Aggregatore di feed

If you seek a general theme in this moment’s tempestuous events, try No submission. It’s behind events in the Middle East and in the USA — and across Western Civ ultimately. No submission to what, you ask? To willful evil. Of course, the willfully evil will not see it that way, and great quarrels will arise over who-and-what represents the evil abroad in the world.

Iran advertised countless times its resolve to wipe Israel off the map, in so many words. Israel was not inclined to submit to that outcome and it closely monitored Iran’s practical steps to acquire deliverable nuclear bombs. Israel, in turn, advertised that Iran’s nuclear program would not be allowed to succeed. The world stood by waiting to see who’s advertising jibed with reality.

Now you know. Never Again is not an empty slogan. The Shiite jihad has been put down, and the effort will continue until the answer is beyond dispute, days, maybe a week or more. Iran’s civil leadership was willing to talk, or at least pretend to talk down to the last hour, but the mullahs above them obdurately pushed ahead toward nuclear jihad. Not going happen, Israel assured them. And so, here we are.

The world situation amounts to a set of jihads of different varieties. In our country, the Democratic Party has been waging jihad against order, liberty, truth, and decency. You can tell it’s jihad because it’s irrational, frankly, insane. Americans are asked to submit to propositions that will destroy the country and its traditions, and they have had enough of the hustles aimed at that outcome.

Too many of us do not believe that uncontrolled illegal immigration is okay, that government should replace the family, that all journeys in life can be equally favorable, that men can become women by wishing it, that our history must be erased, that censorship is required to keep the jihad going, and that the punishment against citizens will continue until morale improves.

That is the program of the American left and lately of the Democratic Party it has taken over. They demonstrate it by their deeds. The Party represents a dwindling cohort of the populace, but its forces have already marched through and captured many institutions crucial to our national life. The opposing force, loosely called Populism, will not submit to that program, is now actively putting a stop to as much of it as possible, shaking out those institutions.

The Left and the Democrats have lost a lot of ground in recent months, especially their control on the levers of power. And since power is really all they care about — the power to make everybody else submit — they are growing desperate, seeking to induce as much chaos across the land as they can possibly generate. Hence, the outbreaks of civil disorder in the cities, using illegal immigrants as one set of shock troops and mentally-ill youth as another phalanx.

The object of the chaos is to provoke the Populist opposition to exert its authority to control that chaos, and therefore — in the insane reasoning of the leftists — to prove that authority itself is an intolerable wickedness. This is only possible, of course, in minds that do not comprehend boundaries, differences between right and wrong, up and down, inside and outside, reality and fantasy. That is the mentality that drives itself toward chaos. So, it remains for the Populists to demonstrate that authority is not innately wicked, that it can have a beneficent purpose in the scheme of civilized humanity. Order is not necessarily tyranny.

The other once-great nations of Western Civ — Britain, Germany, France — slump towards collapse, having already submitted to the EU, run by an unelected, dictatorial, bureaucracy, under the occult influence of megalomaniacs such as Bill Gates and the Soros family. The newly-arrived hordes of Islamic immigrants in these countries demand submission of the Europeans, and the Europeans have so far failed to resist. But an inflection point draws near, and the latent ferocity of the indigenous population has yet to express itself. It may be too late to avert some kind of violent civil conflict across the continent. Governments will surely fall. Mighty empires die of old age and are conquered, alas.

Here in the USA, we await the “No Kings” actions planned for hundreds of cities and towns across the land, meticulously organized by a host of NGOs, even funded by grifts run through government itself, such as the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights (CHIRLA), gifted with $34-million from California taxpayers. Billionaire Walmart heiress Christy Walton is allegedly behind the NGO that styles itself as “Indivisible,” the principal org promoting Saturday’s “No Kings” actions. You can suppose that the idea is to flood-the-zone with so many demonstrations in so many places that at least some of them will get yeasty with violence — tempting populist authority to assert itself. . . so that the left can call them “fascists.”

That label has probably lost its mojo. The Populist opposition has drawn a line against this shuck-and-jive, just as Israel drew a line against its declared enemy acquiring nuclear weapons. The lines, you see, are clearly drawn. The game is on.

Reprinted with permission from Kunstler.com.

The post Game On appeared first on LewRockwell.

Iran has responded to Israel’s blatant attack in the weakest way possible–an appeal to the United Nations.  The attack killed the Iranian commander of the Revolutionary Guards, the deputy chief of the army and several scientists, destroyed facilities and residential housing.  

Washington disavows any responsibility for Israel’s act of war, but was quick to assure its Israeli master that the US would protect Israel from Iranian “aggression” should Iran respond to the attack.  Washington quickly turned Israel’s aggression into an act of self-defense with Israeli puppet House Speaker Mike Johnson affirming “Israel’s right to self-defense:  “Israel IS right–and has a right–to defend itself!”  Another Israeli puppet, House Armed Services Committee Chairman Mike Rogers, denounced Iran–the country attacked– as “the aggressor.”  Washington’s message to Iran is that retaliation against the Israeli attack will be considered aggression against Israel and the US.  Having been indoctrinated by years of the “war on terror” narrative, the US population is ready for war with Iran.

President Trump, Israel’s prime puppet, said that he knew of the planned strikes in advance and that the United States will defend Israel. As President Trump knew, did not intervene, and did not warn Iran, Washington does have responsibility for the attack.

The Iranians are shooting off their mouths but not weapons.

I blame the leaders of Russia, China, and Iran.  A mutual security agreement between the three countries would bring peace to the Middle East, Ukraine and Europe, and Asia.  Israel is not going to attack Iran if it means real war with Russia and China.  Is it lack of vision or plain stupidity that is responsible for the lack of a mutual defense treaty?

Where were Iran’s air defenses?  Did Putin forbid Iran from using the Russian S-400 air defense system against Israel?  How was Iran caught off guard when news reports indicated an attack was coming?  Why do Arabs and Iranians sit on their butts and allow Israel and the US to always have the initiative and to knock them off one by one? Are they stupid or afraid to resist? 

When Israel invaded Gaza, it was a perfect time for Iran to unleash its missiles on Israel and for Hezbollah to invade Israel.  Instead, Iran stupidly demonstrated to Israel that its missiles could penetrate the US-built Iron Dome without doing any damage to Israel, thus gratuitously giving away Iran’s strategic advantage.  Hezbollah sat on its butt and was decapitated by Israel.  Next the US and Russia conspired in the overthrow of Syria, thereby permitting Israel’s expansion into southern Syria. The last remaining Arab fighting force is the small band of Houthis in Yemen. 

Iran has the capability to seriously damage Israel and to wipe out US bases and carriers in the region.  But Iran probably figures that if it uses its military capability successfully, the embarrassment to the US could result in a US nuclear attack on Iran.  The only thing that could prevent such an attack would be a Russian-Chinese announcement that their nuclear umbrella covers Iran.  But neither the Russian or Chinese government would take this step.  

The conclusion seems to be that the destruction of the Muslim states will continue until the Middle East is either turned into Greater Israel or into an American neo-colonial empire.

Far from being a peace president, war will be the hallmark of the Trump administration.

What we have witnessed with Washington’s orchestrations of wars that destroyed Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Syria, and Lebanon and now target Iran, and with Washington and Europe’s support of Israel’s genocide of the Palestinians, is the complete absence of morality in the Western World.  The West is capable of unleashing any calamity from pandemics to nuclear war.  The absence of honesty on this point ensures that it will happen.

The post Will War Be the Hallmark of the Trump Administration? appeared first on LewRockwell.

If you thought that the leftist delusions of grandeur had finally hit their peak you are about to be unpleasantly surprised. There are no limits to the insanity that progressives will embrace in their pursuit of power, and they continue to adhere to the fantasy that they are the “good guys” despite the fact that most of the world has been telling them for the past several years that their ideology is repugnant.

The events in Los Angeles are just the beginning and the path this situation will take is relatively predictable. There is a large enough percentage of the US population (around 25% to 30%) that is inexorably rooted in the ideologies of Marxism and multiculturalism. Many of them might not even understand what they’re supporting, but they’ll still do what they’re told by their gatekeepers.

For decades now the progressives have treated America like an experiment in social engineering; the US has been their personal multicultural playground. What has them enraged today is the fact that they are hitting a wall of opposition. They aren’t used to being told “No” and the only way they know how to respond is by lashing out.

The agenda is simple enough to understand – Open borders, third world replacement of the native population, a complete overhaul of our culture’s fundamental principles and ultimately the utilization of the foreign populace and leftist activists as a weapon to eliminate any resistance.

Interference on a political level is met with mob violence, looting, rioting and eventually terrorist actions and assassinations. This is the classic model of leftist revolutions throughout modern history. They seem to be disjointed and reactionary, yet their efforts end up highly coordinated and conveniently timed. There is nothing “grassroots” about these movements.

Currently, there is a push to make the LA riots go national with something called the “No Kings” protests scheduled to take place in cities across the country this weekend at the same time as the US Army’s 250th anniversary celebration (and Donald Trump’s birthday). The Democrats continue to spin the narrative that Trump is a dictator or “king” when he was duly elected by the majority of Americans and almost everything he has done so far is in line with what he promised during his campaign.  All the usual suspects are pushing the spread of the riots, from NGOs to Democrat politicians to the corporate media.

There are some hilarious hot takes floating around social media concerning this event. Some leftists are claiming that conservatives are “running scared” and going quiet in the face of the protests. This is simply a lie. Conservatives are actually laughing at activists because the crazies still don’t understand the level of FAFO they are playing with.

Others are arguing for the secession of the west coast to Canada, which isn’t going to happen because an army of rednecks could invade and conquer Canada in a week. Canada has no capacity to protect themselves, let alone retain California, Oregon and Washington.

Finally, numerous Mexican and Democrat representatives are demanding the “return” of California to Mexico, claiming the lands were stolen. Of course, the US handed the Mexicans their ass 200 years ago and California was ceded to the US through the Treaty of Guadelupe Hidalgo. To the victors go the spoils. Also, Also, Mexico belonged to Spain and was only a country for a couple decades before they were defeated in the Mexican-American conflict.

Apparently, the Mexican government needs a reminder of who their daddy is…

My point? There is a hailstorm of stupidity and naivety on the part of of the socialist mob and it’s getting worse by the week. They really think they have some kind of momentum. Progressive commentators including Bill Maher have been claiming that most of the country doesn’t want mass deportations, they just want violent criminals removed. They argue that getting rid of “Pedro the construction worker” or “Juanita the waitress” will be the end of conservative governance.

They still don’t get it.

The majority of Americans VOTED FOR THIS. They want mass deportations. All illegal migrants are criminals by definition and the public wants them gone. I’m even seeing most Libertarians (who often waffle on these kinds of issues) and black Americans call for illegals to be aggressively booted out.

Native born Americans want their country back and they certainly aren’t going to allow Democrats to flood the population with migrants so they can manipulate future elections. But the problem goes far beyond rigging the census or offering sweeping amnesty initiatives to create a voting block of third worlders. As we have recently seen in LA, there is an agitation plot afoot…

My primary theory on the engineered migrant invasion of the west has long been that these people are not just being used to score a voting majority in the near future, or as a tool for cultural replacement, but that they are a kind of mercenary army – An entitled mob purchased with welfare subsidies that will turn to violence to secure what they see as their piece of the shrinking American pie.

Progressive leaders and their NGO partners have deliberately positioned these migrant populations to be used as foot soldiers in an eventual soft coup. They believe that when the Trump Administration cracks down on the riots it will inspire even more unrest in other cities, creating a spiraling crisis. The foreign invasion tactic is part of what I call the “Monkey Wrenching” of America.

In my article ‘The “Monkey Wrench” Sabotage Of America Begs For An Authoritarian Response’, published in January, I outlined the history of far-left attacks on conservative or traditionalist societies including their attempts to overrun Germany in the 1920s (which ultimately led to misguided public support for socialist fascism).

I argued that the political left and the globalists have been reeling from a sharp reversal in political gains and that they are on the retreat. However, they still have a destructive play up their sleeve in the form of a civil war triggered by sabotage and migrant unrest. I noted in January:

“Leftists throughout modern history have a habit of engaging in destabilization efforts when they don’t get what they want. They view their motivations as sacrosanct and beyond criticism, be it “saving democracy” or “saving the planet” or “taking down capitalists and colonists”.

