Lew Rockwell Institute

Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard’s office released two damning emails yesterday, the first being a letter from former DNI James Clapper to former FBI head James Comey, former CIA head John Brennan, and then-NSA chief Michael Rogers. Dated December 22, 2016, Clapper’s letter explains how the chiefs should approach writing a new Intelligence Community Assessment, whose conclusion — that Russia interfered in the 2016 election to help Donald Trump — had already been reported:

Mike John Jim;

Understand your concern. It is essential that we (CIA/NSA/FBI/ODNI) be on the same page. and are all supportive of the report — in the highest tradition of “that’s OUR story, and we’re stickin’ to it.” This evening, CIA has provided to the NIC the complete draft generated by the ad hoc fusion cell. We will facilitate as much mutual transparency as possible as we complete the report, but, more time is not negotiable,” We may have to compromise on our “normal” modalities, since we must do this on such a compressed schedule.

This is one project that has to be a team sport.

Jim

click to enlarge

Clapper’s email was in response to a note about “concerns” from Rogers, the NSA chief who never upgraded his agency’s confidence level in the “Russia did it for Trump” conclusion from “moderate” to high. The Rogers letter makes it clear that the head of the Pentagon’s most powerful surveillance agency was being asked to sign off on a conclusion without seeing the most “sensitive” intelligence. From Rogers:

I asked my team if they’d had sufficient access to the underlying intelligence and sufficient time to review that intelligence. On both points my team raised concerns… I’m concerned that, given the expedited nature of this activity, my folks aren’t fully comfortable saying that they have had enough time to review all of the intelligence to be absolutely confident in their assessments… I do want to make sure that, when we are asked in the future whether we can absolutely stand behind the paper… I’m concerned we are not there yet.

This is a devastating exchange. It shows that in assembling perhaps the most high-profile group analysis since the 2002 National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq’s WMD program, four of America’s most powerful enforcement officials said, “To hell with evidence, let’s just put out a tale and stick with it.”

In the specific context of this scandal, it makes a joke of years of public narratives about Trump, Putin, and Russia. Along with more documents funneled from Kash Patel’s FBI to Just The News asserting that senior Justice Department officials squashed Hillary Clinton corruption investigations, and that Comey gave a middleman access to highly classified information to help plead his case to newspapers like the New York Times, the new Gabbard docs further elucidate how years of Russia mania were built on fraud.

But this cascade of revelations is bringing a more disturbing story into focus. A subtext is the unnerving casualness with which procedural rules were broken. Even before Rogers and the NSA were asked to blindly bless a domestic political probe built in part atop “evidence” from an illegal FISA warrant, the FISA court had begun investigating misuse of the surveillance program. Onetime Trump aide Carter Page is not the only American in a politically sensitive position recently monitored under this dubious legal end-around. There was FISA monitoring of campaign manager Paul Manafort, “non-compliant” use of FISA to investigate the January 6th Capitol breach, even FISA tracking of ordinary Americans overseas applying for benefits.

In the coming weeks you’ll be reading (at Racket, among other places) about wholesale abuse of other surveillance programs. It turns out an alarming number of senior Trump campaign officials from the 2024 cycle were notified about prior FBI surveillance (news about Kash Patel, Dan Scavino, and Jeff Clark receiving such notices has already broken, but more names are coming). Widespread surveillance of congressional officials in a 2017 leak probe was the underlying context of recent revelations suggesting two members, Adam Schiff and Eric Swalwell, approved leaks of classified information.

The legacy press is ignoring the releases both because they paint Donald Trump as a victim of overreach and because the press played such a prominent role in the Russiagate corruption. They’re betraying audiences who might be concerned about the larger pattern coming into relief. That story is about intelligence agencies meddling in domestic politics at all — Trump or no Trump — through a list of forbidden practices. We’re about to find out that far more people in the political world were under routine surveillance than previously thought, including mainstream and independent reporters who communicated with political sources of all stripes.

This article was originally published on Racket News.

The post Russiagate Releases Lifting a Veil on Surveillance State Abuses appeared first on LewRockwell.

A Progressive president sets tariff rates. He negotiates a nuclear nonproliferation treaty. He attacks in an undeclared war. When taking action would violate the letter or the principles of the Constitution, a Progressive takes action autonomously.

A Progressive president keeps executing unconstitutional statutes and regulations. Whenever a judge opines that the president shouldn’t execute a statute that the president interprets correctly is constitutional, the president doesn’t execute the statute and instead executes the judge’s opinion. When exercising restraint would violate the Constitution, a Progressive exercises restraint.

Constitutionalist Restraint—on Tariffs, Treaties, and War

Tariff-setting is legislative power. Tariffs raise revenue, so tariffs must be originated in the current house of representatives.

If a constitutionalist president is unconstitutionally delegated the legislative power that’s vested in congressmen, he will refuse to use that power. Instead, he will recommend necessary and expedient measures to congressmen’s consideration.

Treaties are law. Constitutionalist legislators in senates would pass treaties, and constitutionalist presidents would then sign treaties—if treaties would ever be advisable.

