Aggregatore di feed

Israel apologists always attack anti-Zionists by saying “Zionism just means self-determination for Jews! If you hate Zionism then you hate Jews!”

No, that’s not what Zionism means. Zionism means exactly what we see before us today. Genocide. Ethnic cleansing. Apartheid. Nonstop violence and abuse. That’s what Zionism means. And anti-Zionism means opposing these things.

There is simply no argument to the contrary. This is indisputably what Zionism looks like. There is no other alternate reality iteration of Zionism you can point to where genocide, ethnic cleansing, apartheid and nonstop violence and abuse are not happening. This is the only way Zionism looks. The Zionist experiment has been run, and these are the results.

Trying to argue that Zionism doesn’t mean genocide, ethnic cleansing, apartheid, and nonstop violence and abuse is exactly the same as trying to argue that Nazism doesn’t mean all the things that happened when the Nazism experiment was run. Nazism means all the things that happened under Nazism. You can’t legitimately tell me “No, actually, Nazism just means a safe and prosperous homeland for the German people.” We’ve seen what Nazism looks like, and we’ve seen what Zionism looks like. To argue otherwise is to argue with reality.

It’s just so obnoxious how Israel supporters are like “Zionism means these nice things and nice words, so if you’re against Zionism you’re against the nice things and nice words!” No, asshole, that’s not how it works. You’re entitled to your own opinion, but not your own reality.

Israel is what it does. Zionism is what it does. You can’t separate them from their actions. The debate about the true nature of these things has been settled by the reality of what is happening.

It doesn’t matter if you believe Israel just wants to live in peace. It doesn’t matter if you believe Zionism is just the idea that Jews deserve self-determination. Reality says you’re wrong. Reality says Israel and Zionism mean nonstop violence and abuse. Reality says Israel and Zionism necessarily entail genocide, apartheid and ethnic cleansing. Because that’s the reality on the ground.

Them’s the facts. If you disagree with them, you are objectively wrong.

❖

I saw a clip of ABC host Patricia Karvelas raking Netanyahu policy advisor Ophir Falk over the coals for his denialism of Israel’s atrocities in Gaza, and the thought occurred to me that Israel really has lost the normies. All the mainstream western empire loyalists who dutifully toe the imperial line under normal circumstances are dropping away, one by one.

Patricia Karvelas roasts Netanyahu policy advisor Ophir Falk after he refuses to admit starvation in Gaza & that Israel is not letting journos in.
OF “there’s plenty of journalists”
PK “Nope, there’s not plenty”
“You constantly contest facts, why not let journalists come in…? pic.twitter.com/WbPj0UADL3

— stranger (@strangerous10) August 20, 2025

The fact that Israel has managed to alienate western liberals is so funny, because they’d be Israel’s biggest cheerleaders if they were given the tiniest bit of justification for that position.

So much about Israel fits in perfectly with western liberal mythology. A US-aligned capitalist democracy run by a plucky religious minority who survived horrific persecution, which embraces secular progressive values and reinforces the dominant western narratives about the wonderful things the US-led order has been able to accomplish since its triumphant glorious victory in the second world war. All Israel had to do was give them something, anything, and they’d still think Israel is the greatest thing in the world. They just needed an excuse — even a very meager one.

But Israel couldn’t even give them that. Genocide, racism, apartheid, ethnic cleansing and expansionism were just too important to its driving ideology. The Zionist project simply could not continue without going mask-off at some point, so now they’ve lost all the mainstream moderate liberals and pretty much everyone besides the “killing Muslims is good” far right extremists and the “we have to support Israel because God commands it” Christian Zionists.

Eventually all the contradictions had to come out into the light.

❖

The Israeli press are pushing the narrative that if people in Gaza are suffering so bad they should leave, which is precisely the narrative I said we’d soon be hearing from Israel in facilitation of its longstanding ethnic cleansing agenda.

Last month I wrote the following in an article titled “They’re Starving Civilians To Steal A Palestinian Territory, And They’re Lying About It”:

“Western governments are beginning to speak out against the mass atrocity in Gaza, far too little and far too late. We can expect Israel and the United States to respond to this outcry by saying that Palestinians need to be evacuated out of Gaza as quickly as possible in order to rescue them from this deliberately manufactured humanitarian crisis. We can expect them to denounce anyone who opposes this ethnic cleansing operation as evil monsters who want to starve the poor Palestinians.”

The Jerusalem Post has just published an opinion piece titled “Gaza humanitarian crisis should expedite Trump’s relocation plan,” subtitled “Now that there is public awareness of a humanitarian crisis in Gaza, it should be leveraged to garner support for Trump’s Gaza relocation proposal.”

The article’s author, Gol Kalev, complains that “the Gazans” are being “denied the basic human right to flee a war” by the mean, nasty Europeans who just want to accuse Israel of war crimes and atrocities.

“They are needed under the rubble in Gaza — not just by Hamas, who uses them as human shields, but also by Europe and its proxies, who use them as pawns in their age-old opposition to the Jewish state, and as a proxy assault on America,” Kalev writes, arguing that public frustration “should not be directed at Israel, but at those standing in the way of Trump’s relocation plan, including European leaders.”

“Now that there is public awareness of a humanitarian crisis in Gaza, it should be leveraged to garner support for Trump’s Gaza relocation proposal — which could lead to safety and prosperity for Gazans, and peace for the entire region,” writes Kalev. “The public message must be clear: Let the Gazans be free — let them flee.”

Just as I said they would do, they’re disguising a naked ethnic cleansing operation as humanitarianism and denouncing anyone who wants to provide Palestinians with a massive relief effort in their historic homeland as an uncaring monster. We can expect to see more of this messaging going forward.

❖

Anyone who tells you they support Israel for religious reasons is telling you to stop trying to reason with them. They’re saying their position is not based on facts, evidence, logic or morality, but their blind faith in a collection of made up stories. So there’s nothing you could possibly say to them that would change their mind or convince them that they are wrong.

Trying to debate or reason with such a person would be the same as trying to convince someone that there is no God. It’s an entirely unfalsifiable position about which no argument can be made using facts and evidence.

Someone like Mike Huckabee is never telling the truth or saying what he really thinks is going on when it comes to Israel and the Palestinians, he’s just making whatever mouth noises he needs to make to help fulfill a Biblical prophecy and secure his eternal reward. Such people have no place in the conversation. They should be completely excluded from the debate, because they are not actually participating in it. They’re just lying and manipulating for reasons that have nothing to do with truth or morality.

________________

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 Zionism Is What It Does appeared first on LewRockwell.

People who carefully track the machinations of globalist institutions might have noticed a disturbing atmosphere of silence since the 2024 elections. I discussed this trend a few months ago in my article “Globalists Go Radio Silent As NATO Flirts With World War III”, specifically the dramatic shift that has taken place since the pandemic when organizations like the World Economic Forum ripped the mask off completely and admitted their true authoritarian intentions.

By the end of 2021, most of the world was under maniacal technocratic control and the globalists seemed to think they had western civilization by the balls. The elites were constantly in the media openly touting their plans, from perpetual covid lockdowns, to vaccine passports, to climate lockdowns, to cashless digital monetary systems where all economic liberty is lost, to the “sharing economy” where private property is abolished, to the Fourth Industrial Revolution in which AI runs everything, to the “Great Reset” which would completely undermine the free market system and herald a socialist dystopia.

In my 20 years as an economist, writer and analyst in the liberty movement I have never seen the globalists reveal their true intentions so brazenly. The pandemic exposed an incredible number of people to the underlying reality of the “New World Order” and in that span of around three years the awakening skyrocketed. The number of patriots born during covid was unprecedented.

People realized it wasn’t a mere conspiracy theory. World events were not simply random products of chance and chaos. There was indeed a smoky god-damn room filled with nefarious plotting parasites. The march towards global governance was real and now everyone except the dumbest of the dumb knows it.

The powers-that-be were so confident in the success of their endeavor that they essentially proclaimed global government by bureaucrats and corporations in the very midst of covid. Calling it the “Council for Inclusive Capitalism” working in collusion with the Vatican.

Within the occult methodology the natural solution would be to adopt new organizations and new names but maintain the same goals. I’ve noticed that this happens often with the globalists. At one point the majority of their planning was done within the Council on Foreign Relations and the Bilderberg Group. Then it was the Club Of Rome and the UN. Then it was the IMF. Then the focus switched to Davos and the WEF.

They used the term “New World Order”, then switched to “Multipolar World Order”, then to “the Great Reset” and the “Fourth Industrial Revolution”. This makes it very difficult for researchers to track the most current mechanisms of the conspiracy.

I have found that, in the last year, “Stakeholder Capitalism” has become the fresh code for much of their renewed efforts. It’s not a new term, but it is being used more often by the elites to draw less attention. Some use the phrase “stakeholder capitalism 3.0” or “third phase stakeholder capitalism”.

The original idea being that corporations can no longer make profits a priority. Rather, they must produce equal outcomes (not just equal opportunities) in order to participate in the interdependent international economy. In order to get access to the system, companies must promote approved narratives on climate and social justice, as well as partner with governments and NGOs to make DEI equity a reality.

The companies that don’t participate will face pressure from government officials and will not be able to compete with companies that comply. The problem is, this requires that meritocracy be erased and that producers be forced to subsidize feeders on a planetary scale. That is to say, stakeholder capitalism is global communism cloaked in the humanist costume of corporate responsibility.

The World Economic Forum seems to be doubling down on ESG and stakeholder capitalism with Blackrock CEO Larry Fink at the helm, despite growing public opposition.  Though, Blackrock has removed a majority of ESG and DEI related language from their corporate reports.

I recently came across an article published at the end of July from the Harvard Law School Forum on Corporate Governance which outlines the more discreet evolution of ESG (and DEI) in 2025. It reiterates similar observations made by globalists over the past year, that ESG must be rebranded but not abandoned.

It argues that the old political virtue signaling and compliance checklists of the last decade must be set aside (for now) and that stakeholder capitalism should be presented as a “win-win” for the companies and communities involved. It is, in a way, an attempt to sell conservatives on the idea of ESG.

One argument is that companies that engage in ESG-like policies “make more money” and gain more share value. Limited data is produced to support this claim, and I would point out that stock markets overall have been on a frightening bull run since the election.

Companies that are NOT engaging in ESG are doing just as well as those that are, at least…in the US. Harvard notes that outflows from ESG funds are prevalent in America, but in the EU they are becoming more successful. I’m seeing similar trends in Canada and Australia – Anywhere that governments are working with globalists to enforce DEI standards on companies, ESG funds are obviously going to outperform.

It’s a cartel, remember, and western political leaders are the enforcers. The US is the only place where ESG is in retreat. This could change in the near term as Europeans grow increasingly rebellious against the multicultural coup, but it does illustrate the fact that woke capitalism (stakeholder capitalism) cannot survive without government intervention.

This is not to say that progress in the fight against globalism has not been made. I grow tired of blackpilled mouth-breathers that act as if there have been no victories and that everything is going “according to the globalist plan”. If this was true then they would have proudly and publicly moved forward with their Great Reset instead of running back into the shadows.

That said, vigilance requires temperance. Behind the scenes many corporations are still introducing woke policies and they are even advancing the globalist takeover in Europe. The fight must focus on these specific companies and their NGO partners; it is not the job of corporations (or leftist politicians and NGOs) to enact social engineering. They are not qualified to determine the greater good because they are not good people. They are driven by the desire for power, not morality or reason.

The globalists have lost the information war, but they keep coming back because they have yet to face real world consequences for their hubris. The only way to end the nightmare permanently is to dissolve the structures that give them their influence, or, remove them from the equation entirely.