In every case where the political left had influence over social conditions and then lost that power, they revert to directed exponential disruption and violence from riots to assassination. They claim to care about the right of the majority to have their voices heard, but in reality they don’t care at all. When the majority goes against the leftist narrative, leftists go rogue…”

In my article ‘Why Mass Deportations Are Necessary And How To Keep Illegals From Coming Back’, published in February, I predicted the exact tactic the leftist gatekeepers were likely to exploit:

“As we’ve seen in the first weeks of Trump’s presidency, establishment Democrats are intent on interfering with deportations in any way they can (all the future power of leftists requires forced immigration to the US from socialist leaning countries). By extension, leftist activists will seek to disrupt deportation efforts using civil unrest (when the weather warms up these goblins will come out in droves, bank on it).

On top of the internal sabotage, there are many foreign governments that will desperately try to obstruct the return of so many unwanted citizens. Keep in mind that the US is seen by these governments as a dumping ground for their refuse. America is a steam valve to release the pressure so that these countries can get rid of their criminals, revolutionaries and those in poverty…”

There is a clear organized strategy in play to destabilize the US, and the limited unrest over deportations is being exploited as a snowball that leftists hope will create an avalanche. They co-opted the death of George Floyd (who died from Fentanyl overdose) to instigate the BLM riots. They used the war in Gaza to agitate for riots at American universities. They will try to hijack the migrant issue as yet another excuse for national violence.

My suspicion is that the “No Kings” protests will probably fall flat throughout most of the country except in usual suspect cities (LA, New York, Chicago, Portland, Seattle, etc). But, there’s no telling how much cash is behind this operation and how many useful idiots they will dredge up through social media propaganda. If not this week, then eventually, there will be a wider civil breakdown. The illegal migrant agenda is their last chance and they aren’t going to let it fade away easily.

So, here is what’s going to happen and I want to explain this reality to leftists directly:

You’re going to experience a defeat on a level you can’t yet fathom. It’s not going to be fair, it’s going to be ugly. You truly have no idea what is about to happen to you. And, it’s not going to be riot cops, or the National Guard or even the US Marines that serve up the smackdown, it’s going to be regular American conservatives.

Progressive commentators continue focusing on Trump as if he’s going to be wearing the boot that steps on their necks. That’s not how this will go down. You have NO CLUE how many millions of conservatives are fed up with the constant sabotage and cry-bullying of the political left. They are anxious to step in. Listen because I’m doing you a favor here – Just stop, because if you do what you claim you want to do (national riots and infrastructure disruption), we are going to end you.

The switch is about to be flipped. One day soon, without warning, every conservative man in the country is going find themselves reading a particularly egregious news report. They’re going to take off from their jobs which they have been working diligently for most of their lives, they’re going to hug their families, walk out the front door, get in a truck loaded with combat gear, they’re going to show up in droves at the nearest leftist riots, and steeped in an array of skills that they have been carefully practicing for years, they’re going to put those people down flat.

There will be skeptics who will say this is never going to happen. Those people are idiots. They don’t know conservatives, they don’t talk to conservatives. Mark my words, if the current trend continues it’s going to happen and leftists don’t stand a chance (the feds under Obama learned this at Bundy Ranch). So, quit, before it’s too late. Because once it starts it’s not going to stop until every leftist rioter and saboteur is run out of the US or fitted for a wooden box. If you’re on the political left, civil war is the last thing you should want.

Reprinted with permission from Alt-Market.us.

The post And so It Begins: Leftist Monkey Wrenching Is Leading to Civil War appeared first on LewRockwell.

Envy is one of the seven deadly sins but ever present among the writing classes. One would think they’d fake it, but envy, like unrequited love, cannot be easily hidden. I recently read a review of a Bill Buckley biography, one that pricked my fairness button despite the writer’s pretense of objectivity. It was a not-so-subtle attack on my onetime mentor William F. Buckley, but the more the hack tried to hide his envy of the great conservative icon, the more it stuck out, like a giant pimple on the tip of the nose of a handsome woman.

But before I go on about an envious bum called Louis Menand, I’d like to tell you a little bit about how it was back in rainy old London when I started a column in The Spectator, the world’s oldest weekly—a column that ran for 46 years, to be exact. A female journalist came to my London house having asked for an interview after a few months of my column appearing each week. I was 39 years of age and had recently moved to London from Paris. I had covered wars in Vietnam and the Middle East and had decided to settle down in London. My father had bought me a nice house with a double garden in a chic section of town, and word had gotten out that I was a generous party giver.

“The more the hack tried to hide his envy of the great conservative icon, the more it stuck out.”

On the morning of the interview, I was suffering from a hangover and happened to mention it to the rather unpleasant female reporter. She asked me about the house, how I could afford it on my Spectator salary, and that’s when the penny dropped. Her disapproving look got to me. Who the hell, I thought to myself, does this woman think she is? Doesn’t a father have the right to gift his son with a house after the son’s close to ten years of wartime peregrinations? Her face contorted even more when I happily told her that my father had also gifted me with a beautiful sailing boat and some other things I simply invented. By the time I finished, the deformity of her face would have intrigued a thousand plastic surgeons, but I was just starting.

For any of you Takimag readers, I did this because I smelled envy and jealousy the moment the woman walked into my house. So instead of playing it down, I amped it up, something I have done ever since only for the benefit of jealous journalists. And boy, was she jealous! She did a thoroughly good hatchet job on me, one that bothered the then editor of the magazine I wrote for, until I let him in on my little secret. I had entrapped that ghastly woman who had come into my house under false pretenses of objectivity, and had made her hate me to the point where she looked even uglier than she already was.

This all took place close to fifty years ago. Bill Buckley was the man who gave me my first break in journalism, but he was also a close friend to me and my wife, a skiing and sailing companion with whom I skied every winter for thirty or more years in Gstaad and sailed around Europe on my boat with his and my family. His son Christopher was best man when I married my wife Alexandra. Sadly, when Bill’s wife Pat died, Bill called me and asked me to come to his Stamford house, which I did, along with another friend and Bill’s brothers and sisters. For any of you who might not be familiar with his work (he died in 2008), Bill was the modern father of conservatism, a syndicated columnist, a TV host, a writer of fifty-some-odd books and novels, a great debater, the founder of a national magazine, a spellbinding orator…you name it, he did it—excellently. He was also a generous host, owned two beautifully kept houses, and played the harpsichord almost professionally. His “patrician manner, salon wit, and gold-plated vocabulary” stood out when debating or interviewing lesser beings. This angered hoi polloi like Menand and many others. Buckley also was among the first to point out that “newspapermen, publishers, commentators, and professors” imposed their left-wing views on an unwary public that saw them as unbiased.

What Menand found to attack Buckley with writing in The New Dentist was what the magazine, back then known as The New Yorker, had printed. It was Bill’s book called Overdrive, a journal covering a week in Buckley’s very, very busy schedule. The envious hack did not like Buckley’s mention of his sailboat, his limo, or his swimming pool. I could feel the hack’s envy slowly seeping out, green and foul-smelling. And the envious one brought up Bill Buckley’s father’s anti-Semitism. What he didn’t mention was Bill’s philo-Semitism, one that made him believe the lies of Israel agents like the Podhoretzes, Kristols, and Wolfowitzes. See what I mean by envy and jealousy? What did Bill’s father have to do with his son except having given him an excellent education and a comfortable home? Envy should be a punishable offense, but there are not enough jails, alas.

This article was originally published on Taki’s Magazine.

The post The Bane of Buckley appeared first on LewRockwell.

WASHINGTON, D.C. — Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has announced eight appointments for the CDC’s top vaccine advisory panel, following his dismissal of all 17 previous members, citing a need to rebuild public trust in the federal immunization process.

On Monday, I took a major step towards restoring public trust in vaccines by reconstituting the Advisory Committee for Immunization Practices (ACIP). I retired the 17 current members of the committee. I’m now repopulating ACIP with the eight new members who will attend ACIP’s…

— Secretary Kennedy (@SecKennedy) June 11, 2025

RFK Jr. said the new Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) will demand “definitive safety and efficacy data” before issuing any new vaccine recommendations and will re-evaluate existing guidance. The restructured panel is set to convene on June 25.

The appointees include several prominent physicians and scientists, including former Harvard epidemiologist Martin Kulldorff and mRNA researcher Robert Malone, both known for their criticism of COVID-19-era public health policy and the COVID-19 shots.

Kulldorff helped draft the Great Barrington Declaration with Jay Bhattacharya and Sunetra Gupta, which called for focused protection rather than mass lockdowns – a position widely debated among epidemiologists. He also spoke out strongly against vaccine passports and mandates, as well as mask mandates and contact tracing. He was dismissed from Harvard in 2024 because of his refusal to receive the COVID-19 injections.

Malone, who conducted early work on mRNA vaccine delivery systems, was banned from several platforms for posts deemed “misleading” during the COVID crisis. He has given related interviews on The Joe Rogan Experience and elsewhere and was reinstated on X following Elon Musk’s revision of COVID-19 policies.

Retsef Levi, a professor at MIT, has raised concerns about potential cardiovascular risks linked to COVID-19 mRNA shots and has called for stricter safety monitoring. In 2023, a petition circulated opposing his work, though it did not gain traction.

Other appointees include:

• Joseph Hibbeln, an NIH psychiatrist and nutrition researcher focused on immune and neurodevelopmental health.
• Cody Meissner, a pediatric infectious disease expert with previous experience on both FDA and CDC vaccine panels.
• James Pagano, a veteran emergency physician with decades of clinical experience.
• Vicky Pebsworth, a nurse-scientist with prior FDA vaccine advisory roles and Pacific Region Director of the National Association of Catholic Nurses. She is also a Lay Dominican.
• Michael Ross, an OB-GYN and clinical researcher with a background in immunology and women’s health policy.

Kennedy framed the move as part of a broader campaign to remove conflicts of interest and restore credibility to federal vaccine recommendations. Just a few days ago, he accused the panel of having been “little more than a rubber stamp for any vaccine” and pledged that the new members would not have direct ties with the vaccine industry.

The new ACIP, he said, will be focused on what RFK called “gold-standard science” and “common sense.” The June meeting will mark the beginning of its work.

This article was originally published on LifeSIte News.

The post RFK Jr. Appoints Robert Malone, Other Covid Shot Critics to Overhauled CDC Vaccine Panel appeared first on LewRockwell.

From the Tom Woods Letter:

Nobody can be exactly sure what’s going on here.

Just days ago, Donald Trump said to reporters that he had told Benjamin Netanyahu that military intervention “would be inappropriate to do right now because we’re very close to a solution. Now, that could change at any moment. It could change with a phone call. But right now, I think they want to make a deal. And, if we can make a deal, [it would] save a lot of lives.”

And then we have the Israeli strikes from yesterday.

So at first, people wondered: is Netanyahu simply defying and humiliating Trump, and deliberately sabotaging ongoing negotiations?

But then we’re hearing that from Mark Dubowitz of the “Foundation for the Defense of Democracies” that “President Trump’s deception campaign against Khamenei and the Islamic Republic will take its place as one of the most effective ever run by a political leader.”

And then we have this statement, which certainly sounds like the U.S. is now on the hook for all this:

The original Iran deal was an extremely rare case of sanity from Barack Obama, a president I opposed more strongly than did almost anyone you know, so there was no need to be in these negotiations in the first place.

Sean Davis of The Federalist represents that part of the American right that has grown weary of the war propaganda and profiteering, and explains why nobody in his right mind would trust the American regime at this point:

I am already aware of the platitudes and slogans and propaganda, so there is no need to email me a response that repeats them to me.

I want to get more information before writing anything further, but I will assuredly be discussing this topic on the very first Tom Woods Show episode to air next week.

Never pay for a book again: TomsFreeBooks.com

The post What Just Happened in Iran appeared first on LewRockwell.

We all knew that this was coming.  When voters came out in force last November to make sure that President Trump’s margin of victory exceeded Democrats’ systemic fraud, it was obvious what would happen next.  Democrats would do what Marxist globalists and Western Intelligence agencies have been doing across the world for many years: instigate riots, mayhem, sabotage, and general rebellion.

As any thinking person now understands, whenever the powers that be don’t get the election results they want, they just foment revolution and work to overturn the will of the people (see Victoria Nuland and the U.S. State Department’s Ukrainian coup d’état circa 2014).  Britain’s Establishment has undermined the Brexit vote, imported new Islamic voters, and locked up any native citizens who express outrage online.  France and Romania prosecuted their countries’ leading opposition candidates and banned them from holding office.  The Dutch Establishment blocked Geert Wilders from becoming prime minister and installed an Intelligence Community technocrat in his stead.  Germany is close to designating the most popular opposition political party a domestic terror organization.