But treaties don’t, and can’t, force government people to comply. Treaties really just give politicians rationalizations for doing whatever they would do anyway.

Military treaties unconstitutionally bypass congressmen’s duties to pass rules-of-engagement cards (ROE cards) and decide whether to declare war. Trade treaties in practice unwisely restrict trade in order to help cronies—blocking voluntary transactions that would otherwise benefit free producers and customers.

In place of a military treaty that would require agreement and yet that neither government’s people could be trusted to follow, there’s a promising alternative: Unilaterally enact a law establishing upfront that other governments’ military actions will at minimum be met by our government implementing a significant initial response; and keep this law in place and enforce it.

For instance, our government people can enact a law consisting of rules that prohibit unconventional-warfare actions (which we already know that Chinese government people are taking), given force by a sanction that if any of these rules is violated, all trade of our people with the offending government’s people will be ended until all violations have clearly ended. This way, trade with our people wouldn’t build up a proven enemy government.

In place of a trade treaty that would just build up governments and help cronies, there’s another promising alternative: Unilaterally levy tariffs equal to half the tariffs that other nations’ government people levy on each specific category of products. Half-tariffs would incentivize other nations’ people to oppose those nations’ cronies who are being propped up at the expense of those nations’ people. Political opposition would build up that would provide the best chance of getting each tariff first reduced and ultimately eliminated.

War drastically changes the legal regime controlling how persons are deprived of life, liberty, or property.

Since war moves the legal regime onto new ground in which many life-and-death rules suddenly aren’t intuitive, it’s essential to establish what wartime actions will be legal. These new legal rules must be immediately clear in split-seconds in battle. They must be drafted as ROE cards and passed by congressmen.

Also, each war must be decided on by congressmen.

Further, when enemy government people make our government people unable to protect our rights without us being forced into the drastic legal regime of war, our government people’s only approach that is moral is to directly target those enemy government people, and to keep this up until those people and any like-minded successors can no longer force us into war.

It’s immoral, and it’s also unconstitutional, for our government people to support war with attacks, other direct military support, economic support, or other nominally humanitarian support when congressmen haven’t done their due diligence of passing ROE cards and declaring war.

It’s also unwise. People who have freer governments are able to outproduce people who have more-coercive governments. The longer that we keep ourselves in peace, the more that our people will outproduce potential enemy governments’ more-coerced people, and the more the more-coercive enemy government people will be at risk if they would start a war with us. Even when mass murderers have possessed weapons of mass destruction, they haven’t used those weapons if doing that would be suicide.

Superior economic strength will ultimately prevent major wars and keep the peace. Getting there by sustaining peace whenever we can will more-quickly bring more peace and more freedom.

Constitutionalist Action—on Statutes, Regulations, and Opinions

All officials take oaths that they can only uphold if they interpret the constitutionality of every possible action and only take actions that they correctly interpret are constitutional.

A constitutionalist president will choose to not execute statutes that are unconstitutional—and most statutes are.

He will choose to not execute any regulations, since all regulations are unconstitutional.

He will spend nothing on unconstitutional divisions. He’ll close them and recommend formally repealing the enabling statutes.

Each time a judge writes an opinion, a constitutionalist president will interpret correctly whether the opinion is constitutional. If it isn’t, he won’t execute it.

Presidential autonomy has been bad. Progressives have used autonomy to do the things they ought not to do and to leave undone the things they ought to do.

Presidential autonomy will be good when it’s used right. The Constitution expressly calls for presidents to use their powers to ensure that laws that are constitutional are faithfully executed. It also calls for presidents to treat unconstitutional statutes or opinions as moot.

Many people see all statutes as lawful, all executive orders as lawless or a waste, and all restraint as virtuous. Progressives exploit this too-simple thinking to keep Progressive Constitution-defiance locked into place.

Actually, statutes and opinions that violate the Constitution are unlawful. Executive orders that protect the Constitution are lawful. Restraint in protecting the Constitution is a vice.

Even a single constitutionalist executive will turn a government around. Freedom then always builds up strong support.

The post Autonomous Presidents: Troubled Present, Promising Future appeared first on LewRockwell.

Talk about hiding in plain sight. Here is possibly the most important graph ever about the flagging state of the US economy and the utter failure of Washington’s constant efforts during the last two decades to “stimulate” improved outcomes.

To wit, the US industrial production index—which measures the sum of manufacturing, energy, mining, and utility output—marched straight uphill at a 3.3% annual rate between 1954 and 2007. Yet since then it has essentially plateaued, rising by just 0.10% per annum during the past 17 years.

That’s right. The growth rate of America’s industrial foundation has plunged by 97% since the pre-crisis peak in Q4 2007. And yet June’s industrial production index, which was up a small tad, gets headlined as a sign of economic strength. In fact, the longer-term chart below screams the very opposite.

After all, there is no logic that says an economy can remain healthy and prosperous that is increasingly based on educating a shrinking number of kids, feeding an expanding national waistline at fast food joints, and changing adult diapers among the soaring share of the population composed of octogenarians. At the end of the day, you actually have to make things in order for the population to pay for taking in each other’s laundry.