Reprinted with permission from Alt-Market.us.

The post Globalists Are Rebranding Their ‘Woke Capitalism’ Agenda After Crushing Setbacks appeared first on LewRockwell.

In an unsurprising development, Russia and the West are gridlocked on the part of the working peace deal centered on postwar security provisions for Ukraine, even as U.S. President Donald Trump relentlessly pushes for agreement between the two warring nations. There are also new signs that Trump may once again be growing frustrated with his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin.

Ukrainian security was the most repeated issue during Monday’s meeting fest at the White House between Trump and several European leaders. “Security guarantees” was the phrase of the day. When a reporter asked Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky if he wants guarantees to include U.S. troops, intelligence, or equipment, he replied, “everything.”

Zelensky has maintained for as long as the war has been raging that his country is the only thing stopping Russia from rolling through the rest of Europe, a theory parroted by some European leaders yet considered fantastical by many people. The prospect of Russian westward expansion has become more unlikely over time, as the war has prompted many European countries to ramp up military capabilities and spending, including Russia’s neighbor Poland as well as Germany and a slew of Nordic countries that have forged a defense coalition. Moreover, Russia has suffered enormous casualties (there is no reliable information on this front, but an aggregate of estimates suggests at least 100,000). And the invasion has weakened the Russian economy. Thousands of additional sanctions were leveled on Russia after the attack began.

Russia’s Stance

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov issued a statement Thursday indicating that whatever deal the West is cooking up on the security front, it is likely not to the Kremlin’s liking. He said:

When now, following the Russia-US summit in Alaska, where significant progress was made along the path of defining the contours and specific parameters of the settlement, European countries followed Mr. Vladimir Zelensky to Washington and there tried to advance their own agenda, which is aimed at ensuring that security guarantees that follow the logic of isolating Russia, uniting the Western world with Ukraine in order to continue an aggressive confrontational policy, containing Russia, meaning, of course, further attempts to inflict a strategic defeat on us, of course, this cannot evoke any feelings other than complete rejection.

A group of European leaders who’ve formed a “coalition of the willing” want a security agreement that includes stationing troops from various NATO nations in Ukraine to prevent future Russian aggression. (Although Germany recently showed its weak cards in this respect when Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul publicly admitted his country is stretched too thin to help out with troops in Ukraine.) The idea of soldiers from NATO nations in Ukraine is a non-starter for the Russians. Their primary stated reason for the invasion in the first place was Ukraine’s pursuance of NATO membership, which would render a hostile military alliance on their doorstep. (By this line of thinking, that has already happened: several other NATO nations already border Russia, including Finland, Estonia, Latvia, and Poland.)

The Istanbul Draft

In Thursday’s statement, Lavrov also said the basis for Ukrainian security should be the Istanbul agreement drafted in 2022, which he dubbed “natural and relevant today.” The Atlantic Council, a Washington, D.C.-based foreign-policy think tank with several CIA agents on its board of directors, characterized the Istanbul draft as “a blueprint for the destruction of Ukraine.” The terms of the treaty include Ukraine permanently remaining a neutral country, meaning it couldn’t join any military alliances (like NATO) or allow foreign bases within its borders.

The draft also included a security guarantee from a group of nations including the United Kingdom, China, the United States, France, and Russia. A summary of the draft says that other suggested guarantor nations included Belarus and Turkey. A criticism of this provision was that, unlike NATO’s Article 5, the Istanbul treaty “provided no binding mechanisms to ensure a swift and unified response. This reliance on consultations left Ukraine’s security dependent on the alignment of interests among the Guarantor States.” The draft treaty also didn’t specify if unanimous consent among the Guarantor States was necessary to providing military assistance.

The Istanbul draft also included demands that sanctions against Russia be lifted and that Ukraine recognize Russian as an official language. According to some sources, 30 percent of Ukrainians speak Russian.

Security Guarantees

After his meeting with Putin in Alaska, Trump claimed Putin agreed to accept security guarantees for Ukraine — a curious claim from the outset — saying:

I’m optimistic that we can collectively reach an agreement to deter any future aggression against Ukraine, and actually I think there won’t be. I think that’s even overrated — largely overrated. But we’re going to find out.

Noting the ambiguity of Trump and Putin’s security conversation, a lot of Americans wanted to know if the president was considering, as part of the working security agreement, putting U.S. boots on the ground in Ukraine. On Tuesday, Trump put those concerns to bed. During a call-in to Fox & Friends, when asked to provide assurance that Americans won’t end up defending Ukraine’s border, he said, “Well, you have my assurance, and I’m president.” However, that didn’t mean he was suggesting complete U.S. nonintervention. He also said, “When it comes to security, they are willing to put people on the ground. We’re willing to help them with things, especially, probably, if you talk about by air because nobody has stuff we have.”

Getting Tough With Putin?

On Thursday, almost a week after Trump held his chummy rendezvous with Putin, the president published a post causing many to wonder if his view toward Putin and Russia is once again hardening:

It is very hard, if not impossible, to win a war without attacking an invaders country. It’s like a great team in sports that has a fantastic defense, but is not allowed to play offense. There is no chance of winning! It is like that with Ukraine and Russia. Crooked and grossly incompetent Joe Biden would not let Ukraine FIGHT BACK, only DEFEND. How did that work out? Regardless, this is a war that would have NEVER happened if I were President — ZERO CHANCE. Interesting times ahead!!! President DJT

And not long afterward, he posted the photos below.

Donald J. Trump Truth Social 08.21.25 09:45 AM EST pic.twitter.com/HVcvfDOcEp

— Fan Donald J. Trump Posts From Truth Social (@TrumpDailyPosts) August 21, 2025

Is Trump signaling that he’s about to get tough with Putin? Are the posts Trump’s attempt to combat media criticism that Putin outsmarted him like a fox negotiating with a hen in a barnyard deal?

This latest development reinforces how difficult it is to get these parties to agree on peace terms. The Russians want a Ukraine that poses no military threat. Ukraine, however, wants the ability to protect itself against future attacks from its neighbor — which would by nature render it a military threat.

In a statement to The Wall Street Journal on Thursday, a White House official said the president will continue to work toward bringing peace to Eastern Europe. “President Trump and his national security team continue to engage with Russian and Ukrainian officials towards a bilateral meeting to stop the killing and end the war. It is not in the national interest to further negotiate these issues publicly,” the statement said.

Still Pointing Fingers

Meanwhile, the fighting continues. Recent reports says Russia fired 574 drones and 40 ballistic and cruise missiles into Ukraine overnight. According to Trump, thousands of soldiers are dying every week as these two bitter enemies, once attached at the hip, kill each other. Russia blames Ukraine for the war’s continuance. It sees its demands — no NATO admittance for Ukraine, no foreign troops in the country, and the forfeit of eastern territory including the Donbas — as reasonable. Ukraine points the finger right back, although it made a step toward Russian demands recently when it signaled it would consider territorial concessions along the line of contact. Until the two informally agree on these issues, it sounds like a meeting between Putin and Zelensky is off the table.

This article was originally published on The New American.

The post Russia and the West Gridlocked on Ukrainian Security Measures appeared first on LewRockwell.

Robert F. Kennedy. Jr. called out the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) for recommending vaccines – including the dangerous COVID shots – created by its top corporate supporters without disclosing its conflicts of interest.

The AAP recently made headlines for releasing its own recommended childhood vaccine schedule independent of the U.S. Centers of Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), which was recently overhauled by Kennedy, the secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

The notable difference between the two schedules is that the AAP is recommending COVID shots for healthy children, whereas the CDC is no longer recommending these experimental mRNA shots for healthy children and pregnant women.

Kennedy shared on Tuesday a screenshot from the AAP’s webpage showing some of its top donors are Merck, Moderna, Pfizer, and Sanofi, major vaccine manufacturers. Other vaccine makers, like GlaxoSmithKline, make considerable donations to the AAP as well.

This is a screenshot from American Academy of Pediatrics’ webpage, thanking the organization’s top corporate donors. These four companies make virtually every vaccine on the CDC recommended childhood vaccine schedule. AAP is angry that CDC has eliminated corporate influence in… pic.twitter.com/WtWe6vnUrw

— Secretary Kennedy (@SecKennedy) August 19, 2025

The four first companies listed, Kennedy noted, “make virtually every vaccine on the CDC recommended childhood vaccine schedule.”

While he acknowledged that the AAP is free to make its own recommendations, he called for it to “follow the lead of HHS and disclose conflicts of interest” so that Americans may consider whether the AAP is serving the “public health interest” or the “commercial ambitions of AAP’s Big Pharma benefactors.”

Kennedy accused the AAP of anger against the CDC for eradicating “corporate influence in decisions over vaccine recommendations.” He referenced his dismissal of all 17 previous members of the CDC’s top vaccine advisory panel due to the finding that they were routinely advising on products from pharmaceutical firms with which they had financial ties and had been issued conflict-of-interest waivers from the CDC.

While the CDC vaccine schedule so far remains mostly the same since the appointment of eight new members to the Advisory Committee for Immunization Practices (ACIP), its June 25 meeting has launched new workgroups to study these approved vaccines and the cumulative effect of the child and teen vaccine schedule.

Among other recommendations, the June ACIP meeting advised the removal of thimerosal, a neurotoxic, mercury-containing preservative currently used in flu shots.

In Kennedy’s Tuesday X post, he also urged the AAP to clarify that “recommendations that diverge from the CDC’s official list are not shielded from liability under the 1986 Vaccine Injury Act.”

Kennedy has frequently stressed the importance of ridding U.S. health regulatory agencies of “corporate capture,” a term he uses to describe the common phenomenon whereby these regulatory agencies receive significant funding from pharmaceutical companies and subsequently rubber-stamp their products without meaningful review.

This article was originally published on Lifesite News.

The post RFK Jr. Slams American Academy of Pediatrics for Recommending Vaccines Created by Top Donors appeared first on LewRockwell.

We’re humoring our self-delusion.

How do great powers come undone? We can start with a destructive force without equal: self-delusion.

Emperor Norton comes to mind in this context. In 1859, in the Gold Rush-enriched city of San Francisco, Joshua Norton, a bankrupt businessman, declared himself “Emperor of these United States” in a proclamation that he signed “Norton I, Emperor of the United States.”

This grandiosity played well in the rough and tumble “get rich quick, then lose it all” zeitgeist of San Francisco, and rather than be abused or disabused, Norton was “treated deferentially in San Francisco and elsewhere in California, and currency issued in his name was honored in some of the establishments he frequented.”

In other words, his self-delusion was humored. On a grand scale, the same can be said of Great Powers: they humor their own self-delusion.

The progression of a Great Power from self-delusion to collapse was insightfully traced out by Soviet dissident Andrei Amalrik in the late 1960s, when Amalrik predicted the collapse of the Soviet Union, the lone voice to make such a bold prediction at the apex of Soviet power.

Amalrik’s analysis was nuanced, drawing upon the human weaknesses that blind us to our own self-deception and rosy assumptions. Chief among these is the comforting belief that “it will all work out because it’s always worked out before,” an assumption that blinds us to the extraordinary nature of the crisis and the decay that we avoid recognizing beneath the surface of normal life.

Amalrik noted that the primary motivation of the various classes and interest groups was self-preservation, seeking to maintain whatever each faction currently held in terms of wealth and power. The misguided assumption made by all was that the system was so stable and powerful that they didn’t need to concern themselves with anything beyond securing their position in the system.