In the United States, Democrats and their Intelligence Community co-conspirators orchestrated the Russia collusion hoax against President Trump, sabotaged his administration, subverted his lawful orders, attempted to remove him from office, used COVID to nullify election security laws, incited the 2020 summer riots, installed Dementia Joe Biden in a fraud-filled 2020 mail-in ballot dump that ludicrously rendered the Delaware Dummy the “most popular” candidate of all time, and spent years trying to imprison Trump for the rest of his life.

Across the West, the Establishment wages war against national populations that reject the politicians and bureaucratic tyrants running their countries into the ground.  Western “elites” undermine democracy in the name of democracy and throw anybody who objects into jail.  It’s insanely totalitarian…and entirely predictable.

For months, every American with two brain cells and a pulse has understood that Democrats were preparing for a 2020 “summer of love” reunion tour now that President Trump is back in the White House.  Just as they took advantage of fentanyl fanatic George Floyd’s death by railroading four Minneapolis police officers and kicking off a months-long rampage of arson, looting, and murder in Democrat-run cities across the U.S. five years ago, violent Democrats have been salivating at the chance to turn the summer of 2025 into a bloody, fiery nightmare for law-abiding Americans.  It’s what Democrats do.

This season’s production of the NGO-financed, Intelligence Community–choreographed, Chinese Communist Party–supported, and Democrat party–organized “color revolution” has a new theme.  Instead of bringing back Black Lives Matter for an encore performance of its widely acclaimed 2020 race riots (despite five-star reviews from the Establishment, that “fiery but mostly peaceful” theatrical production turned off much of the public), 2025’s murder spree will celebrate criminal illegal aliens’ war against Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers.

Forty million foreign nationals will prove why they should be allowed to break America’s immigration laws and bilk America’s taxpayers by burning down American cities, attacking America’s law enforcement officers, and endangering American lives.  California governor “Gruesome” Newsom sure is excited.  The same tyrant who sent armed enforcers after Christians who refused to mask toddlers over two years into the COVID pandemic (another Democrat-sponsored theatrical production that the press and politicians adored but the public despised) is doing everything he can to help illegal aliens set his state on fire.

Opening night for downtowns across the country is still a few weeks away, but the preview show in Los Angeles is already getting stellar reviews from all the very best people.  Celebrities say the Democrat party has really outdone itself.  Journalists argue that this is one sequel you won’t want to miss.  Anonymous sources from the CIA and FBI are ecstatic about this summer’s coming carnage and are already telling critics who have not yet seen the show, We absolutely love it when armies of foreigners wage war on Americans.  We all get raises, additional surveillance powers, and brand-new office space.

Democrat politicians can hardly contain their glee.  Whenever they show up on CNN and MSNBC, they cheer for rioters.  If “democracy” means throwing bricks and Molotov cocktails at police officers, robbing civilians, and burning down small businesses, then it makes perfect sense why the party of slavery and Jim Crow has never changed its name.

Read the Whole Article

The post Our Fiery But Mostly Peaceful Foreign Invasion appeared first on LewRockwell.

Two notable events have taken place since Pope Leo XIV ascended the Throne of Saint Peter: Bishop Michael Martin of Charlotte angered pretty much every traditionally-minded Catholic in the Anglo-sphere, and 20,000 pilgrims, mostly young, marched the Chartres and attended an internationally televised/streamed Latin Mass said by Bishop Athanasius Schneider.

Bishop Martin’s actions became an international sensation and the documents leaked to the public came off like a temper tantrum by an unhinged ideologue who wanted to stick it to the Trads for not loving the New Springtime enough; whereas Bishop Schneider’s actions, along with the pilgrims, seemed simply Catholic and holy.

What we see in the dichotomous reception of these two events is indicative of an undeniable truth that the hierarchy must deal with, even if some want to ignore it: Tradition is winning and will win, whereas the experiment of the conciliar era will lose and is losing.

Even if we assume the best about the more “moderate” post-conciliar approaches—reform of the reform, etc.—what we find is that the fight is primarily between a general Novus Ordo parish paradigm, and Traditional communities that are bursting at the seams. Of course, I speak in generalities here, and there is not enough time to go into detailed specifics, so please forgive me if I fail to acknowledge some exceptions, which given their infrequency tend to prove the rule.

Now, the conciliar zeitgeist is far from dead, which makes sense since the Vatican II generation is still around and the youngest of it will be for a decade or so. Also, so many of the theologians and clerics who committed their lives to work for the Church during the 70s-90s did so when Tradition was barely acknowledged or maligned. I am thinking of the George Weigels of the world, and while they may not be as influential as they once were, they still get the front page of major journals and mainstream publications, which is a privilege Traditionalists rarely, if ever, are granted.

It is worth calling to mind that during the heyday of the John-Paul II conservative Catholicism, an attachment to the Latin Mass was seen as a problem to be solved. In 1984 under Pope John-Paul II, the famous “Indult” Mass was permitted, which was rightly—you’ll see why—referred to as the “Insult” by Traditionalists.

Released on behalf of the Polish Pope by the Congregation for Divine Worship, the letter Quattuor Abhinc Annos stated: “… [I]t appeared that the problem of priests and faithful holding to the so-called ‘Tridentine’ rite was almost completely solved… however, the same problem continues…”

Gee, how warm and fuzzy it must have been to hear from Rome, “You can have your pretty little missal, but we are giving you this because you are a problem that won’t go away.” Another example of the “pastoral” attitude of clerics in the wake of the pastoral Vatican II.

Now, the Indult failed in its true intention, which was to clarify “beyond all ambiguity that such priests [who say the TLM] and their respective faithful in no way share the positions of those who call in question the legitimacy and doctrinal exactitude of the Roman Missal promulgated by Pope Paul VI in 1970.”

In 1988, Archbishop Lefebvre went ahead with his consecrations, which I view as heroic and providential, and Tradition still continued to grow even though it was associated in the public mind with disobedience, schism, and excommunication. The communities established by Rome to try and pull traditionalists away from the SSPX or give those who were Tradition-curious a place to go continued to grow, and their priests, by and large, still don’t seem to be huge fans of the Novus Ordo or have glowingly positive things to say about Vatican II. I can say from personal experience as someone who has publicly professed himself to be a Lefebvre diehard that when I travel the world and interact with Catholics of all stripes, I constantly hear, “Keep up the good work, keep fighting.” I hear this frequently from priests of the FSSP, the ICKSP, and even diocesan bishops at times.

Read the Whole Article

The post The Toothpaste isn’t Going Back in the Tube: Tradition and the War of Attrition appeared first on LewRockwell.

“In the mountains of truth, you never climb in vain.”
― Friedrich Nietzsche

Early June. Dawn brings mist covered mountains and an empty road. The car’s capsule draws us together. I am taking my adult son to a trail that begins at the bottom of a ski slope where he will start a twenty-one mile run up and over a series of mountain peaks and through dense forests.

It is Sunday morning and soon many will awake and go into buildings to pray. Emerson and Thoreau suggested otherwise, and my son hears the same call. “Rise free from care before the dawn, and seek adventures,” said Thoreau. God is not caged in a building where preachers prattle about commonplaces meant to soothe bad consciences.

As he adjusts his running vest with its bottles of water, he walks toward the ascending path. From the rear, his curly hair and neck remind me of the little boy who loved nature so that he uncannily knew the names of every country and all their animals, as he now knows every bird and all their calls in an instant.

My heart opens like a flower as I watch him go.

Highly accomplished professionally and athletically, I think he runs to find the rhythm of life’s essence and the peace that passes all understanding. And to overcome himself. Always self-overcoming! I recall when I was his age how, when I went on much, much shorter and easier runs in natural surroundings, I would sometimes think of Leo Tolstoy or his character Andrei in War and Peace or Levin mowing with a scythe in Anna Karenina, finding the peace of the uncaged God in nature’s beauty and rhythmic movement. Now when I walk it is no different. And I too prefer to go alone.

I agree with Nietzsche, who wrote on scraps of paper while walking in the mountains: “Sitting still is the real sin against the Holy Ghost.”

I think of my father, with whom I talk regularly, who died thirty-two years ago and who walked city streets to different beats. He was conventional in certain ways, but from the stories I’ve heard about him when he was an age similar to my son’s, he did things that I would have warned against, but that I have come to realize are useless suggestions against God’s seal on one’s soul.  Quien sabe? (who knows?) was his favorite phrase. I don’t. Advice can be crippling. I am a recovering crippler out of love, but a love filled with fear for the safety of those I love, although I too was like my father and son, and many would say I still am, in a different way. Love is strange. So is daring.

When my father was in his twenties, he was in a bar with his brother (both became lawyers). An off-duty cop was drunk and looking for a fight. He was brandishing his gun. My father pinned his arm to the bar, grabbed the gun, ran outside, and threw the gun down a sewer. Risky business.

When in his late fifties, he was riding a subway with one other rider, an old lady. He was dressed in a bulky overcoat and a fedora, looking like a NYC cop of that era. Four young punks entered and demanded his wallet. One said to him, “Are you a cop?” He replied, “Why don’t you find out?” And he put his hands in his pockets. The train stopped at the next station and the four jumped out.

Fathers and sons. The links are mysterious but true, and very strong. My father, the only grandfather my son ever met, was a beautiful caring soul, a conventional Catholic and politically mainstream with a highly sophisticated mind. I became a theologian in my early years but a dissident Catholic and a political radical who was fired from teaching positions for “heresy.” My father disagreed with many of my positions but fully supported me in every way. My son, like many of his generation, took a step further away from religion. He disregards it, but he is such a deep thinker that he travels circuitous paths to the contemplation of the mysterious, to marvel at miraculous nature, what is clearly spiritual, however you want to define that word. What C.S. Lewis in The Abolition of Man sums up as the Tao, that Chinese term whose reality is beyond all predicates. “It is Nature, it is the Way, the Road.” One enters the Tao following one’s chest (the seat of magnanimity, sentiment) – full physically – sensing, however dimly, that one’s feet will lead one into a reality beyond words where “the head rules the belly through the chest,” the middle element of feeling that leads the soul on through trained habit.

In a world becoming more disincarnate and mechanical, what could be more important.

When my father read the English writer Edmund Gosse’s classic account of his Victorian childhood and his conflicted religious relationship with his father in Father and Son – subtitled “a study of two temperaments” – he wrote to me to say it sounded like us. There was a sadness in his words tinged with a wise understanding that this was inevitable, for separate generations are affected differently by changes in society, and yet and yet, the fundamental things abide.  Our deep love, most fundamentally.

My son and I have been affected by similar societal changes that have diffused the religious impulse into more diverse paths. Younger spirits don’t want to run on worn old soles. My son runs further and higher than I ever could. I thought I went deeper than my father. But the winding roads the three of us travel always intersect in ways our unknowing minds never know but our chests feel. These are the ties that bind us.

Wordsworth, in Ode: Intimations of Immortality from Recollections of Early Childhood tells us how they are rooted in childhood:

High instincts before which our mortal Nature
Did tremble like a guilty thing surprised:
But for those first affections,
Those shadowy recollections,
Which, be they what they may,
Are yet the fountain-light of all our day,
Are yet a master-light of all our seeing;
Uphold us, cherish, and have power to make
Our noisy years seem moments in the being
Of the eternal Silence: truths that wake,
To perish never;
Which neither listlessness, nor mad endeavour,
Nor Man nor Boy, for beauty
Nor all that is at enmity with joy,
Can utterly abolish or destroy!

High on the mountain ridge two huge rattlesnakes eye my son the eagle as he passes a few feet from them. He thanks them for awakening him on his long journey and photographs them as he dances past their coiled bodies where a sublime vibrating landscape greets him. Beasts lead the way to beauty if you’re brave. “And he who is not a bird should not build his nest over abysses. . . . You stand there honorable and stiff and with straight backs, you famous wise men: no strong will and wind drives you. . . . Thus spoke Zarathustra.”

In his essay, “Create Dangerously,” Albert Camus tells us that beauty never enslaved anyone, just the opposite. Without beauty, we would perish. And in the Duino Elegies, Rilke tells us that “every angel is terrifying.” What is an angel but an image of beauty, and before transcendent beauty we can only bow down in reverence. Art takes a multiplicity of forms: words, paint, music, etc., but it is always incarnated expression to be true to human experience. Like mountain running.

