, protest against election fraud at the U.S. Capitol, the federal government and the entire corporate news media described Trump supporters as “domestic terrorists.”  I would argue that broadcast news anchors used more pointed rhetoric to attack MAGA voters than they did to describe Osama bin Laden’s followers after 9/11.

Ultimately, the “Global War on Terrorism” — at first painted as an operation to preserve Western civilization and eliminate Islamic supremacists — transformed into an operation to strengthen Islamic civilization’s grip on institutions of power inside the West and to eliminate defenders of Western civilization by defaming them as bigots.  Men and women who fought in Iraq, Afghanistan, the Levant, and parts of Africa went to war for many reasons.  However, the vast majority were dedicated to defending Western civilization, not surrendering it.

It was astonishing how quickly the defense of Western civilization collapsed after 9/11.  Before President Bush even left office, government and cultural institutions had already transitioned from actively encouraging American citizens to be vigilant against potential acts of Islamic terrorism to actively condemning American citizens for being “Islamophobic.”

During the Democrat primaries leading up to the 2008 general election, Barack Obama regularly attacked Hillary Clinton for her vote in favor of the Iraq War.  By the time Obama took office, the corporate news media had already begun framing U.S. military engagements overseas as imperial occupations carried out by American “oppressors” against “oppressed” adherents of Islam.

Once again, the Marxist dialectic was in full force: Americans bad; everyone else good.  Or more generally: Western civilization bad; multiculturalism good.  The election of Barack Hussein Obama two years after the execution of Saddam Hussein for crimes against humanity marked a watershed in the GWOT.  Obama wasn’t elected just because he appeared to be the anti-Bush.  He was elected because his very name repudiated the civilizational defense of the West that had begun after 9/11.  Following the rise of Obama and the emergence of a politically correct war on “Islamophobia,” warriors wondered aloud, “What the hell are we fighting and dying for?”

Those who clearly remember this transition in public policy will recall two events that occurred during the first decade after the 9/11 Islamic terror attacks.

The first one involved an unknown and mediocre intellectual named Ward Churchill, who was a professor at the University of Colorado Boulder until his dismissal in 2007.  Churchill wrote an essay one day after 9/11 in which he argued that the Islamic attacks were justified.  Framing the murder of 3,000 Americans as a legitimate military operation against American imperialism and describing the Americans who had worked in the World Trade Center as “little Eichmanns” who deserved their fate, Churchill blamed innocent Americans for the acts of Islamic murderers.

When his work gained widespread attention a few years later, Americans were furious.  The backlash against Churchill was so intense that the University of Colorado Board of Regents publicly apologized and eventually fired Churchill for unrelated acts of academic misconduct.  Yet it is highly unlikely that he would have suffered any consequences today.

Another event worth remembering was the effort to build a mosque and Islamic community center just two blocks away from the World Trade Center.  The developers claimed to be interested in “interfaith dialogue,” but the construction of a mosque so near the 9/11 terror attacks in Lower Manhattan offended Americans across the country who saw it as a symbolic act of civilizational conquest.  Although public outrage forced investors to shelve the project’s original blueprints for a “Ground Zero Mosque,” plans for an Islamic cultural museum continue to this day.

With Muslim Zohran Mamdani most likely taking the mayor’s office in New York City in January, there is every reason to believe that developers will finally be able to implement more of their vision for the original “Ground Zero Mosque.”  When they are done, a building reflecting classic Islamic designs will cast its shadow near the mass gravesite of Americans murdered on 9/11.  When that happens, warriors who risked their lives all over the world to fight Islamic terrorism will be forced to swallow a hard pill: We came.  We saw.  They conquered.

A few years ago, Congresswoman Ilhan Omar minimized the significance of 9/11 and portrayed Muslims as the real victims.  “Far too long we have lived with the discomfort of being a second-class citizen,” she told the Council on American-Islamic Relations in 2019, “and every single Muslim in this country should be tired of it…CAIR was founded after 9/11 because they recognized that some people did something and that all of us were starting to lose access to our civil liberties.”