As the system destabilizes, nobody notices because they’re focused solely on the infighting borne of self-preservation.

He was also alert to the government’s role in mediating the forces seeking to suppress reforms as dangers to the status quo and those seeking to force reforms on a sclerotic systems, and how seemingly small policy decisions can grease the skids to rapidly unfolding crises few imagined were even possible.

One of Amalrik’s analytic techniques is both novel and insightful. This excerpt from How a Great Power Falls Apart: Decline Is Invisible From the Inside explains the concept of working backward from whatever outcome seems unlikely or even impossible:

Amalrik also provided a kind of blueprint for analytic alienation. It is actually possible, he suggested, to think your way through the end of days. The method is to practice living with the most unlikely outcome you can fathom and then to work backward, systematically and carefully, from the what-if to the ‘here’s-why.’ The point isn’t to pick one’s evidence to fit a particular conclusion. It is rather to jolt oneself out of the assumption of linear change–to consider, for a moment, how some future historian might recast implausible concerns as inevitable ones.”

Catastrophic outcomes are considered impossible because the status quo views itself as already having the means to handle any crisis. There’s nothing to be learned from others and no reason to even ponder unlikely outcomes, and this creates a toxic blend of hubris and blindness.

“Society was becoming more complicated, more riven with difference, more demanding of the state but less convinced that the state could deliver. What was left was a political system far weaker than anyone–even those committed to its renewal–was able to recognize.”

Those in power reckon they have the means to deal with any problem. Suppress dissent, buy off a troublesome constituency, print more money, etc. This confidence reflects the dominant political mythologies of the Great Power and its people. Reformers believe the status quo is capable of systemic reform, those resisting reform believe the system will endure without any reforms, and both are disconnected from reality: the status quo is no longer capable of real reforms, and left on autopilot, it is heading off a cliff.

“Amalrik offered a technique for suspending one’s deepest political mythologies and posing questions that might seem, here and now, to lie at the frontier of crankery.

The powerful aren’t accustomed to thinking this way. But in the lesser places, among the dissidents and the displaced, people have had to be skilled in the art of self-inquiry. How much longer should we stay? What do we put in the suitcase? Here or there, how can I be of use? In life, as in politics, the antidote to hopelessness isn’t hope. It’s planning.”

Read the Whole Article

The post How Great Powers Fall Apart appeared first on LewRockwell.

Thanks, Jesse Trentadue.

American Thinker

 

The post Was the FBI Behind the Oklahoma Bombing? appeared first on LewRockwell.

David Krall wrote:

Back in 2023 I wrote:

Memo To Target Corporation Board of Directors

)”In order to restore integrity and financial soundness to the company you oversee,   it is necessary that you clean house (fire all) at the highest levels of corporate executives from the CEO on down and replace them with an administration that is focused on the business of the company and the interests of its shareholders.

After that, all of you need to resign your positions on the board and let the stockholders elect a new BOD.

Further, none of you, executives and board members alike, should ever be allowed to participate in corporate activity anywhere ever again.

Thank you.”

 Now, the Target Board of Directors has given us this:

Target’s stock plunges 7% as new CEO pick disappoints Wall Street: ‘There won’t be change when change is needed’

 

The post TARGET You Didn’t Listen appeared first on LewRockwell.

Johnny Kramer wrote:

CNBC News

 

The post FBI raids home of John Bolton appeared first on LewRockwell.

The post Horror: Israeli Intel Database Reveals 83% Killed In Gaza Are Civilians! appeared first on LewRockwell.

The Pre-postmodernists Who Prefigured Postmodernism

The post The Donkey and the Tiger Re-Revisited appeared first on LewRockwell.

Thanks Patrick Foy.

BBC News

 

The post Jewish settlers attack in West Bank… appeared first on LewRockwell.

Writes Vicki Marzullo:

This is one of the doctors I follow. Wish I could find a doctor like him.

 

The post “You’re doctor needs to stop medications” appeared first on LewRockwell.

Click Here:

John Leake

 

The post Did I Wound Senator Cassidy’s Vanity? appeared first on LewRockwell.

Click Here:

Crisis Magazine

 

The post “In the Name of Every Man Who Hurt You, Forgive Me” appeared first on LewRockwell.

Writes John Leo Keenan:

Interesting post.  Disrespectful to sign such a letter with just initials.  Thankfully, you clarified who they were.  I went back to that to know.

Hard to comment, but just his letter (or bill proposed in the Argentinean Congress), published by Mises.org, and sent by Dr. Huerta de Soto (called basically an idiot by HHH on that occasion), could be enough to justify even a “bust” in any Ludwig von Mises Institute.  That he then proceeded to balance that budget, achieving a small surplus, drastically reducing the large inflation, looks Misesian indeed.  He did it also while crediting the Austrian school of economics for his insights.  Yet those insights are not enough, as Dr. Huerta de Soto well said in some context (which I think was that of his electoral triumph).  It’s really his personal merit too.  When we “talk Milei” as it were, it’s now about a major top-worldwide expert in defeating inflation (or hyperinflation for the U.S.).  He could earn a lot of money as an economics advisor, being someone who “knows more than just theory.”

If it were the “Rothbard Institute,” it is also difficult to reject an award for him.  Milei has made clear in Argentina that he is a classical liberal only in the midterm, that his long-term goal is to get rid of the State… Politically, that’s very daring of him.  Just the fact that he gets up there without hiding his beliefs is extraordinary enough, and to double down on his libertarianism while in power could be a reason for another bust too. 

The “on the other hand” part of the letter forgets the victory against inflation (typical), recognized now by all in Argentina.  

“It is not enough that he pursue liberal goals with his policies. Rather, the political means must be objectively suitable for actually achieving those goals.”   

“…whatever successes his policies may have had so far have been largely achieved through the usual means of inflationary government financing, i.e. by inflating the money supply and government debt.”  (He could conclude, rather, that the victory over inflation backs up Milei’s theory that the high inflation was due to chronic budget deficits.)

The pros and the cons – as given – seem incompatible, not separate enough from each other:  

“After his election, he immediately set about dismantling the state and, in many respects, he has pursued this policy more resolutely, more extensively and more successfully than any of his Argentine predecessors.”  (Than most politicians anywhere.)

Of course, their point that it should only go to scholars is something different:  

“In our view, a ‘Memorial Prize in honour of Ludwig von Mises’ could be awarded to scientists or politicians who have rendered outstanding services to the development, dissemination or application of Mises’ ideas.” 

Milei also wrote libertarian books (I haven’t read).  Huerta de Soto calls him his “student.”  It’s assumable that he would like such a prize for Milei.  He called him his professor, named him in his inaugural speech and later.   Contrary to most predictions, his first year in power was successful.

The following is the conclusion of the linked news article from yesterday:

“From a mercantile standpoint, Argentina now runs a tighter fiscal policy, a more stable currency path, and a sharply lower inflation rate.

Investors see a country with falling poverty, improving fiscal accounts, and leadership willing to implement structural changes despite resistance. The October elections will determine whether Milei can sustain political momentum as social costs of adjustment remain high.”

 

The post “Resignations from the Scientific Advisory Board . . .” 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 Joshua Stylman

(Versione audio della traduzione disponibile qui: https://open.substack.com/pub/fsimoncelli/p/la-seconda-matrix)

Nell'articolo Leggere tra le bugie abbiamo esplorato come riconoscere i modelli di inganno istituzionale: le narrazioni accuratamente elaborate che tengono l'umanità intrappolata in una matrice di percezioni.

Theodore Dalrymple identificò il funzionamento di questa prima matrice di controllo nei regimi totalitari: “Nel mio studio sulle società comuniste, sono giunto alla conclusione che lo scopo della propaganda comunista non era persuadere o convincere, non informare, ma umiliare; e quindi, meno corrispondeva alla realtà, meglio era. Quando le persone sono costrette a tacere quando vengono raccontate loro le bugie più evidenti, o peggio ancora quando sono costrette a ripetere le bugie stesse, perdono una volta per tutte il loro senso di probità. Acconsentire a bugie evidenti significa, in un certo senso, diventare malvagi a loro volta. La propria capacità di resistere a qualsiasi cosa viene così erosa, e persino distrutta. Una società di bugiardi evirati è facile da controllare”.

Questo principio di partecipazione forzata non è scomparso, si è evoluto. Il sistema odierno non esige solo il silenzio, ma anche la complicità attiva per quanto riguarda le sue narrazioni, trasformando la resistenza stessa in un'arma di influenza. Osservare voci autorevoli denunciare la vera corruzione, solo per poi reindirizzarla verso soluzioni accuratamente preselezionate, rivela uno schema ancora più profondo: il sistema non si limita a creare propaganda, ma crea percorsi riservati per coloro che la vedono. Liberarsi dalla programmazione mainstream è solo il primo passo; ciò che segue è più sottile e altrettanto inquietante. Svincolarsi dalle narrazioni istituzionali crea un'immediata vulnerabilità: la necessità di nuove risposte, nuovi leader, una nuova direzione. Chi governa la prima matrice non lascerebbe le rampe di uscita senza supervisione.

Ciò chiarisce i meccanismi più profondi della seconda matrice: catturare il risveglio attraverso canali sofisticati di opposizione non autentica.

La meccanica dell'opposizione controllata

Lo schema diventa chiaro quando esaminiamo come viene gestita la critica sistemica: a chi denuncia la corruzione è permesso parlare, ma solo entro limiti rigorosi. Prendiamo ad esempio il settore bancario: anche chi denuncia la natura predatoria delle banche centrali raramente ne chiede l'abolizione. La crisi del 2008 ha portato le frodi finanziarie all'attenzione del grande pubblico attraverso denunce popolari come il film, La grande scommessa. Ciononostante la comprensione ha generato solo sfiducia: nessuna responsabilità, solo salvataggi per i responsabili dell'accaduto e un sistema più fragile per tutti gli altri. Come ogni sofisticato gioco di fiducia, funziona per fasi: prima si guadagna la fiducia attraverso rivelazioni reali, poi si crea dipendenza attraverso conoscenze esclusive “dall'interno”, infine si reindirizza quella fiducia verso risultati limitati. Osservate come le piattaforme mediatiche alternative seguono questo schema: denunciano la corruzione autentica, costruiscono un seguito devoto, quindi spostano sottilmente l'attenzione narrativa dalla responsabilità sistemica. Ogni rivelazione sembra condurre più in profondità in un labirinto di risveglio coordinato. Nota: evito deliberatamente di nominare obiettivi specifici, questa analisi non riguarda la creazione di nuovi eroi o antagonisti, ma il riconoscimento di modelli che trascendono i singoli individui.

Ciò che rende questo modello così efficace è che le stesse istituzioni che hanno trasformato il denaro da oro a carta trasformano anche la resistenza genuina in opposizione gestita. Come ho scritto in Tutto svuotato, proprio come la moneta sintetica sostituisce il valore reale, i movimenti di opposizione fiat offrono versioni sintetiche di risveglio indipendente, contenenti solo la verità sufficiente per sembrare reali, mantenendo al contempo l'opposizione entro limiti sicuri.

Comprendere questi schemi di opposizione controllata può sembrare opprimente. Ogni rivelazione sembra portare a un ulteriore livello di inganno. È come scoprire di essere in un labirinto solo per rendersi conto che ci sono labirinti dentro labirinti. Alcuni si perdono a documentare ogni svolta, discutendo di dettagli del sistema finanziario, discutendo di protocolli medici, analizzando mosse di scacchi geopolitiche. Oppure, nei “circoli del complotto”: il virus è stato isolato? Come sono crollate davvero le Torri? Cosa c'è veramente in Antartide? Sebbene queste domande siano importanti, rimanere bloccati in un'infinita mappatura di labirinti ha come risultato la perdita totale del focus. Un sano dibattito e un sano disaccordo sono naturali, e persino salutari, nei movimenti che cercano la verità, ma quando questi dibattiti assorbono tutta l'energia e l'attenzione, impediscono un'azione efficace verso gli obiettivi fondamentali.