Camus:

After all, perhaps the greatness of art lies in the perpetual tension between beauty and pain, the love of men and the madness of creation, unbearable solitude and the exhausting crowd, rejection and consent. Art advances between two chasms, which are frivolity and propaganda. On the ridge where the great artist moves forward, every step is an adventure, an extreme risk. In that risk, however, and only there, lies the freedom of art. . . . the free artist is no more a man of comfort than is the free man. . . . Danger makes men classical, and all greatness, after all, is rooted in risk.

Create dangerously, as he said.

Four hours later, I drive twenty-five miles to the southwest to meet my son. I wait in a little dirt parking lot where the seven mile trail down from the last mountain peak is so narrow that one can barely get through it. I push through and look up in fear and awe. The path cascades down over rocks and heavy brush. No one is in sight. Then, further up, I glimpse movement around a bend and down comes my son flying like a wild bird with feet – grinning.

“How was it?,” I ask him.

“Fine,” he says, in his laconic style.

When we get in the car to drive home and he is gulping the bottles of water that I have brought for him, his grandfather, my father, startles us from the back seat. He says, “Have you guys ever heard this poem?” And he begins to recite it in his mellifluous voice as we roll along.

Sometimes A Man Stands Up During Supper

By Rainer Maria Rilke

Sometimes a man stands up during supper
and walks outdoors, and keeps on walking,
because of a church that stands somewhere in the East.

And his children say blessings on him as if he were dead.

And another man, who remains inside his own house,
dies there, inside the dishes and in the glasses,
so that his children have to go far out into the world
toward that same church, which he forgot.

Reprinted with the author’s permission.

The post Fathers and Sons appeared first on LewRockwell.

Join Mark Groubert & Eric Hunley this Free‑form Friday as America’s Untold Stories dives deep into explosive new revelations and political flashpoints:

First, we unpack the CIA’s newly released RFK assassination files—what do they really mean? We also break down the surprising role of RFK Sr. as a CIA informant. In a dramatic legal standoff, Judge Breyer orders Trump to relinquish California Guard control—but an appeals court says otherwise.

Plus, we examine covert Mossad operations in Iran, the controversial shutdown of trans care at Children’s Hospital LA, an AI-powered NBA ad moment, and the hidden complexities of OpenAI’s legal defense—deleted chat logs and all.

Expect raw insights, probing analysis, and the unexpected angles behind the headlines. Tune in and uncover the untold.

Episode Highlights

1. CIA drops over 1,000 pages tied to the RFK assassination, including the chilling “Kennedy must fall” notation. What new insights emerge?

2. Declassified docs reveal that RFK Sr. acted as a CIA “voluntary informant”—what does this tell us about family legacy?

3. Judge Breyer orders Trump to return California’s National Guard control, but an appeals court blocks the order—what’s next?

4. Israel’s Mossad infiltrated Iran with secret drones and “smuggled missiles”—covering covert intelligence action.

5. Children’s Hospital L.A. ends transgender care amid political pressure—context and implications.

6. AI Ad of the Finals: Kalshi debuts AI-assisted advertising during NBA Finals with Google’s Veo 3 tech.

7. OpenAI lawsuit twist: The company stores deleted ChatGPT conversations in NYT litigation context. *****************************************

Join us November 21st–23rd, 2025 in Dallas at JFK Lancer Conference (or Virtually) Tickets now available at https://assassinationconference.com/

Virtual tickets start at $75.99 In-person tickets start at $149.99 Discount Code: Use UNTOLD10 at checkout for 10% off *****************************************

The post America’s Untold Stories – CIA Releases More RFK Files & National Guard Showdown appeared first on LewRockwell.

Tim McGraw wrote:

The Friday the 13th superstition is attributed to various things in history, but the most likely was the raid by the King of France on the Templars in 1307. Pope Clement V jumped on the “Kill the Templars” bandwagon in 1312. Why not? The Templars were the bankers of that time and had all the gold and the debt that the King of France and the Pope owed to the Templars.

So, will Trump and the Pope attack the Bank of International Settlements today? Maybe the Federal Reserve? LOL. I wouldn’t hold my breath on that one.

Have a happy Friday the 13th, the day the bankers died. Bwah-ha-ha! Throw a dollar bill into the fire. “Let it go, Frodo! Be rid of it!”

The End of the Templars

The post Friday the 13th appeared first on LewRockwell.

Tim McGraw wrote:

The post RIP Brian Wilson appeared first on LewRockwell.

Thanks, David Martin.

DC Dave

The post Israel’s Iran Provocation appeared first on LewRockwell.

Thanks, David Martin.

See here.

The post Trump Confirms He’s Just The Front Man appeared first on LewRockwell.

Thanks, David Martin.

AntiWar.com

The post Israel’s Insane Attack on Iran appeared first on LewRockwell.

Thank, John Smith.

Haaretz.com

The post U.S. Authorities Detain Two Palestinians Invited to Speak With Jewish Groups in California appeared first on LewRockwell.

Thanks, John Smith. 

Marjorie Taylor Greene rips Trump Mideast policy saying ‘Americans don’t want to bomb Iran’ for Israel |

The Independent

The post Marjorie Taylor Greene rips Trump Mideast policy saying ‘Americans don’t want to bomb Iran’ for Israel appeared first on LewRockwell.

He said this (https://x.com/SecRubio/status/1933329943003623446), but:

1. Israel’s strike was not unilateral (yet US taxpayers paid for the planes, the bombs, and provided live recon and coordination via RC-135s).
2. We do not protect US citizens first — in fact, our troops in the region are red lines and marking targets, our military puts Israel first.
3. Nuclear armed Israel does not believe attacking Iran and assassinating Iranians every year is for its “defense” but rather it is Israeli policy, to maintain and grow greater Israel.
4. Trump has not taken all necessary steps to protect our forces, instead he has made new targets of them — bring the troops home!
5. Iran has every reason to attack and retaliate against US forces, people and interests.  The US makes the psychopathy of Israel possible.  

Marco Rubio, like the state he stands for — Israel — is a lying warmongering embarrassment.

The post Little Marco is a Liar appeared first on LewRockwell.

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 è 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 è la storia di un coyote, che quando non riesce a sfamarsi all'esterno ricorre all'autofagocitazione. Lo stesso è accaduto ai membri del G7, dove i sei membri restanti hanno iniziato a fagocitare il settimo: gli Stati Uniti.

____________________________________________________________________________________

(Versione audio della traduzione disponibile qui: https://open.substack.com/pub/fsimoncelli/p/come-gli-inglesi-hanno-inventato-ba4)

Nel 1993 molti in Europa si sentirono traditi.

Alcuni si lamentarono di un “complotto anglosassone”.

La Gran Bretagna aveva respinto l'unione monetaria con l'Europa, affermando che avrebbe mantenuto la sterlina britannica.

Gli animi si infiammarono, le lingue si sciolsero, la retorica iniziava a farsi decisamente razzista.

“C'è una sorta di complotto”, disse il Ministro degli esteri belga, Willy Claes. “Nel mondo anglosassone esistono organizzazioni e personalità che preferiscono un'Europa divisa”.

“Le istituzioni finanziarie anglosassoni” stanno minando gli sforzi dell'Europa per unificare le valute, accusò Raymond Barré, ex-primo ministro francese.

Parlando davanti al Parlamento europeo, Jacques Delors, presidente della Commissione europea, si scagliò contro “gli anglosassoni”.

Da quando i corazzieri di Napoleone caricarono le linee britanniche a Waterloo, il mondo francofono non esplodeva con tanta furia contro la perfida Albione. Le tensioni stavano aumentando pericolosamente.

Ma niente paura.

I soccorsi stavano arrivando.

L'operazione psicologica di Soros

Nella breccia si inserì Roger Cohen, nato e cresciuto in Inghilterra, laureatosi a Oxford e in quel momento storico scrittore per il New York Times.

Cohen cambiò astutamente argomento.

Chiamò l'ufficio di Willy Claes e chiese al portavoce Ghislain D'Hoop di identificare i cospiratori “anglosassoni”.

Ce n'erano molti, rispose D'Hoop, ma uno era George Soros.

D'Hoop era caduto nella trappola.

Aveva dato a Cohen ciò che voleva.

In un articolo del 23 settembre 1993 sul New York Times, Cohen osservò ironicamente: “Ma il signor Soros non rientra certo nella definizione tradizionale di anglosassone. È un ebreo di origine ungherese che parla con un accento evidente”.

Cohen aveva abilmente cambiato argomento.

Invece di un “complotto anglosassone”, Cohen proponeva un complotto alla George Soros.

In un articolo di 900 parole che si proponeva di discutere la crisi monetaria europea, Cohen ne dedicò un terzo a Soros, riflettendo a lungo sull'ingiusto “disprezzo” che Soros aveva subito per aver venduto allo scoperto la sterlina inglese nel 1992 e il franco francese nel 1993.

Mentre Cohen fingeva di difendere Soros, il suo articolo ebbe l'effetto opposto.

Cohen attirò l'attenzione su Soros, rendendolo il fulcro di una storia che non lo riguardava affatto, o almeno non avrebbe dovuto esserlo.

Cohen aveva così schierato una delle armi più potenti nell'arsenale della guerra psicologica britannica.

Io la chiamo la “Soros Psyop”.

Fornire copertura

Nel mio precedente articolo, Come gli inglesi hanno inventato le rivoluzioni colorate, ho spiegato come gli agenti britannici esperti di guerra psicologica svilupparono colpi di stato incruenti e altre tecnologie comportamentali per manipolare i governi stranieri in modo silenzioso e discreto nell'era post-coloniale.

La strategia della Gran Bretagna dal 1945 è stata quella di fare finta di niente, nascondendosi e lasciando che fossero gli americani a fare il grosso del lavoro di polizia nel mondo.

Silenziosamente, sotto i radar, la Gran Bretagna è rimasta profondamente coinvolta negli intrighi imperiali.

Uno dei modi in cui la Gran Bretagna nasconde le sue operazioni è usare George Soros e altri come lui come copertura.

Cattivo designato

Quando gli agenti britannici si impegnano in interventi segreti come la destabilizzazione di governi o l'indebolimento delle valute, George Soros sembra sempre spuntare fuori come un pupazzo a molla, facendo smorfie per le telecamere, rilasciando dichiarazioni provocatorie e, in generale, facendo tutto il possibile per attirare l'attenzione su di sé.

È quella che i professionisti dell'intelligence chiamano un'operazione “rumorosa”.

Soros è il cattivo designato, il capro espiatorio.

Si assume deliberatamente la colpa di tutto, anche quando non ne ha.

È uno strano modo di guadagnarsi da vivere, ma sembra essere ben pagato.

“L'uomo che ha distrutto la Banca d'Inghilterra”

Fino al 1992 la maggior parte delle persone non aveva mai sentito parlare di Soros.

Poi i media britannici lo soprannominarono “L'uomo che ha distrutto la Banca d'Inghilterra”. Soros divenne una celebrità da un giorno all'altro.

Si racconta che abbia venduto allo scoperto la sterlina britannica, ne abbia forzato la svalutazione e se ne sia andato con un profitto di uno (o forse due) miliardi di dollari.

In realtà Soros fu solo uno dei tanti speculatori che scommisero contro la sterlina, forzandone una svalutazione del 20% il “Mercoledì Nero”, ovvero il 16 settembre 1992.

Alcune delle più grandi banche del mondo presero parte all'attacco, insieme a vari hedge fund e fondi pensione. Eppure i media britannici si concentrarono quasi esclusivamente su Soros, sostenendo che fosse stato lui a guidare l'attacco e a trarne i maggiori profitti.

In realtà queste affermazioni hanno ben poche basi, a parte le vanterie dello stesso Soros.

Soros diventa una celebrità

I trader di valute sono notoriamente reticenti, timorosi dell'indignazione pubblica e del controllo governativo.

Quasi sei settimane dopo il Mercoledì Nero, nessuno era veramente sicuro di chi avesse fatto crollare la sterlina britannica.

Poi accadde qualcosa di inaspettato.

Soros confessò!

Il 24 ottobre 1992 il Daily Mail britannico pubblicò un articolo in prima pagina con un Soros sorridente che teneva in mano un drink intitolato “Ho guadagnato un miliardo mentre la sterlina crollava”.

Il Mail era in qualche modo riuscito a ottenere un rendiconto trimestrale del Quantum Fund di Soros.

Quest'ultimo affermò di essere rimasto sorpreso e allarmato dalla fuga di notizie, ma aveva uno strano modo di dimostrarlo. Soros andò direttamente al Times di Londra e confermò quella versione della storia, vantandosi che fosse tutta vera.