In an America where a member of Congress describes 9/11 as a time when “some people did something,” it is clear that Ward Churchill would never be fired today.  He would probably be promoting his latest book on the evils of America.

Islamic mayors are winning elections all over Europe and America.  A Michigan police department recently designed a patch written in Arabic.  The World Economic Forum might as well revise its promise to Westerners: You will own nothing and become Muslims.

The 9/11 nightmare never ends.  Western civilization is in retreat.  We must awaken from our sleep.  The West is worth saving.

This article was originally published on American Thinker.

The post The 9/11 Nightmare Never Ends appeared first on LewRockwell.

Israel’s Ambassador to the US Yechiel Leiter is confident that “they” will get over Israel’s lawlessness in pursuit of greater Israel.  Leiter, Netanyahu, the Knesset, and most Israelis and most in DC believe Israel is in the process of “creating” a far better Arab world than the one “built” by previous European colonials.

In this era of political assassinations on every corner of the planet, Israel – with US advance knowledge, consent, and coordination – attacked with 15 American-made fighter jets a house where the Hamas leadership was meeting in Doha on September 9th, convened there at the request of the US to deliver an overdue ceasefire in Gaza. Not all of the Hamas negotiating team was killed in this strike, and Leiter stated, speaking to Fox News, “We’ll get them next time.”

US Ambassador to Turkey, Envoy to Syria and Trump messenger to Beirut Tom Barrack told the “animalistic” Arab media in Lebanon, and the rest of the world, on May 25th, 2025, that Sykes-Picot is dead, saying:

A century ago, the West imposed maps, mandates, penciled borders, and foreign rule. Sykes-Picot divided Syria and the broader region for imperial gain—not peace. That mistake cost generations. We will not make it again.  The era of Western interference is over. The future belongs to regional solutions, but partnerships, and a diplomacy grounded in respect.

Barrack was celebrating the collapse and dissolution of Syria, newly presidented by a former ISIS commander, with a $10 million bounty on his head hurriedly removed by the White House. US lawlessness has also been on display with regards to Israel as a nuclear power and terrorist state since at least June 8th 1967, and likely since 1963, and even more likely since 1948.  In blindly supporting the lawlessness of the founding and the existence of modern Israel, a political Zionist European-style state colonized on top of Palestine, the US government has dug a political and reputational hole six feet deep and shaped like a coffin.

Washington cannot recognize Israel’s undisclosed and un-inspected nuclear weapons – to do so would require that US military sales be ended immediately.  Congressional legislation requires such standards in weapons sales.  The existing and long-standing lack of political and human rights safeguards in Israel, and the use of US weapons in illegal military attacks and extrajudicial assassinations around the world, would deprive Israel of US military assistance, as the law provides.

Barrack isn’t the only American who believes we need a new approach in the Middle East.  Josh Paul, State Department whistleblower and founder of A New Policy, advocates that our foreign policy and relations with countries in the Middle East, including Israel, be based on actual American interests and American values, and comply with American and international law.

Tom Barrack, the vile and servile Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee, much of Congress, and the Trump White House do not agree with the legit America First message of Paul’s organization.  They reject the substantial American First and American Values message of other voices in US policy including the Eisenhower Media Group and a significant minority in both parties in the US Congress.

As an appeasement, they now say the US no longer wishes to interfere on behalf of the US Empire and wants to see regional solutions, even as the US government/deep state puts its heavy hand politically, economically and militarily on the scale for Israel.

This heavy hand includes lying for Israel, spying for Israel, running political interference for Israel, assisting and sustaining the genocide in Gaza, and the giving our blessing to the forced removal of Palestinians from both Gaza and the West Bank.  Not a single one of these activities is compliant with US law, nor international law, American First or American values.  Instead, to paraphrase Ambassador Barrack, is is animalistic, inhuman, and anti-human.  The US government has become utterly indistinguishable from Netanyahu’s reign of terror in West Jerusalem and beyond.

America has been held hostage by the post-1947 National Security Act, and the establishment of a Department of Defense and CIA Covert Operations, both with unlimited missions and obscure budgets.  Our government offers us not peace, but a warped economic incentivism for war, where the end of one intervention impacts a valuable MICIMATT income stream and therefore must be replaced, or else the US economy, dominated by MICIMATT sectors, suffers.