Il viaggio della ricerca

Negli ultimi anni mi sono immerso profondamente nella scoperta dei meccanismi di controllo, non come un esercizio astratto, ma insieme a un team che include alcuni dei miei amici più cari, seguendo percorsi che sembravano condurre alla verità. Le rivelazioni sono state sconvolgenti: “fatti” fondamentali con cui siamo cresciuti si sono rivelati delle vere e proprie invenzioni. Siamo stati umiliati due volte: prima disimparando ciò che pensavamo di sapere, poi scoprendo che le nostre certezze su nuovi percorsi erano sbagliate. Percorsi che sembravano rivoluzionari hanno portato a vicoli ciechi; comunità che sembravano autentiche si sono rivelate canali progettati ad arte.

La verità più dura non è solo riconoscere l'inganno, ma accettare che potremmo non conoscere mai la storia completa, pur dovendo comunque agire in base a ciò che possiamo verificare. Ciò che è iniziato come una ricerca su specifici inganni ha rivelato qualcosa di molto più profondo: mentre devastanti guerre fisiche infuriano in diverse regioni, un conflitto più profondo si dispiega silenziosamente in tutto il pianeta... una guerra per la libertà della coscienza umana stessa. Ecco come si presenta la Terza guerra mondiale: non solo bombe e proiettili, ma l'ingegneria sistematica della percezione umana.

Questo modello di costruzione della fiducia prima del riorientamento riflette un sistema di controllo più profondo, che opera secondo l'antico principio alchemico di Solve et Coagula: prima dissolvere (rompere), poi coagulare (riformare sotto controllo). Il processo è preciso: quando le persone iniziano a riconoscere l'inganno istituzionale, si formano coalizioni naturali al di là delle divisioni tradizionali. I lavoratori si uniscono contro le politiche delle banche centrali; i genitori si organizzano contro gli obblighi sanitari; le comunità si oppongono all'accaparramento di terreni da parte delle multinazionali.

Ma guardate cosa succede dopo: questi movimenti unificati si dissolvono sistematicamente. Pensate alla rapidità con cui la resistenza unitaria si è frammentata dopo il 7 ottobre e a come le proteste dei camionisti si sono dissolte in narrazioni di parte. Ogni frammento si frammenta ulteriormente: dalla messa in discussione dell'autorità alle teorie contrastanti, dall'azione unitaria alle lotte intestine tribali.

Questa non è una frammentazione casuale, è una dissoluzione calcolata. Una volta scomposti, questi frammenti possono essere riformati (coagulati) in canali dialettici controllati, man mano che le persone tornano alla programmazione precedente su questioni che superano la loro unità.

Osservate come funziona il gioco della fiducia nei movimenti per la verità: prima arriva la rivelazione legittima (es. documenti autentici, informatori autentici, prove inconfutabili). La fiducia si costruisce attraverso intuizioni autentiche, poi inizia un sottile reindirizzamento. Proprio come la società viene smembrata in frammenti sempre più piccoli lungo varie linee di politica, razziali e culturali, i movimenti per la verità vengono smembrati in campi concorrenti. L'unità diventa divisione; l'azione diventa dibattito; la resistenza diventa contenuto.

Questa frammentazione sistematica dei movimenti di risveglio riflette un modello storico più profondo, che traccia l'evoluzione del controllo della percezione di massa dalla propaganda rozza alla sofisticata manipolazione biodigitale.

Dalla propaganda alla programmazione

La prima matrice ha plasmato i pensieri attraverso la programmazione diretta. Il percorso da Bernays alla supervisione biodigitale segue una progressione chiara: prima manipolare la psicologia di massa, poi digitalizzare il comportamento, infine fondersi con la biologia stessa. Ogni fase si basa sulla precedente: dallo studio della natura umana, al suo monitoraggio, fino alla sua ingegnerizzazione diretta. Da Bernays che scopre come manipolare la psicologia di massa attraverso desideri inconsci, al Tavistock che perfeziona l'ingegneria sociale, alla modifica algoritmica del comportamento, ogni fase introduce strumenti più sofisticati per la manipolazione della realtà. La tecnologia digitale ha accelerato questa evoluzione: gli algoritmi dei social media perfezionano la cattura dell'attenzione, gli smartphone consentono un monitoraggio comportamentale costante, i sistemi di intelligenza artificiale prevedono e modellano le risposte.

Mentre questi strumenti digitali si fondono con interventi biologici – dai farmaci che alterano l'umore alle interfacce cervello-computer – si avvicinano al controllo completo della percezione umana stessa. Ciò che è iniziato con una rozza propaganda si è evoluto in una precisa manipolazione digitale dell'attenzione e del comportamento. La seconda matrice crea canali approvati per coloro che si liberano – un ecosistema ingegnerizzato di alternative controllate. Proprio come le narrazioni mediatiche coordinate hanno addestrato la classe degli esperti a esternalizzare il proprio pensiero a “fonti autorevoli”, la matrice biodigitale ora si offre di esternalizzare la propria sensibilità, promettendo una cognizione migliorata e offrendo al contempo una programmazione più profonda. Questa rappresenta l'ultima evoluzione nella gestione della percezione: all'inizio si negava l'esistenza delle cospirazioni, quando poi ciò è diventato impossibile a causa di prove inconfutabili, sono stati creati canali ad hoc per le menti in via di risveglio.

Il processo a O.J. Simpson ha segnato un cambiamento cruciale in questa strategia: ha addestrato la società a elaborare indagini serie come uno spettacolo di intrattenimento. Come osservò Marshall McLuhan, “il mezzo è il messaggio”: il formato stesso dell'intrattenimento mediatico rimodella il modo in cui elaboriamo la verità, indipendentemente dal contenuto. Ciò che è iniziato come legittime domande sulla corruzione della polizia e sui pregiudizi istituzionali è diventato una soap opera alimentata dagli ascolti. Lo stesso schema continua ancora oggi: i crimini di Jeffrey Epstein diventano intrattenimento mentre i suoi clienti rimangono liberi, i crimini di Mangione generano molteplici produzioni in streaming a pochi giorni dall'evento, ancor prima della conclusione delle indagini (le vicende di Garlasco trasformate in intrattenimento per nascondere la corruzione dei giudici, ndT). Gli incidenti di Las Vegas e New Orleans ne sono una dimostrazione lampante: nel giro di poche ore eventi potenzialmente destabilizzanti vengono incanalati in narrazioni concorrenti, mentre l'apparato dell'intrattenimento è pronto a trasformare qualsiasi indagine seria in contenuto fruibile.

Le rivelazioni vere sulle reti di trafficanti e sulla criminalità organizzata sono diventate contenuti da guardare ininterrottamente. Le gole profonde diventano influencer; i documenti declassificati diventano trend su TikTok. Con una capacità di attenzione limitata e contenuti infiniti, la ricerca della verità diventa un'altra forma di consumo che pacifica anziché rafforzare. Osservate come passa il tempo e le “teorie del complotto” diventano luoghi di ritrovo limitati: la morte di JFK viene attribuita alla “mafia”, un comodo escamotage per le forze istituzionali che sostengono tale tesi. Modelli simili emergono con le rivelazioni sull'11 settembre.

Ecco la mia posizione, per quanto estrema possa sembrare ai miei amici ancora immersi in narrazioni convenzionali: dobbiamo considerare la possibilità che la struttura di potere controlli entrambi i lati della maggior parte dei dibattiti più importanti. Ogni narrazione mainstream ha la sua opposizione approvata; ogni risveglio ha i suoi leader sanzionati; ogni rivelazione conduce a canali amministrati. Comprendere questo schema potrebbe portare alla paralisi, ma non dovrebbe: significa invece riconoscere che abbiamo bisogno di nuovi modi di pensare e di organizzarci.

Come ha osservato la ricercatrice Whitney Webb su X:

Now that the people who fearmongered about "Russians" infiltrating and being to blame for everything are leaving power, now we have people on the other side fearmongering about "Islamists" infiltrating and being to blame for everything.

Oh, how the pendulum swings and how the…

— Whitney Webb (@_whitneywebb) January 2, 2025

Cambia solo il nemico designato: la spinta verso una maggiore sorveglianza e controllo rimane costante. Ogni “parte” ha il suo turno di alimentare la paura nella propria base, mentre le stesse istituzioni espandono il loro potere.

Nixon aprì le porte alla Cina; Clinton promosse il NAFTA; Trump accelerò l'Operazione Warp Speed. Sto osservando uno schema ricorrente, non sto accusando nessuno di cospirazione, ma sto notando come le figure politiche spesso agiscano in modo contrario alla loro immagine pubblica: Nixon, l'anticomunista, aprì le porte alla Cina; Clinton, che fece campagna elettorale per la protezione dei lavoratori americani, fece approvare il più grande accordo di libero scambio internazionale; Trump, l'outsider populista, promosse l'agenda di Big Pharma. Che siano pressioni istituzionali, realtà politiche o altre forze, queste contraddizioni rivelano uno schema sofisticato: il sistema pianifica entrambi i lati delle principali trasformazioni politiche, garantendo risultati controllati indipendentemente da chi sembra detenere il potere. Molte di queste figure potrebbero esse stesse rispondere a forze che a malapena comprendono: attori utili, o manipolati, piuttosto che orchestratori consapevoli.

Questa dinamica non si limita ai politici. Si pensi a Twitter/X che negli ultimi due anni si è autoproclamato baluardo della libertà di parola, mentre proprio questa settimana ha introdotto algoritmi per amplificare la “positività”. Inquadrato come un mezzo per promuovere un dialogo costruttivo, rispecchia le stesse linee di politica di moderazione un tempo criticate come censura.

Questo schema di opposizione controllata si estende a ogni livello dei movimenti di risveglio. Pensate a quanti dei miei amici, ancora intrappolati nella prima matrice, liquidano i seguaci di QAnon come dei perfetti idioti, prendendoli in giro come personaggi dei cartoni animati e ignorando la documentata corruzione istituzionale che il movimento ha denunciato. Ciò che non capiscono è che sotto gli elementi teatrali si nascondono prove significative di criminalità sistemica. Rimango aperto all'esame di queste affermazioni: dopotutto, il riconoscimento di schemi richiede di prendere in considerazione le prove senza pregiudizi. Ma il messaggio centrale del movimento, “fidatevi del piano”, rivela come il risveglio venga reindirizzato. Trasforma la resistenza attiva in un gruppo di spettatori passivi, in attesa che i “personaggi dietro le quinte” li salvino invece di intraprendere azioni significative.

È qui che traccio il limite. Non posso delegare il benessere della mia famiglia a entità sconosciute o piani segreti. Ciò richiede una vigilanza costante, attenta sia alle minacce evidenti che ai sottili depistaggi. L'aspetto più pericoloso dell'opposizione gestita non sono le informazioni che condivide, ma il modo in cui insegna un'impotenza mascherata da speranza.