As it has happened, however, during the 48 months since June 2021 the industrial production index has been negative or flat nearly half the time on a month-over-month basis. For all practical purposes, the US industrial economy is just playing “mother may I”, advancing one step forward and the next step backwards month after month. And if that’s “strong” or even a sign of anything except decaying performance, we’d suggest the English language has lost all meaning.

As it happens, the disconnect becomes even more dramatic when you compare the production of goods since Q4 2007 with the constant dollar value of goods consumption (PCE) during the same period. That is to say, cumulative real consumption of goods (durable and non-durable) rose by 62% but domestic industrial output was up by only 1.4%!

Obviously, the yawning gap got filled by imports. On the margin, therefore, the growth of goods consumption during the last 17 years was based on imports financed by massive current account deficits.

Needless to say, the above disconnect was not due to a want of trying by means of Washington-based stimmies. The index lines for Federal Debt and the Fed’s balance sheet since 1954 show the opposite pattern to that embedded in the industrial index chart above. That is to say, growth was slow to moderate between 1954 and 2007, but then took off like a bat out of hell thereafter.

Thus, between 1954 and 2007, US Treasury debt outstanding grew by 6.5% per annum, while the Fed’s balance sheet expanded by 5.6% per year. During the last 17 years, by contrast, the public debt rose by 10.7% per year, and the Fed’s balance sheet grew by 13.3% per year.

To reprise, industrial production growth has essentially ground to a halt at 0.1% per year since 2007, notwithstanding a 13.3% per annum expansion of Fed credit. Self-evidently, all that high-powered central bank money was going somewhere, but clearly it was not into the production of goods on Main Street.

There is no mystery, however, as to where it actually went. Since Q4 2007, the NASDAQ 100 index has risen by 86-fold. In turn, the net worth of the top 1% of US households has soared from $18.9 trillion to $49.4 trillion.

Stated differently, industrial production went nowhere, even as the net worth of the top 1.35 million US households soared by nearly $31 trillion.

And yet and yet. Bubble vision today was replete with Wall Street experts rebuking the Donald in the name of the Fed’s purportedly sacrosanct “independence” for his impending plan to fire Jay Powell.

Then again, the Latin phrase “cui bono” immediately comes to mind. The answer to “who benefits” from the Fed’s so-called “independence” is surely not Main Street America.

The fact is, the Fed is neither a democratically accountable arm of the state nor an agency of the free market. It was, is, and may always be a tool of the traders and gamblers who inhabit the canyons of Wall Street.

To be sure, the Donald’s comprehension of monetary policy is about as wrong-headed as it gets, but his imminent frontal attack on the rogue institution domiciled in the Eccles Building may well be the only way to upend its destructive reign.

Reprinted with permission from David Stockman’s Contra Corner.

The post America Don’t Need No ‘Independent’ Fed appeared first on LewRockwell.

To maintain the illusion of knowing everything, science will often choose to simply ignore phenomena which are too complex for its existing models to explain. So, despite water having a myriad of remarkable properties necessary for life, few are recognized by science and the many scientists who’ve recognized the hidden side of water are largely forgotten.

For example, German naturalist Viktor Schauberger (1885-1958) discovered that much of what water accomplishes in nature arises from its travel not in a linear manner, but rather in constant spirals and vortices, and created many revolutionary devices.

In parallel, a team of Russian physiologists discovered the heart causes blood to travel in spiraling vortices, which drastically increases blood’s momentum and allows the heart to precisely direct where each type of blood goes within the body.

In short, water is thought of as a uniform, evenly mixed (homogenous) substance that exists to facilitate random mixing of biochemical reactants needed for life, despite abundant data (e.g., the Russian research) showing it often is highly structured.

Liquid Crystalline Water

Classically, we are taught water exists in three states: solid, liquid, and gas. However, throughout history, many researchers have observed that water (e.g., the “protoplasm” surrounding cells) assumes a gel-like state, behaving like a liquid crystal.

In 2009, after noticing that microspheres placed in water would be repelled by seemingly “empty” surfaces within the water Gerald Pollack was eventually able to explain how this seemingly impossible state of water was emerging. Once a few critical factors were present, water would assemble into a lattice on that surface, which prevented anything from passing through it, thereby creating an “exclusion zone” of water.

For exclusion zone water to form, it requires a hydrophilic surface, usually negatively charged. Once this condition is met, and electromagnetic energy is present (particularly infrared light, which exists everywhere), water, like a solar battery, will store that ambient energy by assembling into many layers of offset hexagonal sheets with the formula H₃O₂ often reaching 0.1mm in depth (which molecularly, is massive).

As Pollack describes:

This model yields a stable structure that sticks together naturally. This model yields predictable mechanical behavior: semisolid when left alone, yet able to flow in response to an imposed shear force. Its behavior should resemble gelatinous egg white.

Due to this lattice shape, each plane can easily slide past adjacent layers, allowing electrons to travel through the lattice with ease (resulting in conductivity approximately 100,000 times that of surrounding unstructured water).