It is not uncommon to see really bad ideas, as well as marginally bad ideas, become government policy.  The ongoing collapse of many European countries is the result of false charity, false environmentalism, and false security concepts elevated to policy decades ago, and the results have been entirely predictable:  unaffordable and unavailable energy and food, excessive government debt, a passion for war, erasure of freedom. The rise of the stupid must also be mentioned, as the recent statements by close allies, EU Foreign Policy and Security Affairs Chief Kaja Kallas and NATO General Secretary Mark Rutte illustrate.

What makes America different, and the reason Trump was elected twice, if not three times, is Americans are optimists.  We – in a nod to the founders – think we can do it better, fix the flaws of totalitarian and sociopathic tendencies in our politicos, fight state abuse and theft of our creativity and productivity, and resist state and corporate propaganda.  Trump tapped into this optimism, and it was certainly a cool trick. Elon Musk, however, is right: “the government is unfixable.”

It would be nice if Trump’s White House and the US Congress were really interested in cutting nine million Israelis and 450 million Arabs loose, and letting the Middle Eastern residents and neighbors sort it out.  As it stands, we manipulate and fund all sides, profiting from arms sales to Israel’s enemies and subsidizing every aspect of Israeli life and defense for Israel.

The newly renamed Department of War might better be called the Department of War Spending, because it isn’t war we want, and since the DoD’s inception, it isn’t war we’ve ever won. Instead we are caught in a money trap, stuck in a cult of false security, fake diplomacy, and AI-assisted dissent suppression around the world.

Lawlessness defines all states, notwithstanding pretty flags and detailed constitutions. That gang, those pirates and thieves writ large described throughout the centuries by St Augustine, Etienne De La Boetie, and Murray Rothbard is what we have to work with. Ambassador Leiter trusts that, as De La Boetie observed, the people can be counted on to acquiesce, to serve the state, and in effect, get over its lawlessness, immorality and crimes.

The clip of an interview of Charlie Kirk, a frequent guest on Patrick Bet David’s podcast, was linked above, sharing Kirks’ thoughts about the events of October 7th  (Israel’s 9-11). Kirk tirelessly and successfully advocated for youth to become involved in constitutional government, to start living as if Thomas Jefferson and Alexander Hamilton were right about our God-given liberties, and Senator Tim Kaine dead wrong.  In a world where authenticity is already a rare treasure, an assassin’s attempt to make it even more rare is both contemptible, and counterproductive.

Charlie advised young people, and all people, to be courageous.  Etienne De La Boetie would certainly agree, calling our human tendency to consent to tyranny cowardice, even worse than cowardice.  Ambassador Leiter and our own government in Washington are counting on that cowardice, at home, and around the world.  Bold men and women, and hopeful men and women, might instead consider a powerful alternative to cowardice, and take Charlie’s and Etienne’s advice:  “Resolve to serve [the tyrant] no more!”

The post ‘They’ll Get Over It’ appeared first on LewRockwell.

Only the most blind MAGA toadies cannot see that all of Trump’s promises to be a peace president were nothing more than campaign propaganda to entice Americans who were sick and tired of Joe Biden’s (and Barack Obama’s and G.W. Bush’s) perpetual foreign wars to vote for him. But what did Trump do after being elected? He filled his cabinet with neocon pro-war zealots, and just seven months into his presidency, he has shown the American people that he is anything but a peace president.

Not only has Donald Trump not stopped a single war, he has extended America’s wars abroad. He continues to supply Ukraine with a steady stream of U.S. weapons, which only serves to perpetuate the war and guarantees the deaths of tens of thousands of additional Ukrainians. Almost 2 million Ukrainian soldiers have already been killed in America’s proxy war against Russia. Truly, Trump and his drunken stage stooge Pete Hegseth will fight America’s proxy war in Eastern Europe to the last Ukrainian.

Trump just recently authorized the delivery of thousands of additional missiles to Ukraine.