La cattura dei movimenti autentici

Ogni nuova teoria e movimento aggiunge un ulteriore livello di complessità, allontanando ulteriormente chi la cerca tramite l'azione significativa. La controcultura degli anni '60 passò dal mettere in discussione la guerra e l'autorità alla passività del “sintonizzatevi, abbandonatevi”. Negli anni '80 gli ex-hippy divennero yuppie, la loro consapevolezza rivoluzionaria incanalata ordinatamente nel capitalismo consumistico. Ancora oggi il movimento contro la guerra mostra questo schema: una parte politica si oppone alla guerra in Ucraina mentre la sostiene a Gaza, l'altra ribalta queste posizioni. Ciascuna parte si dichiara contraria alla guerra quando non è il conflitto che preferisce. Occupy Wall Street ha seguito lo stesso schema: partendo da una potente denuncia della corruzione finanziaria, si è frammentata in cause di giustizia sociale concorrenti che hanno lasciato intatto il sistema bancario.

La seduzione sta nel contenuto di verità. I movimenti ambientalisti denunciano l'inquinamento aziendale, ma promuovono crediti sull'anidride carbonica e sensi di colpa individuali. I movimenti per la giustizia sociale denunciano le disuguaglianze, ma reindirizzano verso criteri DEI a livello aziendale. La rivoluzione del cibo biologico è iniziata come resistenza all'agricoltura industriale, ma è diventata una categoria di prodotti premium, reindirizzando preoccupazioni reali verso scelte di shopping esclusive. Ogni movimento contiene abbastanza verità da attrarre menti consapevoli, ponendo al contempo attente barriere su soluzioni accettabili, identificando problemi reali ma sostenendo soluzioni che espandono il potere istituzionale.

Questo schema si ripete a ogni livello. Nel corso della storia le strutture di potere hanno compreso il principio di fornire una leadership controllata ai movimenti emergenti. Questo schema continua ancora oggi in ogni movimento di risveglio.

Il modello è coerente:

• Un politico mette “coraggiosamente” in discussione i vaccini mentre accetta soldi dall'industria farmaceutica;

• Un esperto “smaschera” la corruzione dello Stato profondo mentre difende le agenzie di intelligence;

• Una celebrità “combatte la cancel culture” promuovendo i Green pass;

• Un guru della finanza “mette in guardia” dal collasso bancario mentre vende CBDC.

Questi modelli di riorientamento si manifestano vividamente oggi. Il movimento per la libertà medica dimostra questa dinamica: le preoccupazioni fondate sui danni causati dai vaccini rischiano di essere reindirizzate verso teorie contrastanti e dibattiti circolari, mentre la responsabilità rimane sfuggente. La recente controversia sul MAHA dimostra come anche le preoccupazioni fondate sulla sovranità alimentare possano potenzialmente distogliere l'attenzione da questa urgente crisi degli effetti collaterali causati dai vaccini e dalla relativa responsabilità.

Anche il mondo delle crittovalute illustra questo schema: le critiche valide alle banche centrali si trasformano in guerre tribali tra comunità di token. Ognuna rivendica la propria verità esclusiva, estendendo potenzialmente la portata del sistema. Persino i dibattiti ragionevoli sulle soluzioni monetarie diventano una devozione religiosa verso monete concorrenti. Nel frattempo la promessa originale di Bitcoin – la prima crittovaluta e la sua visione di autonomia finanziaria – rischia di essere cooptata, mentre la tecnologia blockchain viene riproposta per le valute digitali delle banche centrali (CBDC), le identità digitali e la conformità automatizzata. Gli stessi strumenti pensati per liberarci dalla sorveglianza bancaria vengono riproposti per perfezionarla, ma la fusione del controllo finanziario con l'identità digitale crea qualcosa di molto più insidioso: un sistema in grado di imporre la conformità sociale attraverso l'accesso alle risorse di base, monitorare i pensieri attraverso modelli di transazione e, in ultima analisi, fondersi con la nostra stessa esistenza biologica. Questa architettura non riguarda solo il controllo del denaro, ma anche la programmazione delle menti.

La convergenza biodigitale: progettare la realtà umana

La fusione tra controllo digitale e biologico non sta solo cambiando il nostro modo di interagire, ma sta anche ridisegnando la percezione umana stessa. Man mano che le connessioni sociali si spostano sempre più online, la consapevolezza umana autentica viene sostituita sistematicamente da esperienze ingegnerizzate. Oltre al dirottamento dell'attenzione e alla manipolazione emotiva, il costo più profondo ci colpisce dove fa più male: nelle nostre relazioni umane. Ogni giorno vediamo persone insieme fisicamente ma separate da schermi, perdendo momenti di vera connessione mentre scorriamo realtà artificiali. Questa costruzione artificiale è destinata a rafforzarsi ulteriormente: Meta ha annunciato l'intenzione di popolare i feed di Facebook con contenuti generati dall'intelligenza artificiale e interazioni con bot entro il 2025, sollevando interrogativi sulla connessione umana autentica su queste piattaforme.

Le grandi aziende farmaceutiche hanno introdotto la capacità di alterare chimicamente la cognizione; le grandi aziende tecnologiche hanno perfezionato la capacità di indirizzare digitalmente l'attenzione e modellare il comportamento. La loro fusione non riguarda la quota di mercato, ma il dominio completo dello spettro cognitivo umano stesso. Quelle aziende che hanno promosso le pillole per anestetizzare una generazione, ora collaborano con piattaforme che ci rendono dipendenti dalla stimolazione digitale. Le aziende che hanno tratto profitto dai farmaci per l'ADHD collaborano con i giganti dei social media che manipolano deliberatamente i deficit di attenzione. Le aziende che hanno commercializzato antidepressivi uniscono le forze con i creatori di algoritmi che manipolano scientificamente le risposte emotive.

Come ha osservato Whitney Webb a proposito del passaggio dalla narrativa del nemico “russo” a quella degli “islamisti”, la minaccia designata cambia mentre l'espansione della sorveglianza rimane costante. L'agenda dell'identità digitale segue questo schema: mentre il World Economic Forum la presenta come un aiuto umanitario per l'inclusione finanziaria, costruisce l'architettura per un monitoraggio e una supervisione comportamentali completi. Ogni crisi, che sia sanitaria, di sicurezza o finanziaria, aggiunge nuovi requisiti che uniscono identità, servizi bancari, cartelle cliniche e tracciamento sociale in un unico sistema unificato. Ciò che inizia come partecipazione volontaria diventa inevitabilmente obbligatorio man mano che la sorveglianza digitale si estende al monitoraggio e alla definizione del comportamento umano stesso: il terreno di gioco perfetto per le valute digitali delle banche centrali.

Questa architettura di sorveglianza rappresenta la fusione di due pilastri fondamentali. Ciò che è iniziato con alterazioni chimiche dell'umore e del pensiero, e si è poi evoluto nella manipolazione digitale dell'attenzione e del comportamento, si sta ora fondendo in un'unica architettura per la gestione dell'esperienza umana. Osservate come le app per la salute mentale raccolgono dati comportamentali promuovendo al contempo la terapia farmacologica. Il punteggio di credito sociale si fonde con il monitoraggio della salute. Le stesse aziende che sviluppano sistemi di identità digitale collaborano con i giganti farmaceutici. Non si tratta di ipotesi future: sta accadendo ora. Mentre discutiamo dell'etica dell'intelligenza artificiale, loro stanno silenziosamente costruendo l'infrastruttura per fondere la cognizione umana con i sistemi digitali. La promessa transumanista di una maggiore consapevolezza attraverso la tecnologia maschera una realtà più oscura: ogni integrazione diminuisce la percezione umana naturale, sostituendo la coscienza genuina con una simulazione ingegnerizzata. Questa colonizzazione tecnologica del cervello umano cerca di recidere la nostra connessione con la consapevolezza naturale e la sovranità spirituale.

In una delle sue ultime lezioni, Aldous Huxley, il celebre autore del libro Il mondo nuovo, fece una previsione agghiacciante sul futuro del controllo sociale: “Nella prossima generazione o giù di lì, ci sarà un metodo farmacologico per far sì che le persone amino la loro servitù e per produrre una dittatura senza lacrime, per così dire, creando una specie di campo di concentramento indolore per intere società, cosicché le persone si vedranno togliere le loro libertà e ne godranno”.

Siamo a un punto cruciale in cui la cattura tecnologica della coscienza umana sta diventando irreversibile. Ogni nuova generazione nasce in una più profonda integrazione digitale, con una realtà di base sempre più sintetica. Ma riconoscere questo schema rivela sia la minaccia che la debolezza: pur perfezionando gli strumenti tecnologici per il controllo, non riescono a replicare appieno il potere della connessione umana diretta. Ogni istanza di interazione autentica, ogni momento di presenza immediata, dimostra ciò che il loro sistema non riesce a catturare. La risposta non è solo smascherare le bugie, ma creare spazi di connessione umana che esistano al di fuori della loro architettura di controllo. Ciò che rende questo momento senza precedenti non è solo la sofisticatezza del controllo, ma il suo metodo di attuazione: non attraverso la forza, ma attraverso la seduzione e la convenienza. Ogni convenienza che abbracciamo, ogni miglioramento digitale che accettiamo, ci avvicina alla loro visione di consapevolezza manipolata.

Liberare la coscienza, recuperare la connessione

Comprendere questi meccanismi non significa rifiutare la tecnologia o rifugiarsi in un isolamento paranoico: significa riconoscere che il vero potere inizia con l'autonomia e imparare a relazionarsi con la modernità alle nostre condizioni.

La battaglia per la nostra mente richiede consapevolezza e azione autentica. Mentre loro cercano di manipolare il comportamento attraverso sostanze chimiche e algoritmi, il nostro potere risiede innanzitutto nella liberazione di noi stessi, per poi estenderci attraverso la connessione umana diretta.

Il loro obiettivo finale – il dominio assoluto sulla percezione e la cognizione umana – rivela una debolezza fondamentale: non possono contenere pienamente menti liberate e relazioni umane autentiche che esistono al di fuori dei loro canali mediati. Questo sistema onnicomprensivo richiede un'opposizione gestita a ogni livello, allontanandoci da un autentico risveglio e da un coinvolgimento diretto.

L'intuizione cruciale è questa: l'opposto del globalismo non è il nazionalismo o i movimenti politici, ma la libertà individuale espressa attraverso l'azione locale. Il vero risveglio non può essere programmato. Emerge attraverso un chiaro riconoscimento e si diffonde attraverso una connessione autentica. Quando gli intellettuali nei think tank come il Brownstone Institute hanno trovato una causa comune con i vigili del fuoco, il sistema ha riconosciuto un precedente pericoloso. L'unità al di là delle tradizionali divisioni sociali – tra intellettuali, professionisti e lavoratori – dimostra come le persone veramente libere possano colmare le divisioni artificiali. Mentre le reti digitali possono facilitare l'organizzazione, il vero potere si manifesta nella comunità fisica.

Parlando per esperienza, queste reti digitali sono state inestimabili nel mio percorso: ho trovato anime gemelle, condiviso intuizioni e costruito amicizie durature attraverso le comunità online. Queste connessioni mi hanno aiutato a comprendere modelli che forse non avrei mai notato da solo. Ma la condivisione di informazioni è solo il primo passo. La vera trasformazione avviene quando portiamo queste intuizioni condivise fuori dallo schermo e nelle nostre comunità, trasformando le connessioni digitali in relazioni concrete e azioni locali condivise.