Since this structure is “missing” protons (it’s H₁.₅O rather than H₂O), those protons go immediately outside the exclusion zone (EZ). Therefore, a negatively charged region exists within the EZ, while a positively charged region (which is acidic due to protons present) exists outside it. This, in turn, has been corroborated by numerous researchers who have both demonstrated a persistent pH change there and successfully harnessed its charge separation to power small electronics.

Since the negatively charged region exists in the crystalline structure, it prevents most substances and ions from existing within it. This separating quality has many uses including economical water purification and allowing cells to create the sodium potassium gradient which is necessary for life but far beyond what membrane pumps alone could accomplish (i.e., cells will continue to concentrate potassium after their membrane pumps are disabled).

Likewise, the EZ has increased viscosity, slowing substance diffusion, and can be directly observed by resonance imaging technologies detecting molecular restrictions (e.g., NMR and MRI).

Note: liquid crystalline water absorbs ultraviolet light (270 nm wavelength), radiates less infrared radiation than surrounding water, and has approximately 10% greater refractive index than bulk water. By each metric, EZ water has a higher density than normal water. It comprises the greatest water percentage at 4 degrees Celsius—the same temperature Viktor Schauberger identified as providing water’s greatest density.

This form of water is all around us in nature. For example, it forms the surface layer of water we typically associate with “surface tension” which is strong enough for water striders and certain lizards to stand upon. That layer, in turn, often behaves like a large connected sheet (best seen by observing large bodies of water from above) and when carefully examined, is actually a complex lattice that weaves through the body of water.

Note: Pollack has also made a strong case that liquid crystalline water facilitates different phase changes (e.g., freezing, water boiling, or water vapor becoming clouds).

Cellular Structural Integrity

Typically, cells are thought to be liquid bags whose contents are dictated by membrane lipids and proteins and held together by a cytoskeleton. However, liquid crystalline water (which forms along the cell membrane and the structures within cells) plays an equally pivotal structural role as it:

• Creates the gel-like stability of cells and tissue (which prevents them from suddenly leaking and spilling out once a puncture occurs).

• Creates a (continually regenerating) protective barrier which prevents things from entering the cells (and likewise protects the lining of blood vessels from being damaged by what flows past them or the load-bearing pivot point within joints from wearing down).

• Lubricates many surfaces, allowing them to slide past each other (e.g., the tendons and fascia are covered with a layer of this water). Conversely, as it disappears, tissues start to stick together (creating problematic adhesions), arthritis onsets, and the blood vessels become vulnerable to injury and atherosclerosis begins.
Note: this lubrication can also be observed outside the body (e.g., ice skating is possible because a layer of liquid crystalline water forms between the water and ice).

• Creates non-compressible pockets throughout the body, which are essential for biomechanics (e.g., joints have a layer of liquid crystalline water in the center which bears the force and weight of matching without becoming damaged or resisting the motion).

• These non-compressible structures allow the body to utilize a tensegrity based structure where elastic lines of tissue tension throughout the body can allow any force to be equally distributed throughout the body, both protecting any single area from buckling if exposed to excessive force and allowing free motion throughout the structure (rather than being like a typical building with a largely static one which relies on a single static core).

While many of these concepts initially appear quite abstract, one French hand surgeon found a way to visualize them through magnifying images obtained during surgery.

Mysteries of Microcirculation

All of the above raises many questions, one of which is how the 4th phase of water functions inside the body? I will present some of the findings below.

A consistent pattern emerges when examining each circulatory pathway in the body. Tiny spaces with no extrinsic force driving their flow simultaneously require regular movement through them, and without that flow, life cannot function.

Note: in many cases, the blood vessels through which red blood cells travel are smaller than the red blood cell, requiring the blood cell to deform to fit—something which could not occur without substantial force pushing the blood cell forward.

As the hydrostatic pumping force of the heart is largely absent at the capillary bed, many have wondered if an alternate driver of circulation exists. For example, spontaneous circulation can be observed in a developing embryo before heart development, while flow and pressures observed throughout the body are frequently inconsistent with heart-generated pressure being the driving force behind blood circulation.

When I’ve thought this question over at length, it does not seem realistic that the heart could provide enough force to move the red blood cells through every capillary in the body. What then could be causing the fluids inside the body to move?

Proton Induced Motion

Pollack and his team happened upon a chance discovery in their laboratory (discussed in great detail within this paper), which provided an answer to the mysteries of circulation:

Fluid commonly flows in response to an external pressure gradient. However, when a tunnel-containing hydrogel [which contains liquid crystalline water] is immersed in water, spontaneous flow occurs through the tunnel without any pressure gradient. We confirmed this flow in a wide range of plant- and animal-derived hydrogels.

As stated above, liquid crystalline water requires ambient infrared energy and a polar surface to form. A curious phenomenon occurs when that surface lines the inside of a tube—the liquid crystalline water lining the tube causes water to flow spontaneously through it.