The administration of US President Donald Trump has approved the sale of 3,350 Extended Range Attack Munitions (ERAM) to Ukraine, according to The Wall Street Journal.

The missile transfer is part of a wider $850 million aid package that also includes other weapon systems, such as air defense platforms and Guided Multiple Launch Rocket System (GMLRS) rounds with a range of up to 145 kilometers.

(Source)

Oh! And that’s another thing. Trump has chosen to change the name of the Department of Defense to the Department of War. Gee! I wonder what kind of signal that sends to the governments of the world.

Trump doesn’t sound like a peace president to me.

In the Middle East, Trump continues the genocide in Gaza. Genocide Joe has a new name: Terrorist Trump. Not only does Trump continue to sanction, endorse and facilitate Israel’s genocide and ethnic cleansing in Gaza, but he has also greenlit Israel’s terrorist expansions in the West Bank, Lebanon and Syria. Plus, Trump has extended the American-Israel axis of war criminality against Yemen and Iran. This includes the assassination of the civilian Yemeni Prime Minister and twelve members of his cabinet. All by itself, that is an international war crime.

If such an assassination was committed by any other nation on earth, everyone—including the Trump toadies—would be screaming, well, bloody murder.

And now Donald Trump has sent a flotilla of U.S. warships to Venezuela and is threatening to overthrow the legitimately elected government of that country. Here we go again: more and more regime change.

I thought Trump was going to change all of that.

To show the might and power of the U.S. government, Trump ordered the U.S. Navy to bomb a small fishing boat with eleven people on board. A boat Trump said was carrying “narcoterrorists” who were heading to the United States to smuggle drugs.

Trump didn’t show the world the U.S. government’s might and power; he showed the world the U.S. government’s lawlessness and greed.

In the first place, that little boat was almost 1,500 miles from the United States in international waters. That boat had no chance whatsoever of making it to the U.S. In the second place, the pictures of the little boat that were provided by the U.S. government showed NO large packages of drugs. If distributing drugs was the objective of the boat’s owner, why was it carrying eleven people? There were so many people on the boat, there was literally no room for large amounts of anything else.

Next, it is an absolute FACT that Donald Trump and the rogue, reckless cabal of criminals that surround him have ZERO concern for the LAW. They care absolutely NOTHING about the Constitution, International Law or the moral laws of God. Even the sharpest legal minds in the U.S. Justice Department have not been able to come up with any kind of legal validation for this brazen act of international criminality.

How did they know that this boat contained “narcoterrorists”? And if they were engaged in a criminal enterprise targeting U.S. citizens, why was not due process of law undertaken? The U.S. could have easily interdicted the boat, checked for evidence and interrogated the passengers, which would have been the lawful way to deal with the situation. Instead, Trump appointed himself policeman, prosecutor, judge, jury and executioner and simply murdered eleven people from another country.

So, how long will it be before Trump starts killing people in his own country?

Oh! And Vice President J.D. Vance, aka James Donald Bowman, his given name; Jimmy David Hamel; and now J.D. Vance. These are all of his name changes. Kind of makes one wonder why so many name changes? Whoever he is, he said about the murder of the eleven people on the boat: “I don’t give a sh*t.”

What Vance was saying was he doesn’t have a conscience about murdering people or breaking U.S. law, international law or the laws of God. He is a law unto himself.

This is what dictatorships are made of.

Anyone with half a brain knows that Trump’s goal in Venezuela is to steal the country’s precious resources, namely oil and gold. Venezuela has the largest oil reserve in the world and also one of the largest gold reserves in the world. He attempted to do this in his first term and is now trying again.

Of course, none of this could have anything to do with drawing the attention of the American people away from the Epstein files, could it? Naw!

Remember, Donald Trump is a product of the Jewish mafia. Taking things he wants, by any means necessary, is all he knows to do. Trump has always been a New York gangster. And now he is an international gangster.

One of the reasons that gas prices in America are still so high is that Trump has prohibited the distribution of oil to America from both Russia and Venezuela.