Ciò significa:

• Liberare le nostre menti mentre loro spingono il pensiero programmato (creando circoli di apprendimento locali per contrastare la loro ingegneria digitale-farmaceutica del pensiero);

• Creare connessioni mantenendo la componente individuale (creando vere e proprie comunità per resistere ai loro sistemi di credito sociale);

• Agire senza attendere il consenso (aggirando i canali di opposizione concordati);

• Coltivare cibo mentre si promuovono alternative sintetiche (mantenendo l'autonomia biologica mentre si promuovono dipendenze create in laboratorio);

• Costruire una comunità mentre vendono tribù digitali (creando una connessione genuina come antidoto all'isolamento tecnologico);

• Guarire noi stessi mentre loro commercializzano le dipendenze (sviluppare una resilienza naturale contro la loro convergenza biodigitale).

La verità più potente non è una rivelazione: è il riconoscimento che la coscienza può trascendere completamente i confini da essa costruiti. La via d'uscita richiede di andare oltre le sue infinite distrazioni e di rivendicare un'azione radicata e autentica. La convergenza biodigitale può catturare solo le anime che seguono i suoi percorsi prestabiliti; la nostra essenza non è mai stata veramente vincolata dai suoi confini.

Rimanete vigili, mettete in discussione tutto, liberate la mente e agite con intenzione. La rivoluzione inizia con spiriti sovrani e cresce attraverso una connessione autentica. Costruite dove loro distruggono, create mentre loro ingannano, connettetevi mentre loro dividono. La via d'uscita dalla loro Matrix è con gli occhi ben aperti e i piedi ben piantati nel terreno locale.

[*] traduzione di Francesco Simoncelli: https://www.francescosimoncelli.com/

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

Veteran CIA counterintelligence chief James Angleton secretly oversaw a top-level spy ring involving Jewish émigrés and Israeli operatives without “any clearances” from Congress or Langley itself, according to recently declassified documents published as part of the Trump administration’s pledge to disclose all available information on the assassination of President John F. Kennedy.

The files provide a fresh and often disturbing look at a spy described by historian Jefferson Morley as “a leading architect of America’s strategic relationship with Israel,” detailing Angleton’s role in transforming the Mossad into a fearsome agency with global reach, while assisting Israel’s theft of US nuclear material and protecting Zionist terrorists.

Angleton established the Jewish emigre spying network in the aftermath of WWII, with the apparent goal of infiltrating the Soviet Union. But as the files show, the spymaster considered his “most important” task to be maintaining the supply of Jewish immigrants flowing from the Soviet Union towards the burgeoning Israeli state.

According to Angelton, his Jewish assets were responsible for 22,000 reports on the USSR, generating several intelligence masterstrokes. Chief among them was the publication of Soviet Prime Minister Nikita Kruschev’s famous 1956 secret speech denouncing Stalin, which the spymaster boasted “practically created revolutions in Hungary and Poland.” Elsewhere, Angleton bragged that his arrangement with Israel had produced “500 Polish intelligence officers who were Jewish” who “knew more about Polish intelligence than the Poles.”

Other passages appear to show Angleton taking credit for securing the “release” of several Zionist terrorists affiliated with the Irgun militia before they could be convicted for bombing the British embassy in Rome. Though the group had been captured by Italian authorities, the newly-disclosed files indicate the terror cell was freed on the orders of the CIA.

The information was originally divulged in 1975 to senators serving on the Church Committee, which probed widespread abuses by US intelligence in the decades prior. Congress was particularly interested in claims by New York Times foreign correspondent Tad Szulc, who testified under oath that Angleton had personally informed him that the US provided technical information on nuclear devices to Israel in the late 1950s. The new documents show that Angleton was deceptive under questioning, and evaded questions on Israel’s nuclear espionage efforts on the record.

Additional unsealed FBI documents, which refer to Israel’s Mossad as Angleton’s “primary source” of information, confirm that the CIA’s head of counterintelligence relied heavily on Tel Aviv to solidify his position within the Agency – and also add to the growing body of evidence that Angleton may not have been operating with US interests in mind throughout his 21-year tenure.

Other newly declassified files from the FBI have shown that Angleton maintained a wildly lopsided relationship with the Bureau, which saw federal agents deferring to the CIA counterintelligence chief after they caught him surveilling the correspondence of huge numbers of Americans. The files show Angleton openly admitting he would have been fired if Langley caught wind of his leaks to the Bureau.

A side-by-side analysis of the now-unredacted Church Committee files compared with their previously-released versions from 2018 demonstrates that even after 70 years, Washington felt compelled to conceal details of its real relationship with Israel’s founders. Over a dozen references to “Israel,” “Tel Aviv,” or descriptions of figures as “Jewish,” which were scrubbed from the 2018 release, can now be viewed on the National Archives site.

click to enlarge

The documents reveal that Angleton repeatedly lied to multiple Congressional bodies, including the Church Committee, which investigated CIA abuses, and the House Select Committee on Assassinations, which probed the murders of John F. Kennedy and Martin Luther King, Jr. Angleton was similarly evasive when interrogated over Israel’s nuclear weapons program, and about CIA knowledge or complicity in the scheme.

Those documents also reveal that Angleton’s CIA counterintelligence staff ordered Lee Harvey Oswald’s removal from federal watchlists six weeks before Kennedy’s assassination, despite his classification as a high security risk. The surveillance of Oswald was personally overseen by a member of Angleton’s intelligence network of Jewish emigres, Reuben Efron, a CIA spy from Lithuania. Angleton had placed Efron in charge of an Agency program called HT/Lingual which intercepted and read correspondences between Oswald and his family.

Numerous historians have questioned why the CIA counterintelligence chief insisted for decades on personally overseeing what he described as the “Israeli account.” Though several off-the-record interactions remain impossible to parse, the documents show that when grilled about his “unusually close” connections to the Israeli Mossad, Angleton acknowledged forming an “arrangement” in which, “in most simplistic terms, [the Israelis] were informed that we would not work with them against the Arabs, [but] that we would work with them on Soviet bloc Intelligence and communism.”

Freeing Zionist terrorists

One of the earliest instances of Angleton’s cooperation with Zionist elements came as Zionist militants embarked on a terrorist campaign to pressure the British colonial authorities to leave Mandate Palestine.

In October 1946, three months after they bombed the British administrative headquarters at the King David Hotel in Jerusalem, members of the right-wing Irgun militia planted explosives in the British embassy in Rome in a failed bid to assassinate the UK’s ambassador to Italy.

According to Angleton, after the Irgun “blew up the British embassy in Rome” in 1946, the CIA intervened to ensure they escaped Italy without prosecution.

click to enlarge

“We had the members of the group, and then we had the dilemma again as to whether we turned them over to the British authorities,” noted Angleton, who had served as counterintelligence chief for the Italian branch of the Office of Strategic Services, the CIA’s predecessor. “And we were in a position to make the decision one way or the other. And eventually we came down on the side of releasing them.”

A secret deal with the Mossad

As Washington sought to manage the political ruptures caused by the creation of Israel, and monitor the wave of Soviet migrants pouring into the self-proclaimed Jewish state, Angleton framed his takeover of “the Israeli account” as a convenient way for US intelligence to kill two birds with one stone.

“The other side of the Israeli problem was that you had thousands coming from the Soviet Union and you had the Soviets making use of the immigration for the purpose of sending illegal agents into the West and breaking down all the travel control, identifications and so on. And so there was both a security problem and a political problem.”

To manage these “problems,” the US and Israelis brokered a deal involving the secret exchange of “papers and signals, communications intelligence, [and] the other products of intelligence action,” Angleton stated. The spy chief claimed the only records of the 1951 arrangement held by the US side would be in the possession of the Agency, and admitted US Congress had been left in the dark, telling senators, “I don’t think there were any clearances obtained from the Hill.”

click to enlarge

Asked by one legislator how it was “possible for succeeding directors of the intelligence agency to understand what the agreements were between” US and Israeli intelligence, Angleton responded: “Very simple. They saw the production to begin with. And they met with directors or the head of Israeli intelligence. And they met with Ambassadors and prime ministers. And they were very much involved.”

Grooming Zionist spies “outside the structure” of the CIA

Angleton was especially protective of what he called “the fiduciary relationship” with Tel Aviv, assembling a close-knit clique of Jewish Americans with dubious loyalties to manage it as World War Two drew to a close. “I started from the south side with two Jewish men who worked with me during the war,” he explained. Having “sent them over as ordinary people under cover” to get their bearings in newly-formed Israel, Angleton “brought over six others and put them through some months of training, outside of the structure” of the CIA.

“To break down the fiduciary relationship – which is after all a personal business – all the men I have had, were men who stayed in it and came back to headquarters and went back to Tel Aviv, they went to the National Security Council, and went back to Tel Aviv, et cetera.”

“It was probably the most economical operation that has ever been devised in the U.S. Government,” Angleton crowed. “I don’t think there was [sic] more than 10 people that were hired in the same process.”

click to enlarge

Having trained these spies “outside of the structure” of the CIA, it’s unclear how Angleton ensured they remained faithful to US national security objectives, or whether he ever intended to.

Enabling Israeli theft of US nuclear material, spying on America

Angleton’s role in enabling Israel’s wanton theft of nuclear material from an American facility is one of the more shocking episodes in the US-Israeli relationship. The scene of the crime was the Nuclear Materials and Equipment Corporation, or NUMEC, a uranium processing facility in Apollo, Pennsylvania owned by a Zionist financier named David Lowenthal. In 1965, Zalman Shapiro, a fellow Zionist hired by Lowenthal to run the plant, illegally diverted hundreds of kilograms of nuclear fissile material to Israel. Posing as a scientist, the notorious Mossad spy Rafi Eitan visited NUMEC three years later to continue the heist.

As Jefferson Morley documented in his biography of Angleton, “The Ghost,” the late CIA counterintelligence chief made sure the CIA looked the other way as Israel constructed its first nuclear weapon out of the stolen fissile material. According to Morley, “Angleton, it is fair to say, thought collaboration with Israel was more important than U.S. non-proliferation policy.”

A 1977 investigation by the US Government Accountability Office found that the CIA withheld information about the NUMEC nuclear theft from the FBI and Department of Energy, and “found that certain key individuals had not been contacted by the FBI almost 2 years into the FBI’s current investigation.”

The latest batch of Church Committee files add new detail about Angleton’s compromising of US national security to benefit Israel, and his attempts to cover up his betrayal.

During his testimony before the Committee, Angleton was pressed about media reports alleging that he and his counterintelligence unit provided Israel with technical support for constructing nuclear weapons. He strenuously denied the charges, insisting the CIA had never played any role in providing Tel Aviv with nuclear materials. However, when questioned about whether “Israeli intelligence efforts” were ever conducted in the US “aimed at acquiring… nuclear technology,” Angleton equivocated.

First, he blustered, “there have been many efforts by many countries to acquire technical knowledge in this country, and that doesn’t exclude the Israelis.” Asked if CIA counterintelligence had “certain knowledge” of Israeli agents “trying to acquire nuclear secrets in the US,” Angleton pleaded, “Do I have to respond to that?”

The Committee then went “off record” at the senators’ request, making Angleton’s responses impossible to scrutinize.

click to enlarge

In a secret 1975 memorandum to the FBI, the ousted CIA counterintelligence chief disclosed that he had “avoided any direct answers” during his Senate testimony on Israel’s spies carrying out “intelligence collection” to gather “nuclear information” in the United States.

Just days later, a Bureau report on “Israeli intelligence collection capabilities” revealed Angleton entertained “frequent personal liaison contacts” with Mossad representatives at Israel’s Washington DC embassy between February 1969 and October 1972. This “special relationship” involved “the exchange of extremely sensitive information.”

Further, the 1975 FBI memo on Angleton disclosed the Israeli embassy’s establishment of a “technical intelligence network” seven years earlier which was directed by an Israel scientist who worked on Tel Aviv’s nuclear program. This may explain why Angleton was so cagey under Senate questioning.