EZs [regions of liquid crystalline water] were studied previously by immersing sections of tubes made of strongly hydrophilic material, Nafion, in aqueous microsphere suspensions. A microsphere-free EZ developed adjacent to the tube surface. In the central core of the tube, movement of microspheres demonstrated a flow, continuously sustaining itself at a velocity of ~10 μm/s in the axial direction… On the other hand, flow was not observed in tubes built of hydrophobic materials such as Teflon, which do not generate EZs.

Since liquid crystalline water’s formation requires ambient radiant energy, its presence influences observed flow:

We found that increased infrared energy substantially increased the flow velocity… application of ultraviolet-containing white light could boost flow velocity by up to 500%. Thus, the self-driven flow mechanism can convert radiant energy into kinetic energy.

Pollack theorized this flow was generated by mutual repulsion between positively charged protons expelled as water (H₂O) transitions to liquid crystalline (H₃O₂) water.

Several observations support this hypothesis. First, protons are continually added to water passing through:

We found that the exiting water had a lower pH value than the entering water; the pH difference exceeded one unit and never diminished — even after 30 minutes of continuous flow.

Second, flow was greatest in narrow tubes:

Another prediction of the proton-gradient hypothesis is that the flow should be faster in narrower tunnels…a narrower tunnel should lead to a higher proton concentration in the core…which should lead to faster flow in the narrower tunnels.

Note: narrow blood vessels are the most vulnerable to their blood flow being disrupted by an impaired zeta potential, and hence where the initial subtle signs of illness often appear.

Third, flow direction was always from the narrower end to the wider end:

A common feature shared among the various flows was the direction—always toward the region with a larger cross-section or volume.

Each fluid conduit in the body is lined with a material recognized to create liquid crystalline water. For example, all blood vessels are lined with a protective glycocalyx, which remarkably well-suited for creating liquid crystalline water on its surface. Likewise, liquid crystalline water generating biomolecules divide cells into compartments and simultaneously, by lining the gaps with liquid crystalline water, create a primitive circulatory system, facilitating the exchange of metabolites necessary to sustain life.

The biological flow of fluids independent of a central pump has also been explored in animals:

Blood can apparently flow without a beating heart. After the heart had been arrested, postmortem blood flow was confirmed in mice, rats, dogs, and chick embryos. The flow persisted from 15 minutes to several hours. Furthermore, some amphibian larvae could live up to 15 days following surgical removal of the heart, implying an alternative means for propelling blood.

In short, the human vascular system is structured so that expelled protons can drive circulation, something that hydrostatic pumping alone is not sufficient to do.

Note: other organisms also utilize this mechanism. Plants require significant internal water transportation, but they have no pumping organs. In the lab, Pollack demonstrated that the xylem creates liquid crystalline water and that this flow allows water to overcome gravity’s resistance and climb up tubes.

Read the Whole Article

The post The Hidden Powers of Water That Shape Our Health appeared first on LewRockwell.

I don’t think I’ve ever seen a movie with Sydney Sweeney in it. Sure, she’s easy on the eyes, in the way that so many blondes and brunettes before her have been. I guess I’ll add another “racist” notch on my belt by saying that White women look the best now, have always looked the best, and will always look the best to me.

Evidently, having a pretty blonde in a jeans ad, with the caption, “Sydney Sweeney has Great Jeans,” is yet another example of the White Privilege which Blacks seem to find everywhere. To my former blue collar worker mind, it just seems like a clever play on words, the kind I enjoy coming up with. But somehow, this has been deemed beyond racist, and perhaps a glorification of Hitler’s National Socialism. You know, Nazism. After all, it’s undeniable that Sweeney has the kind of Aryan looks that would have titillated the Fuhrer, one testicle and all. And that appears to be the main issue here. A lot of overweight, non-Aryan looking women are jealous. Hip hopping mad. Once again. And the ad was accused of “setting unreasonable standards of visual interest.” Which could be said about pretty much every advertisement in the history of Madison Avenue, prior to the past decade or so. Attractiveness was a known selling feature.

Rather astonishingly, it doesn’t appear that Sweeney has apologized. Yet. She was even seen wearing a tee shirt that proclaimed, “I apologize for having great tits.” Clever girl. Seems like the total Aryan package. I still expect that she will eventually issue the standard White apology, but so far she’s in the running to become the first White celebrity not to do so in the face of predictable “Woke” criticism. This is where we are at as a society; simply having a famous, good looking White as a spokesperson for, in this case, American Eagle jeans, can be considered “controversial.” They could have hired Dylan Mulvaney, the transgender who nearly broke Anheuser Busch when he was hired as the face of Bud Light. Or some obese Black woman. That’s always cool. The objective obviously isn’t to sell products, which we are told is the foundation of our wondrous capitalist system. Other agendas are clearly more important.