Arrivò al punto di dire che “Noi [di Quantum] dovevamo essere il singolo fattore più importante del mercato [...]”.

E così la mattina del 26 ottobre 1992, un titolo di prima pagina del Times proclamò che Soros era “L'uomo che ha distrutto la Banca d'Inghilterra”.

Nei mesi successivi il Times avrebbe preso l'iniziativa e iniziò a promuovere la leggenda di Soros.

Protettori nascosti

In un articolo del 15 gennaio 1995 sul New Yorker, Connie Bruck ricordò lo stupore che travolse il mondo finanziario per la confessione pubblica di Soros: “I colleghi di Soros nella comunità finanziaria, inclusi alcuni amministratori e azionisti di Quantum, sono rimasti sbalorditi dalle sue rivelazioni pubbliche; ancora oggi molti esprimono sconcerto per la sua azione. Una persona nella comunità degli hedge fund mi ha detto: 'Perché portare luce su questo argomento? Perché attirare l'attenzione su di sé?'”.

Questi finanzieri non sono riusciti a cogliere il quadro generale. Non hanno capito che Soros giocava in un campionato diverso, stava giocando una partita diversa.

Non era solo uno speculatore.

Era un soldato in una guerra psicologica.

L'uomo che ha creato George Soros

L'uomo responsabile della promozione di Soros in quel periodo fu Lord William Rees-Mogg, un eminente giornalista e membro della Camera dei Lord.

Il Financial Times lo ha definito “uno dei nomi più grandi del giornalismo britannico”.

Lord Rees-Mogg è morto nel 2012.

Fu direttore del Times per 14 anni (1967-1981), poi vicepresidente della BBC.

Era amico e confidente della famiglia reale, amico intimo e socio in affari di Lord Jacob Rothschild e padre del politico britannico Jacob Rees-Mogg.

Più di chiunque altro, Lord Rees-Mogg è stato responsabile della trasformazione di George Soros in un'arma.

Soros, salvatore della Gran Bretagna

Quando il Daily Mail accusò Soros di aver fatto crollare la sterlina, il Times intervenne per spiegare che Soros era un eroe, che invece aveva effettivamente salvato la sovranità britannica.

In un articolo di prima pagina del 26 ottobre 1992, il Times spiegò che Soros aveva salvato il Paese dal collasso economico e dalla schiavitù dell'UE.

La svalutazione della sterlina aveva costretto la Gran Bretagna a ritirarsi dal Meccanismo Europeo di Cambio (SME), bloccando così i piani britannici di aderire all'unione monetaria europea, aggiunse il Times.

Lord William Rees-Mogg fu particolarmente esplicito nella difesa di Soros.

“La Gran Bretagna ha avuto la fortuna di essere costretta a uscire dallo SME”, scrisse Rees-Mogg nel suo articolo del 1° marzo 1993 sul Times. “La politica economica di George Soros, per un compenso modesto, ha corretto quella del [Primo Ministro] John Major”.

Negli articoli successivi Rees-Mogg si dimostrò sempre più entusiasta nel lodare Soros. Affermò che quest'ultimo aveva “salvato” il Regno Unito; che Soros era un “benefattore della Gran Bretagna”; anzi, che una sua statua avrebbe dovuto essere “eretta in Piazza del Parlamento, di fronte al Ministero del Tesoro”.

Agenda globalista

In realtà Rees-Mogg stava fuorviando i suoi lettori.

Non sosteneva la sovranità britannica. Rees-Mogg era un globalista, convinto che lo stato-nazione avesse esaurito la sua utilità.

Qualunque fossero le ragioni per opporsi all'unione monetaria con l'Europa, il patriottismo britannico non rientrava tra queste.

Rees-Mogg espresse le sue convinzioni globaliste in una serie di libri scritti a quattro mani con lo scrittore statunitense specializzato in investimenti James Dale Davidson.

In The Sovereign Individual (1997) gli autori profetizzarono che le “nazioni occidentali” si sarebbero presto “sgretolate come l'ex-Unione Sovietica, per essere sostituite da piccole giurisdizioni “simili a città-stato” che sarebbero “emerse dalle macerie delle nazioni”.

Gli autori prevedevano che “alcune di queste nuove entità, come i Cavalieri Templari e altri ordini religiosi e militari del Medioevo, avrebbero potuto controllare una considerevole ricchezza e un potere militare senza controllare alcun territorio fisso”.

Come ai tempi del “feudalesimo”, scrissero Rees-Mogg e Davidson, “le persone a basso reddito nei Paesi occidentali” sarebbero sopravvissute legandosi “alle famiglie benestanti come dipendenti”.

In altre parole, le classi inferiori sarebbero tornate alla servitù della gleba.

Tutto questo era per il meglio, scrissero gli autori, poiché avrebbe permesso alle “persone più abili” – ovvero il “cinque per cento più ricco” – di vivere dove volevano e fare ciò che volevano, libere da lealtà o obblighi verso una particolare nazione o governo.

“Mentre l'era dell'Individuo Sovrano prende forma”, conclusero gli autori, “molte delle persone più abili cesseranno di considerarsi parte di una nazione, come britanniche, americane o canadesi. Una nuova comprensione transnazionale o extranazionale del mondo, e un nuovo modo di identificare il proprio posto in esso, attendono di essere scoperti nel nuovo millennio”.

Queste non sono le parole di un patriota.

Il nuovo feudalesimo

Infatti non c'era nulla di nuovo nel “nuovo modo” promesso da Rees-Mogg nel suo libro.

Discendente da un'antica famiglia di proprietari terrieri, Rees-Mogg sapeva che il globalismo era sempre stato il credo delle classi abbienti, la cui unica vera lealtà era verso le proprie famiglie.

La saga di Harry Potter offre una metafora calzante per il mondo odierno, in cui le famiglie d'élite si muovono invisibili tra i “babbani” o la gente comune, gestendo silenziosamente le cose dietro le quinte, nascondendosi alla vista di tutti.

Negli anni '90 le famiglie privilegiate come quella di Rees-Mogg si erano stancate di nascondersi. Rimpiangevano i bei vecchi tempi, quando potevano vivere apertamente nei loro castelli e comandare i loro servi.

Il politologo di Oxford, Hedley Bull, si rivolse a questo pubblico quando nel suo libro del 1977, The Anarchical Society, predisse che “gli stati sovrani potrebbero scomparire ed essere sostituiti non da un governo mondiale, ma da un equivalente moderno e laico del... Medioevo”.

La previsione di Bull di un nuovo medioevo trovò eco nelle élite britanniche.

Con il crollo dell'Unione Sovietica, Rees-Mogg e altri della sua classe sociale iniziarono a celebrare apertamente la fine dello stato-nazione e l'ascesa di un nuovo feudalesimo.

Ripristinare l'ordine feudale è il vero obiettivo del globalismo.

A proposito di quel “complotto anglosassone”

Gli elogi esagerati di Rees-Mogg a George Soros suscitarono sospetti nel continente per un “complotto anglosassone”.

Ulteriori sospetti sorsero quando J. P. Morgan & Co. e la sua affiliata Morgan Stanley furono ritenute complici della rottura della sterlina.

Pur essendo nominalmente americane, queste banche avevano forti legami storici con la Gran Bretagna.

L'attività principale di J. P. Morgan era sempre stata quella di fungere da copertura per gli investitori britannici in America. Le ferrovie e altre industrie statunitensi si basavano in gran parte sul capitale britannico, erogato tramite le banche Morgan.

Junius S. Morgan, il padre di J. P., avviò l'azienda di famiglia nel 1854, trasferendosi negli uffici londinesi di Peabody, Morgan & Co. e rimanendo in Inghilterra per i successivi 23 anni.

I legami della famiglia Morgan con la Gran Bretagna sono profondi.

Nel periodo precedente al Mercoledì nero, J. P. Morgan & Co. vendette allo scoperto la sterlina britannica. Nel frattempo la sua banca gemella, Morgan Stanley, concesse ingenti prestiti a Soros, consentendogli di fare lo stesso.

Le accuse di un “complotto anglosassone” non sembrano inverosimili, alla luce di questi fatti.

È probabile che Soros e altri speculatori stranieri abbiano semplicemente fornito copertura a quella che era, di fatto, un'operazione di guerra economica britannica contro la propria banca centrale.

Come gli inglesi hanno reclutato Soros

Come sottolineò Roger Cohen sul New York Times, George Soros non è un “anglosassone”. Com'è finito coinvolto in quel complotto anglosassone?

Il giovane Soros era stato reclutato tramite la London School of Economics (LSE). Lì fu plasmato come arma del “soft power” britannico.

In un precedente articolo, Come gli inglesi hanno venduto il globalismo all'America, ho spiegato come la Gran Bretagna utilizzi il “soft power” (seduzione e cooptazione) per costruire reti di influenza in altri Paesi.

La Gran Bretagna si considera “il principale soft power al mondo”, secondo la Strategic Defence and Security Review del Regno Unito del 2015.

Gli inglesi devono il loro status di leader al loro incessante reclutamento di studenti stranieri nelle università del Regno Unito, un'iniziativa considerata una priorità per la sicurezza nazionale, supervisionata dal British Council, un'agenzia del Ministero degli esteri.

La Strategic Defence and Security Review del 2015 rilevava che “1,8 milioni di studenti stranieri ricevono un'istruzione britannica ogni anno” e che “più di un quarto degli attuali leader mondiali ha studiato nel Regno Unito”.

Dopo la laurea, questi ex-studenti britannici sono attentamente monitorati dal Ministero degli esteri britannico.

Secondo un documento del governo britannico del 2013, gli ex-studenti che sono destinati a posizioni di rilievo sono incoraggiati a cercare un “maggiore coinvolgimento” con i colleghi ex-studenti britannici, allo scopo di formare “una rete di persone in posizioni di influenza in tutto il mondo che possano promuovere gli obiettivi della politica estera britannica [...]”.

Modello di reclutamento

George Soros è un trionfo della strategia di soft power britannica.

Non solo ha raggiunto una “posizione di influenza” dopo la laurea, ma è rimasto vicino ai suoi mentori britannici e ne ha promosso gli insegnamenti.

In onore di Karl Popper, suo professore alla LSE, Soros diede alle sue ONG il nome di Open Society Foundation, la cui teoria della “società aperta” guida l'attivismo di Soros ancora oggi.

Il capolavoro di Popper del 1945, La società aperta e i suoi nemici, è una difesa filosofica dell'imperialismo, in particolare dell'imperialismo britannico, così come sostenuto dai fondatori della LSE.

I socialisti fabiani che fondarono la LSE credevano che l'espansione britannica fosse la più grande forza civilizzatrice in un mondo altrimenti barbaro.

Nel suo libro Popper difese espressamente la conquista imperiale come primo passo per cancellare le identità tribali e nazionali, per spianare la strada a un “Impero Universale dell'Uomo”.

“Pregiudizi britannici”

Soros arrivò a Londra nel 1947, rifugiato dall'Ungheria occupata dai sovietici.

Visse in Inghilterra per nove anni, dai 17 ai 27 anni (dall'agosto 1947 al settembre 1956).

Laureatosi alla LSE nel 1953, Soros ottenne il suo primo lavoro in ambito finanziario presso la Singer & Friedlander, una banca d'affari londinese.

Soros ammette di essersi trasferito negli Stati Uniti solo per fare soldi.

Progettò di rimanerci cinque anni, per poi tornare in Inghilterra.

“Non mi piacevano gli Stati Uniti”, raccontò al suo biografo Michael Kaufman nel libro, Soros: The Life and Times of a Messianic Billionaire. “Avevo acquisito alcuni pregiudizi britannici di base; sapete, gli Stati Uniti erano, beh, commerciali, volgari e così via”.

Società aperta & società chiusa

Il disprezzo per l'America non fu l'unico “pregiudizio britannico” che Soros acquisì alla LSE. Sviluppò anche una forte avversione per i concetti di tribù e nazione, seguendo l'esempio di Karl Popper.

Nel libro, La società aperta e i suoi nemici, Popper insegnava che la razza umana si stava evolvendo da una società “chiusa” a una società “aperta”.

Il catalizzatore di questa trasformazione era l'imperialismo.

Le società chiuse sono tribali, interessate solo a ciò che è meglio per la tribù, mentre una società “aperta” cerca il meglio per tutta l'umanità.

Popper ammetteva che le società tribali sembrano attraenti in superficie, sono strettamente legate da “parentela, convivenza, condivisione di sforzi comuni, pericoli comuni, gioie comuni e sofferenze comuni”.