“Israeli matters” trigger Angleton’s downfall

The Church Committee files show Angleton bristled at then-CIA Director William Colby’s efforts to apply a modicum of transparency to the Agency’s activities, especially as they related to Israel. The spymaster warned that if the USSR ever caught wind of Langley’s use of the self-proclaimed Jewish state as a de facto halfway house for communist turncoats, they would almost certainly end their policy of encouraging Eastern European Jews to migrate to Israel:

“This idea of opening the doors and letting the light in, and breaking down compartmentation, and breaking down the need to know, would inevitably put in jeopardy the immigration, if the Soviets should learn the extent of the activities,” Angleton stated.

click to enlarge

Colby fired Angleton in 1974 after the New York Times revealed that he devised an illegal program of domestic spying targeting antiwar American dissidents. In his testimony, Angleton framed their clash as an interpersonal conflict, describing Colby as “not my cup of tea professionally or in any other way.”

Yet Angleton also acknowledged to Senate that a “dispute in connection with these Israeli matters” between himself and Colby contributed to his departure from the Agency. Was this a reference to the former spook’s involvement in Israeli theft of US nuclear secrets, enabling Israel to acquire the bomb?

Whatever the case, it was clear why Angleton would be remembered more fondly in Israel than inside the country he ostensibly served.

On December 4, 1987, the director of Israel’s Mossad and Shin Bet intelligence services gathered in secret on a hillside in Jerusalem to plant a tree in honor of Angleton. They were joined there by five former Israeli spy chiefs and three former military intelligence officers.

Despite attempts to keep the ceremony under wraps, two local reporters managed to evade the cordon to record the ceremony for the former CIA counter-intelligence director, who had died seven months prior. Together, the Israeli spooks laid a memorial stone that read, “In memory of a dear friend, James (Jim) Angleton.”

This article was originally published on The Grayzone.

The post Israel’s Man Inside the CIA Betrayed the US, New Files Show appeared first on LewRockwell.

Christianity has always emphasized the severity of the Seven Deadly Sins. The Catholic Church defined them as pride, greed, envy, wrath, gluttony, lust, and sloth. Looking around at America 2.0, it’s hard to escape the conclusion that Deadly Sinning comes as naturally to us as betrayal or dishonesty, which apparently don’t qualify.

Pride can be seen in the scrunched up duckfaces of every young girl, as she posts selfie after selfie, like all her fellow narcissist friends. It can be seen in the face of the bully, after he’s sucker punched someone. You know, as in the Knockout Game. You’ll find it on the glowing faces of executives who’ve outsourced or eliminated thousands of jobs, as they announce how much larger the tax free bonuses will be at Christmas. You’ll hear it in the excessively loud laughter of the practical joker, after he’s humiliated someone. But now we have a Pride Month. And it’s devoted to something no decent person should ever be proud of. Gay Pride gave way to LGBTQ Pride. It’s more inclusive. So the mother who pushes her son to become a “girl,” and the newly emasculated lad himself, become extraordinarily proud. But there is no pride in say, being a faithful husband or wife for a half century. Or just being a good Samaritan.

There are some things to be justifiably proud of. Any parent’s face should be flushed with pride as they hold their newborn baby. Or watch them accomplish great things on the sports fields, or cheer them as they graduate from high school or college. Tear up as they walk down the aisle, and dance at their wedding. Genuine heroes should be proud. A firefighter who saves a child from a burning building. A soldier whose valor earns him a Purple Heart, even though the cause he was fighting for was senseless. Inventors who make all our lives better. Nikola Tesla had a right to be proud. The artist who creates a timeless work. But there’s a huge difference between any of that, and Pride Month, for instance. To paraphrase the late Norm MacDonald, that’s not an achievement. Or to revel in your obesity, for instance. The Fat Acceptance movement has created vain monsters out of those who shouldn’t be shamed as they often were in the past, but certainly shouldn’t be celebrated for an inability to control themselves.

Greed. Despite the enduring popularity of Dickens’ A Christmas Carol, there are too many who have spirits only slightly less selfish than Ebeneezer Scrooge. We would not have the world’s most shameful disparity of wealth, and I could never have written a book exposing it, without the systemic greed that powers corporate America. Every family has a story of a miserly parent, or sibling, or adult child, that won’t help out a loved one, despite having riches to spare. I have found that, generally speaking, the more money one has, the less generous one is. I’ve heard a few old geezers explain, “How do you think I got rich?” No one gets rich pinching pennies, as Survival of the Richest shows. The same people who like to say, “You can’t take it with you,” very often act as if they do intend to take it with them. Or, conversely, spend it all before those they supposedly love the most in the world can inherit it. You’ll see photos of elderly parents taking lavish vacations, captioned, “spending my kids’ inheritance!”

Envy. Now, I’m as guilty of this as anyone else. I envy those conspiracy celebrities that inexplicably have millions of followers. We all have envied something our neighbor, or a family member, has. A bigger house. A newer car. We might envy someone’s good looks, or the fact he has a trophy wife. Or the great accomplishments of his children. The fact he has a cushy job with wonderful flexibility and outstanding pay. When you have a society where over 70 percent of you live paycheck to paycheck, and have less than $1000 in savings, that’s going to happen. How could it not? I think this is the one Deadly Sin that is the most explainable. I’m not sure that our younger people have any more envy than we had back in the misty days of America 1.0. But they probably have a more burning desire to be famous for fame’s sake. A social media “influencer.” A few people have accused me of being that. I think that’s ridiculous. If I thought I was one, I might very well be struck with a sudden burst of the Deadly sin of pride.

Wrath. This is a tough one. If we mean simple anger, we’re all guilty. All doomed to burn in the flames of Hell. Who doesn’t get angry from time to time? I would define wrath more as an anger with repercussions; wielding authority over those with less power. The Old Testament depicts a wrathful God. We all know that great power usually doesn’t come with great responsibility, despite what Spiderman’s Uncle Ben said. And wrath often interferes with the possibility of forgiveness. It’s not just scorned women who have such wrath. It’s very hard for most people to apologize. Or forgive. Mainly because they have pride. You could call it vanity or conceit. They’re part of the same family. Now I think some wrath is justified. For instance, you could fairly say that my writing is full of wrath, directed towards our politicians, business leaders, celebrities, etc. Basically anyone with real power. Call it Deadly Criticism.

Gluttony. One trip to a large public event will reveal this particular Deadly Sin in all its glory. The overpriced corn dogs, cotton candy, and beer stuffed into ever chubbier faces. The average woman today weighs 170 pounds. That was the average weight of a man in 1960. And the average man has a size forty waist. Even as a pathfinding obese child, I never got beyond a size thirty eight. When the Sheeple of America 2.0 aren’t chanting, “USA! USA!” they’re chanting, “Super size it!” The filmmaker who produced the great documentary Super Size Me, Morgan Spurlock, died at only fifty three in 2024, of what they called “aggressive” cancer. Others would call it turbo cancer. Spurlock publicly chided McDonald’s for not giving employees the whole day off to get their vaccine. Ironically, Spurlock survived (barely) a month of nothing but McDonald’s, but was done in by the COVID psyop. When Victoria’s Secret starts glamorizing overweight models, you know that gluttony is being institutionally celebrated.

Lust. Perhaps the most prevalent Deadly Sin of all. I’m guilty of it all too often. They created an entire world of Deadly lust in online pornography. Sex has been used to sell virtually every product for well over a half century. They use sex with advertising because they know it activates the lust in so many potential consumers. At least for me, it’s the hardest Deadly Sin to resist. If you’re at the beach, or a swimming pool, and an attractive female in a bikini walks by, your head is going to turn robotically. That might not be lust exactly, but it is surely interest. Is interest a Deadly Sin? Half of all marriages end in divorce. In every case, it was because of someone’s lust. Few people leave their spouse for the nunnery or priesthood. Maybe the Muslims have the right idea. Does covering every inch of a woman’s body, and even her face, curtail the innate male lust? I’m just keeping it real, because we males are a lusting bunch.

Finally, we have sloth. I don’t think very many people were guilty of this Deadly Sin back in America 1.0. But now? Males and females, and all the assorted gender fluids, are comfortable in wearing pajamas in public. With all that massive weight gain, you’re going to need a lot of stretchable sweat pants. You wouldn’t want to pop a button while super sizing. And XXXL tee shirts. I don’t think they had anything bigger than an XL when I was young. XL is now pretty much the standard. You don’t have to dress like Ward and June Cleaver did around the house. But we used to at least try to be what they called “presentable” in public. Very few are presentable in public now. Look at all the “People of Walmart” photos. I don’t even know where they buy that kind of outlandish clothing. We’ve gone way beyond casual. Way beyond the untucked world I argued for in my radical youth. We are firmly in sloth land now.

I don’t mean to sound like a blue nose. I know I’m a hopeless sinner but I have faith the Lord will forgive me for my imperfections. I know I could never hurt anyone, let alone commit murder. I would never rape even the loveliest girl in the skimpiest thong. Sexual emergencies only apply to nonwhite migrants. I try to hold my envy in check, by remembering the blessings I have, and how many people might envy me. I don’t really display much pride. I could brag about having had ten books published. Perhaps if I’d sold as many books as a Stephen King, then I might have a swelled head about it. I might even look down my nose at the peasants who bought them. But having pride over being a heterosexual? I.E., normal? Pride at not undergoing a gender transition? Pride over my skin color? What am I, Aretha Franklin? You can be happy with yourself without spelling out R-E-S-P-E-C-T.

Greed should be the easiest Deadly Sin to avoid. I know, you’re thinking- that’ easy for you to say, Mr. Share the Wealth. Huey Long is your hero. If you have the financial wherewithal to help a loved one in need, but don’t, then you’re greedy. Period. We all watch or read the story of Scrooge, and get the point. It makes us feel a special warmth at Christmas. And yet, does the message of the story really cause anyone to change? Demonstrating that the most wealthy are indeed the greediest, Warren Buffet is said to have refused to help his daughter pay for a kitchen remodeling, or help out with his granddaughter’s college tuition. He probably kicks puppies, too. Bill Gates, like many rich and famous entertainers and athletes, is a crummy tipper. Greed is the lifeblood of our corrupt and monstrously unfair economy. Our disparity of wealth is a Deadly Sin in itself. How many bankruptcies, suicides, and divorces, could be avoided with just the figurative pocket change of a One Percenter?

Anger, or wrath, can be a good thing, if channeled at the proper target. For instance, it would hardly be sinful for the masses who are suffering under the tyranny of our criminal overlords to be angry at them. I mean, how are we not angry at them? What exactly do they have to do in order to arouse our anger? I see their sinful wrath in every foreclosure, every repossession, and every unfair job termination. Sometimes, we should be angry. It’s cathartic. My good friend John Barbour, still vigorous at ninety two, told me, “Donald, there are two reasons why I have lived so long. One, is my anger. The other is my laughter.” A sadistic ruler turns his wrath upon the common riff-raff, just like an immature child steps on an anthill. Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely, the great English populist Lord Acton reminds us. We have every reason to fear the wrath of the elite.

Read the Whole Article

The post Land of the Deadliest Sins appeared first on LewRockwell.

Not too far from where the principal military industrial complex power players work and live, hundreds of liberty-lovers congregated in the suburbs of Washington DC at the ninth annual Ron Paul Peace and Prosperity Institute (RPI) conference. RPI brings together voices of differing ideologies to achieve its core mission. In its own orderly, diplomatic manner, the event was a raging against the war machine and a reminder that there is opposition to the trillions spent on military budgets in pursuit of a global empire, an empire that is nonetheless destined to collapse. Yet the event also signaled a fostering of hope. When asked who was attending a Ron Paul conference for the first time, about one third of the several hundred in the audience raised their hands and many were young adults.