Because of decades of White capitulation in the face of increasingly irrational demands, any White in the spotlight is considered unworthy. Kind of like how working class Whites used to view all the Black Affirmative Action hires. What is never mentioned is how this anti-White agenda, this Great Replacement, contradicts the core beliefs of those who misrule us. Our leaders are virtually all eugenicists. They can’t stop telling you about that. The late Prince Philip, Ted Turner, Bill Gates- all have publicly declared that millions of human beings have to die. To make the planet “safe.” Climate Change and all that. The eugenics mindset, which is basically the credo of evolution- survival of the fittest, is historically connected with Adolf Hitler. Some eugenicists are more equal than others. It seems unfair to associate the murder of millions exclusively to him, when it’s perhaps the most frequently stated desire of those who despise him. Still make movies about him. Still call their enemies Nazis.

Hitler was known to admire American eugenicists, and their forced sterilization programs for the “feeble minded.” “Liberal” Woodrow Wilson, whom the court historians tell us was one of our greatest presidents, passed the first forced sterilization law, as governor of New Jersey. At its peak in the twentieth century, thirty two states legalized compulsory sterilization. Another great “liberal” hero, Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, the guy who invented the “You can’t yell fire in a crowded theater” line to justify imprisoning WWI protesters, spoke for the Court when it legalized this odious practice in 1927, observing that “three generations of imbeciles are enough.” The American Eugenics Society, supported by Teddy Roosevelt, and assorted Rockefellers, Carnegies, and Harrimans, advocated sterilizing a full ten percent of the population.

Over in Germany, a frustrated painter named Adolf Hitler was noticing, and approving. In Mein Kampf, he marveled that it wasn’t “our model German Republic,” but the United States, that was making progress on the eugenics front. Hitler wrote to American writer Madison Grant, author of The Passing of the Great Race, declaring, “The demand that defective people be prevented from propagating equally defective offspring is a demand of clearest reason and, if systematically executed, represents the most humane act of mankind.” F. Scott Fitzgerald was among Grant’s admirers, although it is doubtful he was a fan of Hitler. In the early 1920s, the Rockefeller Foundation funded a series of programs based on German eugenics research, and one of the grantees was Josef Mengele. He was a mere eugenicist at the time, like pretty much everyone who was anyone, and yet to become the “angel of death.”

Leading eugenicists like California’s CM Goethe visited Germany, and returned full of praise for how they were implementing eugenics programs. “Everywhere I sensed that their opinions have been tremendously stimulated by American thought,” he wrote. Goethe’s letter was considered important enough that the Human Betterment Foundation, a San Diego-based eugenics institute, included it in their 1935 annual report. Eventually, some American media outlets began criticizing the eugenics in Germany, because it was claimed that Jews were the primary target. It was perfectly fine to sterilize the common riff raff and the “feeble minded” of all races, but once that particular group, the one that even then was wielding extraordinarily disproportionate power, was targeted, eugenics quickly became “genocide.”

In 1917, Hollywood produced a film called The Black Stork, in which Dr. Harry Haiselden, chief of staff at a German-American hospital in Chicago, played himself. Haiselden was a thoroughly unpleasant character, who infamously performed what were in effect abortions of babies he determined were not worth saving because of some affliction or perceived weakness. I’m guessing Hitler liked that film. Abortion has always been closely associated with eugenics, and again, it was pushed then, as it is now, almost exclusively by the Left. I’m sure my readers are aware of the ugly philosophy of Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger. Sanger was a true racist, publicly supporting the eradication of Black people. I don’t care how obnoxious ghetto culture has become, it seems a whole lot easier, and far less evil, to simply hold them accountable in the same way everyone else is.

So we have a Left, including all the great “liberals” of the early twentieth century, approving of the weeding out of all those who are too “weak” for society. Survival of the fittest. That’s why I continue to condemn evolution, not only because it’s a stupid theory that is riddled with missing links, but because it triggered the eugenics movement. After all, if you’ve determined that all life isn’t sacred, that some people simply aren’t “fit” enough to survive, then you introduce the horrors of abortion, and euthanasia, and assisted suicide. You can find articles about how American “racism” inspired Hitler. But not how all the leading “liberals” of that era inspired him. And, of course, at the risk of lowering my social credit score even further, the atrocities attributed to Hitler are very questionable, to put it kindly. But the forced sterilizations that were committed in this country, for much of the twentieth century, are on the record. But the victims of that horror didn’t write books or get portrayed onscreen.

Read the Whole Article

The post Sydney Sweeney, Whiteness, and Eugenics appeared first on LewRockwell.

Who really has their pulse on the conditions of the market and the economy? Every day we get “flash signs” of things to come. Jobless claims go up, consumer confidence goes down and economists toss the economic crisis ball back and forth.

Shipping volume has fallen, and everything is lining up with the numbers of 2008.

This is the messaging we get on a daily basis. I think most economists and financial bloggers are doing their best to keep us ahead of another crash like in 2008. However, the next economic crisis isn’t going to look anything like 2008

When you take an armed nation that has so overspent itself for the last 50 years and threaten a situation like economic collapse, it doesn’t get any worse. We have clear modern-day examples of what an economic crash can look like. See Venezuela. However, history knows nothing about what the American economic crisis will look like.

The numbers of those dead will look, to historians, like the greatest war ever waged on Earth’s soil. We are a nation divided that seems to be looking for a reason to get at each other’s throats. With the onset of things like resource scarcity and inflation, your life will be at risk.