Tuttavia i popoli tribali non sono mai veramente liberi, sosteneva Popper. Le loro vite sono governate da “magia” e “superstizione”, dalle “leggi”, “costumi” e “tabù” dei loro antenati.

Sono intrappolati in una routine da cui non possono sfuggire.

Al contrario, una società “aperta” non ha tabù né costumi, né tribù né nazioni. È composta solo da “individui”, liberi di fare o pensare come desiderano.

“Impero universale dell'uomo”

Popper sosteneva che tutte le società nascono “chiuse”, ma in seguito diventano “aperte” attraverso l'imperialismo.

Quando una tribù diventa abbastanza forte da conquistarne altre, le società “chiuse” sono costrette ad “aprirsi” al conquistatore, mentre il conquistatore diventa a sua volta “aperto” alle vie dei conquistati.

“Credo sia necessario che l'esclusivismo e l'autosufficienza tribale possano essere superati solo da una qualche forma di imperialismo”, concluse Popper.

Gli imperi rendono tribù e nazioni obsolete, disse Popper. Forniscono un governo unico, con un unico insieme di regole per tutti.

Popper sognava un “Impero universale dell'uomo” che avrebbe diffuso la “società aperta” in ogni angolo del mondo.

Frutto Proibito

Per molti versi l'Impero è più “tollerante” della tribù, sostiene Popper. I popoli detribalizzati scoprono di essere liberi di fare e dire molte cose che un tempo consideravano “tabù”.

Ma c'è una cosa che l'Impero non può tollerare: il tribalismo stesso.

Popper avvertì che l'umanità può solo progredire, non regredire. Paragonò la “società aperta” al mangiare dall'Albero della Conoscenza. Una volta assaggiato il frutto proibito, le porte del Paradiso si chiudono.

Non si può mai tornare alla tribù; chi ci prova diventerà fascista.

“Non potremo mai tornare all'innocenza e alla bellezza della società chiusa [...]”, scrisse Popper. “Più ci proviamo [...] più sicuramente arriviamo alla [...] Polizia segreta e al [...] gangsterismo romanticizzato [...]. Non si può tornare a uno stato di natura armonioso. Se torniamo indietro, allora dobbiamo percorrere tutta la strada: dobbiamo tornare alle bestie”.

Impero Socialista

Le idee di Popper non erano originali: stava semplicemente sposando la dottrina dell'imperialismo liberale a cui era dedicata la London School of Economics.

La LSE fu fondata nel 1895 da quattro membri della Fabian Society, tra cui Sidney e Beatrice Webb, George Bernard Shaw e Graham Wallas.

Tutti erano ferventi imperialisti, oltre che socialisti, e non vedevano alcun conflitto tra i due. Anzi i Fabiani consideravano l'Impero britannico un ottimo veicolo per diffondere l'internazionalismo socialista.

In un opuscolo del 1901 intitolato, Twentieth Century Politics: A Policy of National Efficiency, Sidney Webb invocava la fine dei “diritti astratti basati sulle 'nazionalità'”. Respingendo quella che definiva la “fervida propaganda dell'Home Rule” irlandese, Webb condannava qualsiasi movimento che spingesse per l'autogoverno basato sulla “obsoleta nozione tribale” di “autonomia razziale”.

Webb sosteneva invece che il mondo dovesse essere diviso in “unità amministrative” basate esclusivamente sulla geografia, “qualunque fosse la mescolanza razziale”, come esemplificato da “quel grande commonwealth di popoli chiamato Impero Britannico” che comprendeva “membri di tutte le razze, di tutti i colori umani e di quasi tutte le lingue e religioni”.

Così Webb espose l'essenza della “società aperta” imperiale quasi 50 anni prima di Popper.

Socialismo invisibile

Non si sa se George Orwell fosse un Fabiano, ma condivideva il sogno di un Impero Britannico socialista.

Nel suo libro del 1941, Il leone e l'unicorno: il socialismo e il genio inglese, Orwell predisse la nascita di un “movimento socialista specificamente inglese” il quale avrebbe conservato molti “anacronismi” del passato.

Questi “anacronismi” avrebbero calmato e rassicurato l'anima inglese, proprio mentre la società britannica veniva sconvolta.

Un tale “anacronismo” sarebbe stata la Monarchia, che Orwell riteneva degna di essere preservata. Un altro era l'Impero, che sarebbe stato ribattezzato “una federazione di stati socialisti [...]”.

Orwell predisse che un vero socialismo inglese avrebbe “mostrato una capacità di assimilazione del passato che avrebbe sconvolto gli osservatori stranieri e talvolta fatto dubitare che si fosse verificata una rivoluzione”.

Nonostante le apparenze, la Rivoluzione sarebbe stata reale, in ogni suo aspetto “essenziale”, promise Orwell.

“Come una mummia insepolta”

In una strana eco di Orwell, Lord William Rees-Mogg suggerì anche che il suo nuovo feudalesimo avrebbe mantenuto molti degli aspetti esteriori della normale vita inglese, anche mentre la nazione britannica si disgregava.

Nel loro libro del 1987, Blood in the Streets, Rees-Mogg e Davidson predissero che, anche dopo che gli stati-nazione avessero perso il loro potere e la loro sovranità, “le loro forme sarebbero rimaste, come in Libano, come del resto la forma dell'Impero Romano, ovvero come una mummia insepolta, per tutto il Medioevo".

Nonostante la sua cupa visione del futuro della Gran Bretagna, Rees-Mogg continuò a spacciarsi per patriota britannico fino alla fine. Forse era questo il suo modo di salvare le apparenze, di contribuire a preservare la “forma” della Gran Bretagna, “come una mummia insepolta”, al fine di calmare e rassicurare l'anima inglese.

Vediamo quindi che il socialismo “specificamente inglese” di Orwell – in cui persino la monarchia sarebbe sopravvissuta – ha una strana somiglianza con il nuovo feudalesimo di Rees-Mogg.

Potrebbe persino essere opportuno chiedersi se siano la stessa cosa.

Soros, l'imperiale

Nel 1995 Soros dichiarò al New Yorker: “Non credo che si possa mai superare l'antisemitismo comportandosi come una tribù [...]. L'unico modo per superarlo è rinunciare al tribalismo”.

Non fu né la prima né l'ultima volta che Soros suscitò scalpore condannando il tribalismo ebraico come fattore che contribuisce all'antisemitismo. Quando Soros fece un commento simile nel 2003, ricevette un rimprovero da Elan Steinberg del Congresso Ebraico Mondiale, che replicò: “L'antisemitismo non è causato dagli ebrei; è causato dagli antisemiti”.

Per essere onesti, Soros stava solo ripetendo ciò che aveva imparato alla London School of Economics.

Le sue fondazioni, Open Society, sono espressamente dedicate agli insegnamenti di Popper, che si oppongono a qualsiasi tipo di tribalismo. Rifiutando il tribalismo del suo stesso popolo ebraico, Soros si limitava a essere intellettualmente coerente.

A livello personale, non posso certo condannare Soros per la sua critica al tribalismo ebraico, visto che mio padre, ebreo, aveva opinioni simili.

Uno dei modi in cui mio padre espresse la sua ribellione fu sposando mia madre, una bellezza esotica, metà messicana, metà coreana e cattolica di fede.

Comprendo pienamente il difficile rapporto di Soros con la sua identità ebraica.

Tuttavia nelle parole di Soros percepisco un'eco inquietante dell'ideologia imperialista di Sidney Webb, un'influenza che pervade e definisce la rete Open Society a ogni livello.

Effetto pifferaio magico

Nei mesi successivi al Mercoledì Nero, i media britannici promossero Soros come una star del cinema, costruendo la sua leggenda come il più grande genio finanziario dell'epoca.

Lord William Rees-Mogg fu il capofila.

Rees-Mogg e i suoi soci sapevano che, se un numero sufficiente di piccoli investitori fosse stato indotto a credere alla leggenda di Soros, se un numero sufficiente fosse stato manipolato per imitarne le mosse, comprando e vendendo secondo i suoi consigli, allora Soros avrebbe comandato l'ondata.

Avrebbe potuto fare la differenza sui mercati, semplicemente parlando.

Nel suo articolo sul Times del 26 aprile 1993, Rees-Mogg gettò un'aura mistica su Soros, dipingendolo come un Nostradamus dei giorni nostri in grado di vedere attraverso le “illusioni pubbliche” la “realtà” sottostante.

Altri giornalisti si allinearono, ripetendo i punti di vista di Rees-Mogg come sonnambuli.

“Perché siamo così stregati da questo moderno Re Mida?”, chiese il Daily Mail, con il tono svenevole di un innamorato disperato.

Non tutti credettero al mito di Soros.

Leon Richardson, editorialista finanziario australiano, accusò Rees-Mogg di aver cercato di trasformare Soros in un pifferaio magico, per sviare gli investitori.

“Lord Rees-Mogg ha elogiato Soros, definendolo l'investitore più brillante del mondo”, affermò Richardson nella sua rubrica del 9 maggio 1993, “di conseguenza la gente ha iniziato a seguirlo e a fare quello che fa per fare soldi”.

La truffa dell'oro

Chi teneva d'occhio Soros dopo il Mercoledì Nero non dovette aspettare a lungo per il suo successivo consiglio di investimento.

“Soros ha rivolto la sua attenzione all'oro”, annunciò Rees-Mogg il 26 aprile 1993.

Newmont Mining era il più grande produttore di oro del Nord America. Soros aveva appena acquistato 10 milioni di azioni da Sir James Goldsmith e Lord Jacob Rothschild.

Se Soros stava comprando oro, forse dovremmo farlo anche noi, insinuò Rees-Mogg.

Non tutti accolsero con entusiasmo il suggerimento di Rees-Mogg. Alcuni commentatori notarono che, mentre Soros acquistava azioni Newmont, Goldsmith e Rothschild le stavano svendendo – un segnale di acquisto tutt'altro che chiaro.

“Normalmente quando un insider vende azioni della propria azienda cerca di non farsi notare”, commentò Leon Richardson. “Questo è stato uno strano caso in cui l'insider stava cercando di ottenere un'ampia copertura mediatica sulla sua vendita”.

Ciononostante l'effetto pifferaio magico funzionò: il 2 agosto il prezzo dell'oro era schizzato da $340 a $406 l'oncia, con un aumento del 19%.

“Un nuovo modo di fare soldi”

Molti nella stampa finanziaria mormorarono dell'insolito livello di coordinamento tra il Times, Soros, Goldsmith e Rothschild.

“Soros è un enigma [...]” scrisse il London Evening Standard. “Non ha mai parlato bene dell'oro, ma d'altronde non ce n'era bisogno. La stampa lo ha fatto per lui, con il sostenitore di Goldsmith, Lord Rees-Mogg, che ha lanciato l'appello sul Times”.

“Non si può che ammirare la tempistica di Goldsmith/Soros e l'aura ben orchestrata del loro spettacolo per l'oro”, commentò EuroBusiness Magazine nel settembre del 1993. “Avevano anche un cast di supporto impressionante: una stampa che ha suonato come un coro greco al loro canto da sirene per l'oro”.

David C. Roche, stratega londinese di Morgan Stanley, concluse: “È un nuovo modo di fare soldi, una combinazione di investimenti giudiziosi al minimo di un mercato e di un colpo di scena pubblicitario”.

Gioco di squadra

Nonostante tutto il clamore, la bolla dell'oro è scoppiata a settembre di quell'anno, facendo crollare i prezzi dell'oro.

Molti persero... tanto.

Ma Goldsmith e Rothschild fecero un sacco di soldi, vendendo al picco.

Alcuni sospettavano che lo scopo dell'operazione fosse quello di aiutare Goldsmith e Rothschild a realizzare un profitto sulle loro partecipazioni in Newmont, precedentemente stagnanti.

Soros, d'altra parte, subì un duro colpo: quando vendette le sue azioni Newmont, dovette farlo a un prezzo inferiore.

Perché lo fece? Perché Soros avrebbe dovuto guidare un piano di propaganda dell'oro che gli portò pochi o nessun profitto?

Alcuni sospettavano che Soros potesse aver subito un colpo per la squadra.

Forse non era poi così anticonformista, dopotutto.

Forse il pifferaio magico era solo uno che segue gli ordini...

Profeta o pedina?

Come minimo, la mossa dell'oro dimostrò che Soros lavorava di squadra.

La sua immagine di lupo solitario era solo un mito.