From the podium, institute executive director and conference organizer Daniel McAdams recalled that as his plane began its descent toward Dulles Airport, he flew over the Pentagon and the mansions in McLean where defense contractors and government workers reside, their salaries paid for by profitable U.S. overseas military interventionism and wars. “These people made money…to rob us,” he said. “And they are stealing our children’s future.” With defiance and expectation, he thanked the audience for their presence, acknowledging the next generation of the Ron Paul revolution: the 14 students who had participated in the scholars seminar the previous day.

Among the courageous and principled thought leaders and independent journalists speaking truth to power, a highpoint was the panel comprised of Col. Douglas Macgregor, Professor Jeffrey Sachs, the Grayzone’s Max Blumenthal and his wife Anya Parampil. They were questioned by Judge Andrew Napolitano, whose “Judging Freedom” podcast livestreamed the discussion. You can watch the panel exchange preceded by Sachs’ speech here:

“No one has been more right than Ron Paul,” observed Macgregor, whose authentic heroism on the battlefield, brilliance as a military strategist, gravitas and physical presence qualify him as the man who should be the US president. Macgregor predicted an economic collapse has to happen before the wars end. “When the fake money collapses, we will focus internally.” The war machine sends Americans to die and they are of no value to those who start the wars. “The globalist class live around here and are enjoying life,” he said. “They have no accountability. They approve PowerPoint slides and attack defenseless people. The media doesn’t report on the vulture capitalists and fake news is the business model. Palantir, a CIA startup, is developing a digital prison for us all. The vets living in Pennsylvania and Ohio falsely believed they were fighting for US national security. We are governed by people who ride in golf carts,” he said. “The ruling class preach virtue and practice vice. The people who run DC have no business being there. We have a government of the corrupt by the conniving, crooked and connected. Trump’s MAGA base is eroding, and the diehards are going down with the Titanic. They got into the same car and changed lanes but the destination is the same.” Macgregor compared our situation in the US with 18th century France leading up to the revolution when wars were waged, leadership eroded and society began to rot from within. Macgregor’s blueprint for peace: Break up the financial cartels, make banks serve communities, restore sound money, restructure the national debt, defend the nuclear family, respect other cultures, be fearless, and build alternative structures. “The future is not written. They are counting on your apathy. Destiny rests on the shoulders of a few.”

Professor Sachs said all current “artificially prolonged” major military conflicts the U.S. is involved with can be easily resolved. JFK was killed by the CIA because he was for peace and he was the last truly independent US president, he stated. “Of course, the Mossad spies on and blackmails presidents,” he said. Presidents are either all afraid of the Mossad or they don’t know the true power controlling the presidency. “These people are crazy,” Sachs said of neocons like Hillary Clinton and Victoria Nuland who promote war at any cost. He called Netanyahu a “vile, misguided criminal” and decried the starving and shooting of Palestinians at food depots. The U.S. government is supporting “maniacs and murderers,” he said. “We are trapped.” The think tanks are bought and Americans are subjected to endless paid propaganda. The “zealots in Israel” and powerful Israeli lobby in America keep the US from joining the 192 nation state votes at the UN in favor of a Palestinian state. “We are now preparing for a war with China,” he warned, “the worst idea ever.”

Chris Rossini, co-host with Dr. Paul of the Liberty Report’s Friday editions, said Blumenthal and Parampil risked their lives by visiting Iran two months before the US bombing. What the couple witnessed was very different from what is “reported” by mainstream media. They said Christians and Jews are allowed to practice their faith, the churches and synagogues are full, and the Iranian leadership is anti-Zionist. Blumenthal denounced the Mossad’s assassination of Iranian nuclear scientists and Palestinian journalists.

Dutch politician Thierry Baudet, the founder of the political party Forum for Democracy who was elected to the House of Representatives in the Netherlands, said he was the only European politician who opposed the Covid mandates: “This was the hill I was prepared to die on.” He denounced the “Russia-phobic paranoia” of his political colleagues and said the Israeli lobby is very powerful in Europe. The mainstream media and government conspire to oppose dissident voices, he said. While “change goes slower than we want it to,” he admitted, he believes the new generation is beginning to see through the lies.

Natali Morris, who hosts Redacted News on Rumble, YouTube and X with her husband Clayton Morris, asked why Fox News and CNN fight about the culture wars but not the real wars that kill children, women and men. “There is no daylight between them,” she said. “They share identical support for Israel” but have small audiences. The couple live in Portugal where the police patrol the beaches and mortgages have quadrupled. “How do they have these monsters in power?” she asked. “Europe must decide if it wants freedom. But there is still time to fight in America,” asserted the mother of three. “We must think about the future we want to leave our children.”

Before mathematical statistician and essayist Nassim Nicholas Taleb spoke, I told him I did some research on him and concluded he was a genius. He responded by laughing. I was right. He told the audience the warmongers no longer have skin in the game compared to the days when there was a risk they could actually die. Taleb then explained seven economic points he had compiled. McAdams posted on X the speech was “one of the most incredible things I have ever heard. I could not believe how great it was. I kept texting my son who also loves Taleb about each thing he was saying in real time. Taleb challenged everyone and he did it with a smile. Many people had no idea what the hell he was talking about as they told me afterward. He blew everything out of the water. They weren’t absurd sound bites. They were reality bites. This is what made it legendary! Video coming!” So, if you want to know what Taleb was talking about, ask McAdams or his Space X engineer son. As for me, I’ll watch the video to see if I have more success in comprehending Taleb’s message.

This was the first time Dr. Paul did not appear in person at his own conference. As he explained during his live on camera appearance, his absence was due to serious family concerns and admitted it was disheartening to let his supporters down. He projected the same energy and enthusiasm he always has had and, at 90 years young, it is apparent he is still teaching, studying and learning. He said the battle is good vs. evil, the truth seekers vs. the nihilists. The world is waking up and starting to prepare for the collapse of the economy. “We have God-given individual rights and the government ought to butt out,” he said. “We need to return to the Constitution.” Dr. Paul remains optimistic because the message of liberty is an idea whose time has come and one that even armies cannot stop and, he said, everyone has a role to play.

It is a testament to the enduring ideals of liberty Dr. Paul has communicated throughout his life, the drawing power of the speakers, and the elation attendees feel by interacting with each other in person, an experience that has no substitute, that the conference stood on its own even without the physical presence of Dr. Paul. I treasure the times I have spoken with Dr. Paul and felt great joy as I have sensed the enthusiasm that emanates from him. And I understand I am in the presence of the greatest living American, the man ordained by destiny to be, as Judge Napolitano has called him, the Thomas Jefferson of our time. I will always believe that what makes Dr. Paul an important historical figure was not only that he spoke truth to power but that he entered the political arena and led the Ron Paul Revolution, a political movement that continues today.

While the conference was entitled, “Blueprint for Peace,” a detailed plan was not presented, so here is my takeaway summary based on the speakers’ content and side conversations with attendees: The younger generation will not tolerate the subordination of US foreign policy to Israel or any other foreign power. As Dr. Paul and Col. Macgregor pointed out, the wars will not end until the inevitable financial collapse forces them to end. The wars will then be unaffordable and, by necessity, America will be forced to turn inward to tend to its own problems. When this will occur is unknown but do all you can to prepare. Keep the faith. Be fearless. Pray. Act in faith. Have children, start a business, speak out, write, tell the truth, do whatever you can. And support the Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity.

Afterward, I drove home on roads that were wet from an earlier rainfall. In the distance ahead of me I saw a beautiful rainbow curved across the clear blue sky.

The post The Ron Paul Institute’s “Blueprint for Peace” Conference appeared first on LewRockwell.

The Trump administration is delivering justice for employees who were forced out of their job for declining the abortion-tainted COVID shot – including a recent $1 million settlement.

Mercyhealth agreed to the settlement after the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) investigated the healthcare organization, which operates clinics and hospitals in Wisconsin and Illinois, for “denying [employees] a religious accommodation and either terminating their employment or subjecting them to a wage deduction.”

“The EEOC also found reasonable cause to believe that Mercyhealth discriminated against a class of similarly situated employees across all its facilities from September 2021 to May 2022 by denying them an opportunity to request a religious accommodation, opting instead either to terminate their employment or withhold money from their pay,” the commission announced.

The pay withholding was essentially a $60 monthly tax on individuals who chose to decline the COVID-19 jab for religious reason. The shots are derived from aborted fetal cell tissue lines, which raised serious ethical concerns for many Christians. The hospital system called the tax a “vaccine incentive charge.”

The EEOC notes that the hospital’s practices appeared to violate Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, which “prohibits discrimination based on religion.”

“Such alleged conduct violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits discrimination based on religion,” the EEOC stated.

Mercyhealth will “provide back pay and compensatory damages to the aggrieved individuals.”

It also agreed to further training on religious accommodation requests and monitoring by the EEOC.

Acting EEOC Chair Andrea Lucas explained the importance of the settlement further in a statement.

“At the start of my tenure as Acting Chair of the EEOC, I committed to focusing our agency’s resources to address the very real problem of religious discrimination, and this resolution is just the beginning,” Lucas stated

“This is an example of what our agency can accomplish when we work with employers to ensure that the doors of our workplaces are equally open to religious employees,” she stated. “I am proud of the monetary relief that we have obtained here, and I am equally proud that these employees—who remained committed to their religious beliefs and practice at great personal cost—will receive job offers.”

“Mercyhealth respects the religious beliefs and practices of its employees,” Vice President of Clinical Operations Kara Sankey stated on behalf of the health organization.

Liberty Counsel, which represented Mercyhealth employees who objected to the vaccine policy, said the settlement is good but took too long.

“During the COVID mandates, Liberty Counsel assisted many Mercyhealth employees whose religious accommodations had been denied. While these health care workers are getting much deserved relief, the relief is very late as it has been nearly four years since their unconstitutional treatment,” the religious liberty group wrote on its website.

Chairman Mat Staver provided further analysis.

“This hospital system did not live up to its name and instead was merciless to its faithful and dedicated workers,” he said. “This class-wide settlement is rightly deserved for these health care employees who were unlawfully discriminated against and denied religious exemptions from the experimental COVID shot.”

Employees, Staver said, “should never have to choose between their faith and their job.”

Trump admin continues fight for religious liberty

The Trump administration has continued to pursue other cases of discrimination against individuals who decided not to take the COVID jab for religious or other reasons.

As recently reported by LifeSiteNews, the Trump administration sued the Mayo Clinic for allegedly coercing a security guard into taking the COVID shot.

The lawsuit, filed on July 30, accuses the Minnesota-based clinic of violating the civil rights of security guard Cody Schultz by rejecting his religious exemption request from a COVID shot mandate in 2021. Schultz, a member of the Assemblies of God church, said taking the shot conflicted with his religious beliefs.

He eventually took the jab after exhausting his options to get exempted – including offering to wear a mask and submit to regular testing. He also had already contracted COVID, meaning he likely had the antibodies.

In addition to religious liberty concerns, the COVID shots have also come under scrutiny for being dangerous. In June, the Food and Drug Administration announced a new warning for mRNA COVID shots due to the risk of young men developing serious heart problems.

This article was originally published on LifeSite News.

The post Hospital System Will Pay $1 Million to Employees It Punished for Refusing COVID Shots appeared first on LewRockwell.