Besides, Latin America expert, journalist and author Anya Parampil, has documented that 98% of the illegal drugs coming to the U.S. from the south are from Columbia, Peru and Bolivia. But obviously, Columbia, Peru and Bolivia don’t have Venezuela’s oil and gold reserves.

Beyond that, anyone who doesn’t know that the world’s biggest drug dealer is the U.S. government isn’t paying attention. Can anyone say Mena, Arkansas, Iran-Contra or Fort Bragg?

In addition to the above, Trump continues to threaten China and even continues to threaten Russia, the Alaska summit notwithstanding.

Still again, Trump effectively declared war on India with his application of 50% tariffs on India’s exports to the U.S. This act of wanton aggression against India has thrust New Delhi into the arms of Russia and China. Then Trump turns around and acts surprised that India would do such a thing.

What a doofus!

Oh! If you think products at the store are expensive now, just wait a few months for the calamitous consequences of Trump’s punitive tariffs to kick in. We will see recession-like inflation and empty shelves like we have not seen since the 1970s.

Donald Trump has even expressed intentions to go to war with the U.S. city of Chicago, Illinois. On his Truth Social page, the Bellicose-in-Chief wrote: “Chicago about to find out why it’s called the Department of WAR.”

In addition to Los Angeles, Washington, D.C., and Chicago, Trump is threatening to send military troops to Portland, Oregon; Seattle, Washington; Boston, Massachusetts; Baltimore, Maryland; Oakland, California; New Orleans, Louisiana; and New York City. In other words, any major city that isn’t controlled by Republicans.

Is there any country that Trump hasn’t threatened to go to war with? Oh, that’s right: Israel.

Forget the Constitution. Forget Posse Comitatus. Forget the fact that law enforcement is the role of states, counties and municipalities. In other words, forget the 10th Amendment. Donald Trump can do anything he wants to do. That’s exactly what he told us.

And Trump has said much more in this regard. He also said, “A lot” of people “would rather have a dictator,” meaning as long as he stops crime. He also said, “Most people say, ‘If you call him a dictator, if he stops crime, he can be whatever he wants.’”

But Trump is not stopping crime: He is committing crime. Trump is the Criminal-in-Chief. Like Vance, Trump believes he is a law unto himself. He sees himself as a Roman emperor.

One would do well to watch this biographical video of the richest man in Rome in 53 BC, Marcus Licinius Crassus. He was one of the three most powerful men in Rome at that time, along with Julius Caesar and Pompey the Great.

Crassus’ lust for wealth and power rivals that of any man’s in human history. What he craved and what he received should be a lesson for all of us to this very day. It should be a lesson for Donald Trump and those who so blindly support him.

The narration of this fascinating biographical video ends with these words:

The story of Marcus Crassus serves as a timeless warning about the dangers of allowing personal ambition to override wisdom and restraint. His transformation from successful businessman to military disaster illustrates how individual character flaws can have consequences far beyond personal failure, affecting entire civilizations and altering the course of history.

The molten gold that killed him remains a powerful symbol of how the things we desire most intensely can become the instruments of our destruction.

In our modern world, where wealth inequality and political ambition continue to shape global events, the death of Crassus offers sobering lessons about the relationship between power and responsibility. His story reminds us that true leadership requires more than accumulating resources or achieving tactical victories. It demands wisdom, empathy and understanding of the broader consequences of our actions.

The golden throat that silenced Rome’s richest man continues to whisper warnings across the centuries about the price of unchecked greed and the importance of knowing when enough is truly enough.

As I watched the video of Marcus Licinius Crassus, the words that immediately came to mind were Donald John Trump. Trump has all of the character traits of Crassus.

If Trump is successful in achieving his gratifications, America could easily descend into a totalitarian state. And if he fails to achieve his gratifications but refuses to acknowledge the reasons for which he failed or if the American people do not themselves embrace a revival of the American principles of justice, human empathy, limited government and personal freedom, America could easily descend into a nightmarish global nuclear war. Because it should be crystal clear to everyone by now that Donald Trump is anything but a peace president.

Reprinted with permission from Chuck Baldwin Live.

The post Peace President? What a Joke! appeared first on LewRockwell.