Quando i riflettori della celebrità si posarono per la prima volta su Soros, lo trovarono a lavorare con una ristretta cerchia di investitori britannici, tra cui alcuni dei nomi più famosi della finanza globale.

Gli investitori di quel livello non si limitano a “speculare” sui mercati, quanto piuttosto a controllarli.

La truffa dell'oro rivelò che Rees-Mogg, Soros, Goldsmith e Rothschild erano legati da una intricata rete di relazioni commerciali.

Goldsmith, ad esempio, era un direttore della St. James Place Capital di Rothschild. Un altro direttore della St. James Place, Nils Taube, era contemporaneamente direttore del Quantum Fund di Soros.

Lo stesso Rees-Mogg era un caro amico di Lord Rothschild, nonché membro del consiglio di amministrazione di J. Rothschild Investment Management e direttore di St. James Place Capital.

Nel frattempo il giornalista del Times, Ivan Fallon – che contribuì a far uscire la notizia dell'acquisto dell'oro da parte di Soros sul Sunday Times, co-autore della relazione originale del 25 aprile – era il biografo di Goldsmith, autore di Billionaire: The Life and Times of Sir James Goldsmith.

Era tutto molto intimo.

“Una banda di insider”

“Questo tipo di connessioni, questa impressione di una banda di insider, è ciò che fa sì che gli investitori più tradizionali a volte sollevino un sopracciglio quando si tratta di Soros”, brontolò The Observer con disapprovazione.

The Observer aveva ragione. Soros era un “insider” che lavorava con altri insider e non c'era alcuna indicazione che fosse minimamente vicino a essere un socio senior del gruppo.

Soros era un servitore, non un profeta; un seguace, non un leader.

Ecco perché gridò allo scandalo quando fu condannato per insider trading nel 2002, in relazione allo scandalo francese Société Générale.

“È bizzarro che io sia stato l'unico dichiarato colpevole quando era coinvolto l'intero establishment francese”, si lamentò Soros alla CNN.

Soros riteneva chiaramente che i francesi avessero infranto le regole.

Secondo lui, quando “l'intero [...] establishment” di un Paese cospira per manipolare i mercati, è ingiusto individuare un singolo cospiratore e sottoporlo a processo.

Dopotutto, Soros stava semplicemente facendo quello che facevano gli altri.

Rivoluzioni colorate

Mentre Rees-Mogg stava raffinando l'immagine di Soros come il più grande guru degli investimenti al mondo, ne promuoveva anche le attività politiche.

“Ammiro il modo in cui ha speso i suoi soldi”, affermò Rees-Mogg nella sua rubrica sul Times del 26 aprile 1993. “Niente è più importante della sopravvivenza economica degli ex-Paesi comunisti dell'Europa orientale”.

Rees-Mogg si riferiva al lavoro della fondazione di Soros negli ex-stati sovietici, dove divenne rapidamente famoso come finanziatore e organizzatore di colpi di stato incruenti noti come “rivoluzioni colorate”.

Come per le sue transazioni monetarie, Soros non agì da solo quando si impegnò in operazioni di cambio di governo. Faceva parte di una squadra.

Soros e gli “atlantisti”

In una serie di articoli su Revolver News, Darren Beattie ha smascherato una cricca di agenti della sicurezza nazionale statunitense specializzati nel rovesciare governi attraverso “rivoluzioni colorate”.

Operano attraverso una rete di ONG sponsorizzate dallo stato, tra cui il National Endowment for Democracy (NED) e le sue due filiali, l'International Republican Institute (IRI) e il National Democratic Institute (NDI).

Beattie accusa questi gruppi “pro-democrazia” di aver organizzato un ammutinamento contro il presidente Trump.

Secondo Beattie, questi agenti “pro-democrazia” hanno avuto un ruolo centrale nell'intralcio delle nostre elezioni nel 2020, e i loro piani sono culminati nella cosiddetta “insurrezione” del Campidoglio, che Revolver ha ora smascherato come un'operazione interna orchestrata da provocatori dell'FBI.

Beattie definisce i cospiratori “atlantisti”, un eufemismo comunemente applicato agli anglofili del Dipartimento di stato che antepongono gli interessi britannici a quelli americani.

Uno di questi cospiratori “atlantisti” era George Soros, secondo Beattie.

La bocca che ruggì

Normalmente quando Soros si impegna in operazioni di cambio di governo, fa di tutto per rivendicarne il merito, proprio come fece per il fallimento della Banca d'Inghilterra nel 1992.

Ad esempio, nel suo libro del 2003, La bolla della supremazia americana, Soros confessò apertamente: “Le mie fondamenta hanno contribuito al cambio di governo in Slovacchia nel 1998, in Croazia nel 1999 e in Jugoslavia nel 2000, mobilitando la società civile per sbarazzarsi rispettivamente di Vladimir Meciar, Franjo Tudjman e Slobodan Milosevic”.

Quello stesso anno, in una conferenza stampa a Mosca, Soros minacciò pubblicamente di deporre il presidente georgiano Eduard Shevardnadze, affermando: “Questo è ciò che abbiamo fatto in Slovacchia al tempo di Meciar, in Croazia al tempo di Tudjman e in Jugoslavia al tempo di Milosevic”.

Quando Shevardnadze fu successivamente rovesciato durante una rivolta del novembre 2003, Soros ne rivendicò pubblicamente il merito.

“Sono felicissimo di quanto accaduto in Georgia e sono molto orgoglioso di avervi contribuito”, si vantò Soros sul Los Angeles Times il 5 luglio 2004.

La rete del Regno Unito

Soros non si affrettò a rivendicare il merito della Rivoluzione arancione del 2004 in Ucraina, ma fu un suo collega, Michael McFaul, a farlo per lui.

“Gli americani si sono intromessi negli affari interni dell'Ucraina? Sì”, scrisse McFaul sul Washington Post del 21 dicembre 2004.

McFaul – che all'epoca era professore associato a Stanford, ma che in seguito fu ambasciatore in Russia sotto Obama – proseguì elencando vari “agenti d'influenza americani” che, a suo dire, avevano preso parte alla Rivoluzione arancione, tra cui l'International Renaissance Foundation, che McFaul descrisse in particolare come “finanziata da Soros”.

L'Ucraina è un Paese pericoloso e violento, dove gli agenti stranieri corrono rischi. È difficile capire perché McFaul abbia deliberatamente messo in pericolo Soros e una serie di agenti americani implicandoli pubblicamente in ingerenze elettorali, a meno che non stesse cercando di distogliere l'attenzione da altri partecipanti non americani.

Uno di questi partecipanti non americani era la Westminster Foundation for Democracy (WFD), un gruppo britannico “pro-democrazia” finanziato dal Ministero degli esteri britannico. La WFD ha avuto un ruolo cruciale nella Rivoluzione arancione.

McFaul ha forse messo a rischio i suoi connazionali americani per fornire copertura agli inglesi?

Come Rhodes Scholar e laureato a Oxford, McFaul è un ex-studente britannico che ha raggiunto una “posizione di influenza”, esattamente il tipo di persona a cui il Ministero degli esteri britannico si rivolge abitualmente per contribuire a promuovere “gli obiettivi della politica estera britannica”.

La mano nascosta della Gran Bretagna

Uno dei cosiddetti “agenti d'influenza americani” smascherati da McFaul sul Washington Post era Freedom House.

Come rivelato nel mio precedente articolo, Come gli inglesi hanno inventato le rivoluzioni colorate, Freedom House fu fondata nel 1941 come corpo di spionaggio britannico, il cui scopo era quello di spingere gli Stati Uniti a entrare nella Seconda guerra mondiale e di aiutare la Gran Bretagna a condurre operazioni segrete contro i pacifisti statunitensi.

Non c'è motivo di credere che Freedom House abbia cambiato schieramento da allora.

Descrivere Freedom House come un “agente d'influenza americano” mette un po' a dura prova il termine “americano”.

Freedom House esemplifica perfettamente quel tipo di fronte anglofilo che Darren Beattie definisce “atlantista”.

Dov'è Soros?

Sospetto che il vero ruolo di Soros tra gli operatori delle “rivoluzioni colorate” sia simile al suo ruolo nel mondo finanziario.

Distoglie l'attenzione dalle operazioni britanniche rivendicandone a gran voce il merito.

Allora, dov'è Soros adesso?

Perché non si vanta della figura decaduta del presidente Trump, come fece con Meciar, Tudjman, Milosevic, Shevardnadze e tanti altri?

Forse Soros ha ricevuto una chiamata da Londra.

Forse i suoi superiori lo hanno avvertito che la situazione si stava facendo un po' rischiosa con queste rivelazioni su Revolver.

Forse hanno detto a Soros di tenere la bocca chiusa.

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

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

“But we had forgotten that alongside Orwell’s dark vision, there was another—slightly older, slightly less well known, equally chilling: Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World. Contrary to common belief even among the educated, Huxley and Orwell did not prophesy the same thing. Orwell warns that we will be overcome by an externally imposed oppression. But in Huxley’s vision, no Big Brother is required to deprive people of their autonomy, maturity and history. As he saw it, people will come to love their oppression, to adore the technologies that undo their capacities to think.” – Neil Postman – Amusing Ourselves to Death

 “What Orwell feared were those who would ban books. What Huxley feared was that there would be no reason to ban a book, for there would be no one who wanted to read one. Orwell feared those who would deprive us of information. Huxley feared those who would give us so much that we would be reduced to passivity and egoism. Orwell feared that the truth would be concealed from us. Huxley feared the truth would be drowned in a sea of irrelevance. Orwell feared we would become a captive culture. Huxley feared we would become a trivial culture, preoccupied with some equivalent of the feelies, the orgy porgy, and the centrifugal bumblepuppy.” – Neil Postman – Amusing Ourselves to Death

I find myself ruminating about whether there is anything myself or any other average Joe can do to make a difference in this world, controlled by psychopaths, satanists, egomaniacal billionaires, corrupt evil politicians, a cabal of greedy financiers, neocon warmongering globalists, and the propaganda entertainment complex. When a complex entity becomes too large, it becomes inefficient, bureaucratic, corrupt, and uncontrollable.

The corruption, waste, and purposeful use of governmental power to enrich politicians and their billionaire benefactors, to the detriment of the country and the average citizen, has grown to an incomprehensible and uncontainable level. Whether DOGE was a legitimate undertaking by Musk and his tech geniuses to cut wasteful spending and uncover fraud, or nothing more than a PR stunt designed to keep the MAGA army satiated with the appearance of making America great again, it appears to have sunk into the swamps of DC, foiled by the uni-party once again.

But the show must go on, and this past week’s episode of “As the Empire Crumbles” was certainly entertaining, with the most powerful politician in the world hurling insults at the richest man in the world, who responded by accusing the president of pedophilia, while calling for his impeachment and the creation of a new political party. The MAGA acolytes were flabbergasted, as their two heroes, who were going to usher in a new golden era, came to blows and have irreconcilably broken up. Who could have predicted that the two biggest egos on the planet would ultimately clash and dissolve their partnership? Many of the twitterati were convinced it was just more 4D chess, just as they believed the Q bullshit during Trump’s first term.

The world was captivated and enthralled by this trivial social media war, while NATO/Ukraine desperately attempted to initiate WW3 with their attacks on Russian airbases, the Crimean bridge, and Russian passenger trains. Thousands of tweets and hundreds of articles have been written about this Trump/Musk bickerfest, while the world is imploding and we are accelerating headlong towards a global war, initiated by the three stooges running France, U.K. and Germany, and cheered on by the likes of Lindsey Graham and Mike Pompeo.

Trump’s campaign trail promise to end the Ukraine war in 24 hours has proven to be nothing more than his predictable bloviating bullshit. It has become clear he has absolutely no sway over the EU warmongers, or his own Deep State CIA operatives carrying out the attacks on Russia, as his weak and ineffectual efforts to end the conflict start to diminish his presidency from the outset.

The Gaza genocide continues, with American financial and military support, even though Trump promised to end that conflict. Iran continues to resist efforts to stop its nuclear enrichment program. China pretends to be negotiating with Trump on tariffs but is content letting the Soros installed leftist judges across the country place roadblock after roadblock in the way of Trump’s tariff, deportation, and governmental downsizing agenda. Foreign leaders know they can wait out all of Trump’s threats by just slow walking negotiations and hoping the Republicans lose the House in 2026.