So how will you die in during an economic crisis?

#1. Early Stage Riots

The early days of the economic crisis will be calm in comparison to what is to come. We will see national riots that encompass every major city across the nation. These riots will be brought on by massive job loss, bank runs, exorbitant cost of goods and the rebellious nature of the American people.

These will be violent, bloody riots that are much different than anything we have seen in this nation. If you get swept up into one of these riots it could be your life. However, this is just the beginning.

#2. Robbery

While riots may satisfy the desperate and the unprepared during the daytime hours, they will get hungry and even more angry at night. Just as with any disaster we will see robbery after the collapse of the economy. However, robbery and the murder associated with it will be at such a massive scale, as people scrounge for food, cash and valuables, local authorities will be overwhelmed.

You might die at the hands of a robber. Or you might die at the hands of a home owner. Remember, it only takes one robbery while you are at work to steal all your stored food and supplies. Then you will be one of the desperate, as well.

#3. Ransom

Another hot new market will be kidnapping. If you have any money or influence you can bet you are going to be targeted for ransom. Kidnapping for ransom is a popular practice in places like Mexico. It’s a tool of the cartels. The radical Mideast and African Muslims also use it to fund their failing Jihad.

There is no telling just how bad life can get for you if you get kidnapped and your family does not have the money to pay the ransom. It won’t be a fun way to go.

#4. Disease

As the nation dives deeper into collapse, we will see important infrastructure fall along with it. Trash collection, water treatment and waste management in general will come to a halt. The pests and disease that will come next will undoubtedly be the biggest killer of all.

Human waste and pests will spread disease like wild fire and there will be no doctors to help.

#5. Starvation

Large scale agriculture will stop. Farmers are already shutting down operations left and right due to the low profit margins. If government subsidies stopped, it would literally be impossible to afford. That means the world would face widespread starvation or the American heartland might even be occupied by foreign nations that handle food production.

#6. Hospital Blackout

The high-risk population of those hooked up to machines at the hospital will also be in grave danger. While hospitals have backup generators, they run on fuel and when that fuel runs out all those machines will go out.

A hospital blackout, for those in places like the ICU is a certain death sentence. It’s scary but it’s a very real situation that could come from the blackouts associated with an economic crisis.

#10. Lack of Medications

A large percentage of Americans are on meds that they take daily. Things like blood pressure meds to insulin for controlling blood sugar levels. What about all those people on bi polar, anti-schizophrenics and anti-depressants.

During an economic collapse the movement and production of medications will come to a halt. That means all those who need that kind of help will have to self-medicate however they can or die. Are you one of those Americans on medications? Is there someone you love who is?

When Does It All Begin?

The answer is: Now.

Maybe the riots don’t start now. Maybe the markets don’t completely crash, right now. However, you can start preparing right now.

Forget about everything else and focus on preparedness. Take small steps each week or month to get yourself in a better position. Food, water, backup power, security, first aid and evacuation are some great places to start.

Maybe its economic collapse or maybe its something else. The reality is, we cannot live on eternal prosperity. What you prepare for today will decide how you survive the future.

This article was originally published on Preppgroup.

The post 10 Ways You Can Die During an Economic Crisis appeared first on LewRockwell.

Without Fed-delivered wealth and power-center demographics, DC’s parasitic government and by extension, its police force, could not function as successfully as it does.  Zoologists are correct about the host-parasite relationship, and Trump critics are correct in reporting the DC crime has actually been down, not up.

Yet, Trump is true to form.  Reacting as a statist leader (and real estate developer) to a crime committed against a person he knows personally, Trump deployed the National Guard to assist with cleaning up the town. Congress, the deep state, and possibly the courts will go along with this use of, and show of, force not because it is necessary or constitutional, but because it is good for them politically and materially, and because it sets one more useful precedent for federal power.  It’s truly a win-win for them.

“Bill Balls” Coristine lived up to his nickname on August 3rd.  Trump, however, has long shown his proclivity to use of the state’s military/law enforcement activities in a variety of domestic roles – mainly under the wholly contrived Department of Homeland Security, now almost 25 years old.  In this way, if not in others, Trump is an echo of Bill Clinton – happy to lie, cheat and steal in order to present the state as all-powerful against people it expects to stand down, shut up, comply and kneel.  The abuse of law, and murder of men, women and children, and the government coverup afterwards in Waco is well documented in the 1997 documentary “Rules of Engagement.” Yet even today, we see concentrated and renewed efforts by state-friendly media to justify all state actions, to bless state crime, to condemn the victims who “caused it to happen.”

Trump is oriented to increasing and utilizing federal force, both military and economic, to protect Americans – their lives, their conditions, their economy.  Rather than a philosopher who thinks about how things should be – is man to be self-governed? should the state be limited? is war immoral? –Trump is a technician who assesses the “problem” with the “unit” and seeks to repair or replace it.  Dave Chappelle was dead on.