China is biding its time until they believe America is sufficiently preoccupied with its own domestic turmoil and its Ukraine quagmire, and they will initiate their inevitable Taiwan takeover. The United States has not won a war in 80 years and is in no position to wage war in Europe and Asia simultaneously. Trump professes to be for peace, but the Deep State actors controlling the government and the globalist billionaires pulling the strings will force him into WW3. That is how Fourth Turnings roll.

With the intense opposition to the Big Beautiful Bill from Musk and key Republicans in the Senate, the next few months could get messy on the fiscal front. Musk is entirely correct, calling the BBB a massive, outrageous, pork-filled disgusting abomination of congressional pork. When the mind numbingly stupid media outlets declare it will add $3 trillion to the national debt over ten years, that means $3 trillion more than the $21 trillion of additional debt already projected. And this assumes no recessions, no financial crisis, no wars, and no fake pandemics. They purposefully give the impression our national debt only goes up by $3 trillion over ten years.

I’m absolutely certain the average prole, distracted by their technological bread and circuses, has no clue our debt is on automatic pilot to increase by nearly 70% over the next ten years. The average person remains trapped in a false comfort zone, designed by their overlords, to keep them satiated with toxic foodstuff, propaganda disguised as entertainment, and believing going deeper and deeper into debt, buying trinkets and baubles makes them wealthy. Until that comfort zone is shattered by the bitter reality of the next financial implosion, the masses will do nothing to try and alter the disastrous course plotted by their overlords.

The GOP passage of $9.4 billion of DOGE cuts is nothing more than a PR stunt to convince the ignorant masses they are actually doing something about the deficit. The dopes making bets on Draft Kings and posting videos on Instagram have no concept about how ridiculously out of control our government has become. They add $6 billion to the national debt every single day, so their $9.4 of “cuts” will be gone in 37 hours. Our deficits are big, but they are not beautiful. Our deficit in FY24 was $1.8 trillion. Through the first 7 months of FY25 the deficit is $1.049 trillion. At the current rate of spending, the deficit will be $2.2 trillion by the end of the fiscal year.

Interest on the national debt is now the second biggest expenditure and has gone from $500 billion during Trump’s first term to $1.3 trillion today. These deficits are clearly unsustainable, and anything which is unsustainable will not be sustained. But the corrupt, captured politicians and insatiably avaricious Wall Street bankers will keep dancing until the music stops. Then they will use their next engineered financial crisis to take more of our money and further restrict our liberties and freedom. CBDCs and social credit scores anyone?

The real reason Trump and the GOP need to pass the big beautiful, bloated pig of a bill is because our Ponzi scheme economy depends upon the never-ending issuance of trillions in debt every year to give the fabricated appearance of stability. This is why the GOP applauds Musk’s low hanging fruit DOGE cost savings and ignores them in their outrageously corpulent budget bill. The truth is any actual reduction in government spending (36% of GDP) would ripple through an economy entirely dependent upon government largess and immediately create a massive recession and probable depression.

Ponzi schemes have to keep growing until they run out of suckers believing the bullshit underlying the Ponzi. This is where those controlling the levers of society (Bernays’ invisible government) utilize their limitless well of propaganda techniques, technological distractions, and mindless entertainment venues to keep the ignorant masses amused, delusional, and living in denial of the reality staring them in the face.

Since the 2008 financial crisis we have been muddling through economically at a 10,000 feet macro level, with periodic crisis episodes (housing collapse, fake pandemic) utilized by the powers that be to issue trillions more debt as the antidote to the initial crisis created by too much debt. At a micro level, the average American has seen a significant decline in their standard of living, as official government reported inflation has eroded 40% of their purchasing power, when in reality they have lost more than 60% of their purchasing power. The reality for the average American prole is debt slavery, either self-imposed to keep up with the Joneses or forced upon them to survive this globalist-imposed death by a thousand cuts economy.

Credit card debt of $1.3 trillion is at an all-time high, up $350 billion (35%) since 2020. The average balance on those credit cards is over $7,000 and the average interest rate on those unpaid balances is over 21%. Student loan debt of $1.8 trillion is at an all-time high, up $100 billion since 2020, with over 25% of these loans in default. Auto loan debt of $1.7 trillion is at an all-time high, up $350 billion (27%) since 2020. The average length of these loans is now 70 months. The borrower is underwater by the fifth year of these loans. Shockingly, credit card and auto loan delinquencies have been soaring in the last year, with credit card delinquencies above 3% for the first time since 2012, and auto loan delinquencies surpassed 8% for the first time since 2010. Does that sound like a consumer on solid ground?

In addition, the housing market is a disaster looking for a trigger. The Wall Street hedge funds (Blackrock) bought up millions of homes, driving prices 140% (Case Siller Index) higher than the 2012 low, while outstanding mortgage debt has risen from the 2012 low of $13 trillion to $21 trillion today. Prices are ridiculously high and mortgage rates of 7% make it virtually impossible for an average working stiff to buy even a small home. The market is frozen.

This is why Trump and his GOP minions must avoid a recession at all costs by continuing to rack up $2 trillion annual deficits. A recession would result in millions of layoffs, which would mean unpaid mortgages, which would mean foreclosures and slashing of home prices, which would trigger housing collapse 2.0, which would turn the recession into a depression, causing a stock market collapse. Now you know why they are desperate to pass this big, beautiful behemoth of bilge.

The Fed is in a precarious position of their own making, with all choices pointing towards disastrous outcomes. They are already sitting on over $1 trillion of unrealized bond losses, while their Wall Street owners sit on another $400 billion of unrealized bond losses. If these entities ever have to realize those losses, our entire banking system would collapse. The Fed has cut rates by 1%, but market rates went up, as their power to mislead market players diminishes.

They have reduced their balance sheet from $9 trillion to $6.7 trillion. The last time they tried to reduce their balance sheet in 2019, the repo market spasmed and they used the Covid cover to drastically print more fiat. Trump is mocking Powell and demanding interest rate cuts. Powell is pretending to be independent, but he is praying for some kind of crisis to again set the printing presses to hyper-speed. I’m sure the ruling oligarchs are hatching a new crisis to expand their wealth, power, and control, while further impoverishing and enslaving the plebs.

It is clear at least to me, we stand on the precipice of an economic conflagration capable of putting the final nail in the coffin of this empire of debt. At the same time there are unrelenting evil forces who are frantically creating the casus-belli to initiate World War III and the massive death and destruction that would produce. The simultaneous commencement of these two events would produce the type of climax expected in the waning years of a Fourth Turning, with a final resolution expected by 2032.

Most people are blissfully unaware of the imminent demise of their comfortable existence, so addicted to their techno-gadgets and mindless social media performance art, they are incapable of critical thought regarding the dystopian world they inhabit.

“People will come to adore the technologies that undo their capacities to think” ― Neil Postman – Amusing Ourselves to Death

“If politics is like show business, then the idea is not to pursue excellence, clarity or honesty but to appear as if you are, which is another matter altogether.” ― Neil Postman – Amusing Ourselves to Death

If you ever needed proof politics is nothing but show business, it is this big, beautiful bill episode of drama, fiction, comedy, and tragedy. Excellence, clarity, and honesty have no part in this absurd psychodrama of lies, accusations, and continued downward spiral of this empire of debt. We know Huxley believed the masses could be sufficiently distracted by their own ego driven pursuits, but I don’t think even he realized how much power the technological “advances” of our times (TV based mass media, the internet, corporate/government controlled social media, Big Pharma) would be used by the ruling elite to control, manipulate, sedate, and scare the ignorant masses into voluntary subservience. Everything we are witnessing and living through is nothing more than a theater production, designed by Bernays’ invisible governing authorities to herd us towards their technological gulag, with the slaughterhouse as the other alternative.

Huxley’s 1932 dystopian vision, which he believed was more likely than Orwell’s 1949 dystopian vision of the future, and reinforced in a letter to Orwell in 1949 shortly before his death, has been the pre-dominant method used by our overlords to rule over, manipulate, and exploit the foibles of the unthinking masses. They have kept their citizens distracted with pleasures, drugged into passivity, taught to feel rather than think in government run indoctrination centers (public schools) and overloaded with so much useless trivial information, they are incapable of distinguishing between good and evil – actually believing their servitude is freedom.

While Huxley’s dystopia continues, the ruling class fears their passive mind control methods aren’t as effective in achieving their great reset agenda, and in need of some Orwellian censorship, disinformation, brute force, government intimidation, harsh mind control, and guaranteeing compliance through fear. Aren’t we lucky to be experiencing the best of both dystopian visions. Those controlling the levers of society have used the school system to create a soulless amalgamation of hedonistic mass consumers; purposeless, apathetic, with muddled brains unable to understand their unintended enslavement to the evil demons running our world and controlling their lives.

Knowing most of what we see on our screens and hear from supposed “experts”, left wing corporate media talking heads, and Fox News bimbos, is gibberish and propaganda, it is hard to distinguish real threats from clickbait, purposeful disinformation, and scare tactics designed to make you do what they want you to do. The precarious financial situation of the country is real. The danger from an AI cage built through a tech-state merger with Palantir to surveil and digitally profile everyone is real.

The threat of the Ukraine-Russia conflict morphing into WW3 is real. The desire by billionaire globalists to introduce a Great Reset, Great Taking, and CBDCs is real. The planned, funded, and executed invasion of our southern border during the Basement Dummy administration by third world dregs, with the sole intention of destroying the social fabric and finances of the country, run by the Soros/Clinton/Obama triumvirate is real.

Even with the dismantling of their USAID insurrection funding source, this week’s festivities in Los Angeles kicked off the summer of civil war. There is nothing real or spontaneous about these riots. Whenever pallets of bricks suddenly show up on streets in city centers, you know Soros and his ilk are behind the organized destruction of that particular city. The brick and bomb throwers are being paid to riot and take photo ops. This will assuredly be rolled out in our other Democrat controlled urban shitholes across the land. The governor of California and the communist mayor of Los Angeles are paid acolytes of Soros, stoking insurrection and should be arrested and thrown into the dungeons of DC, like the grandmothers and patriots who sauntered through the Capitol on January 6.

We find ourselves on the precipice of a financial, social, and military calamity, all driven by the three driving forces of this Fourth Turning: debt, civic decay, global disorder. Anyone not noticing events are intensifying, conflict is expanding, anger is building, and the world is accelerating towards that precipice at breakneck speed, is simply ignorant or their minds are so numbed by their i-gadgets and government school indoctrination, that it’s beyond their comprehension to acknowledge reality.

At this point in history, I do not believe there are enough awakened critical thinking citizens to make a difference during the waning years of this Fourth Turning. We can’t vote our way out. We likely can’t shoot our way out. We can’t buy our way out. When the majority are proud of their ignorance and believe it is superior to actual knowledge, your society is pretty much screwed.

“What is happening here is that television is altering the meaning of ‘being informed’ by creating a species of information that might properly be called disinformation. I am using this world almost in the precise sense in which it is used by spies in the CIA or KGB. Disinformation does not mean false information. It means misleading information–misplace, irrelevant, fragmented or superficial information – information that creates the illusion of knowing something but which in fact leads one away from knowing. I am saying something far more serious than that we are being deprived of authentic information. I am saying we are losing our sense of what it means to be well informed. Ignorance is always correctable. But what shall we do if we take ignorance to be knowledge?” ― Neil Postman – Amusing Ourselves to Death

The existing financial, social and political paradigms will have to collapse and be swept away for any real change to occur. The problem is it appears that is exactly what the billionaire globalist elite are trying to trigger. In the aftermath, amidst chaos, financial ruin, civil and global war, social strife, and a political vacuum, they envision establishing an authoritarian global world order, with CBDCs, social credit scores, 15-minute cities, and Big Brother level surveillance. If this vision prevails, Orwell wins the award over Huxley for the most accurate dystopian nightmare.

Our only hope resides in the hubris and arrogance of the ruling class. Once the collapse is underway, its course is unpredictable and unstable. The best laid plans have a way of going awry. This could offer an opportunity for normal rational people to make their stand. If a liberty movement, backed by the 300 million firearms residing in the red states, could re-ignite the brush fires of freedom in the minds of men, maybe we could reset the course of our country. The odds probably aren’t worse than they were in 1776. At this point, all we can do is prepare mentally, physically, and spiritually for the coming storm. Buy supplies, guns and ammo. And remember what your forefathers accomplished with far less. The choice is slavery or freedom.

“It does not take a majority to prevail … but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men.” ― Samuel Adams

“The time is near at hand which must determine whether Americans are to be free men or slaves.” – George Washington

Reprinted with permission from The Burning Platform.

The post We Are Being Amused and Abused to Death appeared first on LewRockwell.