Like Bill Clinton, and Hillary as Secretary of State under Obama, Trump seeks to leverage power and threats of power, to seek or enforce what the state calls “peace.”  As with the Clintons, peace is just a condition from which to profit, and if the peace is not profitable, then perhaps a regime change or a bombing or a trade war will serve just as well.

Trump is far more sincere and patriotic than either of the Clintons, which makes him a more attractive candidate, and his fix-it mentality has made him a minor threat to those actually moving and shaking the increasingly brittle US empire.  There is no cure for a dying empire, of course, except that it recedes and washes away, and how that happens depends far less on the capitol rulers themselves than on the people who were once ruled by that capitol.  The kids are going to be all right.

I wonder if we – by practicing Washington-ology much as our wise men practiced Kreminology during the Soviet era – can see something explainable, and better yet, predictable by studying the Trump regime?

It occurs to me that Trump’s instinctive desires to protect Washingtonians from crime, Americans from open border criminality, Ukraine’s people from Russian onslaught, and a very stupid Israeli government destroying itself by picking fights it cannot win (the “ending” of the 12 day war courtesy of little more than Trump saying so) – are refreshing.  Trump’s psychology leans to the protective, and it is probably why neither of his ex-wives have a bad thing to say about him.  It’s why he received across-the-spectrum support of a country where health, welfare, purchasing power, and community have all declined since the bad 1970s.  People who feel unprotected and vulnerable want a protector, a leader, a savior – and Trump is the ultimate republicrat, willing to functionally deploy more “state” to provide a fix to our broken appliance of late-stage empire.

Unable to elect the libertarian leaders they all fundamentally want, Americans elected a guy who believed in defending the weak, even as he has made his entire business and political career by identifying and destroying his competitors, honing in on their weaknesses, and taking no prisoners.

So what does this mean for the biggest travesty on the planet right now, the US funded and assisted Israeli destruction of Gaza (already completed) and the ongoing murder and starvation of the 1.6 million or so remaining Gazans that the IDF has herded into concentration camps?  Israel’s permanent answer to criticism of its decades of apartheid strategy is largely meaningless statement that “Israel has a right to defend itself.” Lately we are seeing Netanyahu promoting a two-tiered message: that Israel will militarily expand to create an even larger apartheid state, and “it’s not a genocide ‘cause if we wanted to genocide the Gazans, we would have done it in one day.”

Both messages are criminally aspirational, and both are operationally false. After two decades, the Netanyahu regime is on its last legs, and his successors have none of Bibi’s gangsta charm and familiarity with America that keeps the mother’s milk of USG billions flowing and Israel-friendly policies rolling.

Trump has “solved” six conflicts in six months – and with the August 15th summit in Anchorage, he may be able to claim seven.  Yet, the cream of the crop remains unsolved, desperate, broken and criminally energized.

The responsibility to defend both values and country is Constitutional, and while Trump may have no idea what’s in the Constitution, he does know his oath, and it meshes well with his personality of defender.  Trump seeks the international stage, and international plaudits, and while he often condemns the UN, it remains a stage he covets, an organization he would like to fully control.

There is a way forward for Trump to get that Peace Prize, to move through a settlement of the Ukraine war and deal directly with number 8, the Gaza genocide, now in its end stages, but with 1.5 million surviving Gazans and 2.4 million targeted Palestinians in the West Bank.  The number of surviving Palestinians in Israeli-occupied territories would populate a Palestinian state similar in population to Mongolia, Georgia or Croatia.  Most UN member states already recognize a Palestinian state, and most agree that Israel blatantly refuses to protect the populations it occupies.

Twenty years ago, the UN established the Right to Protect, aimed specifically at genocides and forced starvations.  Idealistic, not realistic, but R2P could provide a toehold for Trump – seeking peace and a legacy – to do what I think he really wants to do – and that is to limit his own, and the American government’s, vulnerability to Zionist money and Zionist blackmail.

Israel’s army is not designed to do much defending, as we saw during Day 3 through Day 12 of the artfully idiotic “12 Day War.”  It is poorly trained, and as a people’s army, ill-suited for the Zionist vision of continual expansion and genocide.  Its strengths tend to terrorism, in a justified nod to the original Zionist military units.  Israel, for all its lies, bluster, murder and theft can be viewed as a wounded baby seal, and Trump as a dead-eyed shark.

Unconstrained by history, tradition, philosophy or the Constitution – Trump may independently and intuitively perceive two primary weaknesses that Israeli voters already know:  1) its government allowed October 7th to happen in order to expedite the elimination of Palestinians and grabbing their land while its American sponsor was still bought and paid for, and 2) that this war is destroying Israel’s morale, military, and economic power in a way that looks to be permanent.

The Dave Chappelle video linked above includes a comment by statist historian Victor David Hanson, regarding a past Trump quid pro quo.  Many of us believe that if Washington stops starting and funding other people’s wars, we will see peace, liberty and prosperity grow.  Mr Trump, if you can reconcile your natural urge to defend and to protect, you’ll not only get a big prize, you will have earned it.

The post Can Responsibility To Defend and Responsibility To Protect Be Reconciled? appeared first on LewRockwell.