Today’s Technology: The Gateway to Psychotronic Weapons and the Reprogramming of Humanity
Humanity is facing a challenging turning point ahead as the new global system readies to reset the worlds’ governments by the year 2030. This is the United Nation’s sinister Sustainable Development scheme which will completely restructure society and laws and pulverize the free will of every human being. These freedom-stealing sustainable development goals have already been adopted into American society, and yet, the majority of citizens respond to this infringement of their rights with a passive whatever and who cares attitude. American patriots have a long history of laying their lives down for their freedoms. Why are they surrendering them now without resistance?
There is no soft way to answer this question. Our government has been using Directed Energy Weapons (DEWs) and psychotronic mind weapons on the populations to manipulate thought processes so that the upcoming Great Reset transitions without mass mutiny by the people.
The sobering subject on psychotronic weapons that I am about to talk about in this article will sound science fiction and conspiratorial to some readers, therefore I want to preface this article with an excerpt from a lengthy 2009 substantiated research report on the history of the US concerning mind-weapons, and the US government’s blatant disregard for human rights. The report, documented on Project Censored, is titled Electromagnetic Weapons and Human Rights, and was written by Peter Phillips, Professor of Sociology at Sonoma State University and Director of Project Censored, Lew Brown, Psychologist, and Bridget Thornton, History major at Sonoma State University.
The report states:
“This research explores the current capabilities of the US military to use electromagnetic (EMF) devices to harass, intimidate, and kill individuals and the continuing possibilities of violations of human rights by the testing and deployment of these weapons…”
I can verify from my own experience that every word in the above research report is accurate and that mind-altering weapons are being targeted against American citizens. For the last year, both my wife, June, and I, have been victims of a psychotronic weapon attack, perpetrated by the US government, which has caused us bodily harm and mental torment. No surprise here. Since 2019, we have both exposed the Covid pandemic hoax, the weaponized mRNA Covid vaccines, Agenda 2030 and other corruption and fraud inside this government.
Before I talk in more detail about our horrific ongoing ordeal, I want to provide solid leverage to my claims that our government and foreign governments are using harmful technology as weapons of warfare against the mental and physical health of populations worldwide. Do not think for one moment that any government will spend billions of dollars to develop directed energy weapons to attack a few political dissidents. No, this type of weaponized system is highly sophisticated and expensive warfare, and developed to restructure and dominate the minds of the masses into obedient and easily controlled lapdogs.
Over the last thirty years, the infiltrated powers-that-be have deliberately submersed and encaged humanity within a hula-hoop of harmful electromagnetic and radio wave technologies, enabling easy indoctrination over human minds. Wireless cell phones, computers, cell towers, radio towers, and so forth are being used as gateways to these mind-altering directed energy weapons. “Nah, not true,” you might argue. “My cell phone provides me with convenience, easy communication, and entertainment!” Yes, it does all of that, but deception always comes in pretty boxes.
Directed Energy Weapons of the mind are not new technology. The Russians themselves claim they are in the 5th generation of mind-controlling DEW development. This is true. Their technology on how to create a controlled beam of energy from far distances to harm human targets can be traced back as far as 1920. The testing stages were surpassed long ago and they are now super weapons of mass suppression and destruction.
Psychotronic weapons are Directed Energy Weapons, and defined as weapons that aim to control or modify the psyche, or attack the sensory and data-processing systems of the human organism, with the goal of confusing or destroying the signals that normally keep the body in equilibrium. Other mind-altering weapons that fall under Directed Energy Weapons are Neuroweapons, High Energy Radio Frequency (RF) weapons or Influence weapons, Lasers, High-powered Microwaves (non-nuclear electromagnetic pulse), Sound or Acoustic weapons, Infrasound weapons, and Ultrasound weapons. All these weapons harm both the mind and the physical health of the body.
Today’s run-away and unregulated technologies have submerged humanity and the environment into unparalleled harmful levels of electromagnetic fields (EMF). Symptoms of EMF include skin inflammation, headaches, nausea, dizziness, tinnitus, sleep disorders, fatigue, fibromyalgia, heart arrhythmia, memory loss, brain fog, anxiety, mood disorders and thoughts of suicide.
Validations on the dangers of EMF to human health were completed over five decades ago, and still being confirmed through scientific research, and yet today we are fed constant lies by the government-controlled media that WIFI and RF technology is completely safe for human health. But even the World Health Organization classified radio frequency radiation as a possible carcinogen and the California Health Department issued warning that cell phone radiation increases the risk of brain cancer and low sperm counts.
On February 2nd, 1998, the US Army War College Quarterly published an amazing article by Timothy L. Thomas, titled “The Mind Has No Firewall.” He addresses a truth that few citizens ever think about, and that is the simple logic that the human body was formed much like a computer, containing countless data processors. Our brain is extremely unique, and without its constant signaling to the other parts of our body, our physical, cognitive and emotional state would be out of balance and impaired, even causing death. Every human being should be required to read Mr. Thomas’ article, because the advancements in technology today are extremely damaging to human health, and can be used as weapons against us, individually or as an entire populace. Humans can be hijacked, destroyed and eliminated just as easily as a computer that has been infected with a destructive and irreparable virus.
Our cell phones, our computers, our TV’s, our cars, and the chips in our credit cards all track our whereabouts, allowing the controllers to know where we stand, travel, eat and sleep. They have gotten the world so dependent on their WIFI gadgets, and the convenience they provide, that the people have surrendered their privacy and freedoms, and allowed their governments across the world to confine them within an invisible wall of harmful radio frequencies, wireless signals, and excessive electromagnetic fields. All of these gadgets, like cell phones and laptops, are gateways to psychotronic weapons.
If the government does not like you, they will track you from every device you own. They will follow your signals from the satellites above, and aim highly advanced Directed Energy Weapons at your brain while you sleep, or use radios and phone lines to send unhealthy electromagnetic impulses. We are now living in a precarious time where the human body is being manipulated and debilitated on a daily basis, without our knowledge or consent. And like Mr. Thomas’ article warns, computers have firewalls, but our minds do not. We are constant open targets for all governments whose aim is to reset society by 2030, and keep citizens tightly-surveilled and controlled during the final takeover. Sadly, we as a people allowed them to imprison us under their technology, and they now own us.
The evils of psychotronic warfare were exposed back in 1999, by Russian author, N. I. Anisimov, in his informative book entitled Psychotronic Golgotha. Anisimov was spokesperson for psychotronic victims, and interviewed by several Russian mainstream news departments in the 1990’s. He appeared in the 1998 documentary, Zombies of Russia, aired by German television and has been quoted in Timothy L. Thomas’ article, “The Mind Has No Firewall.”
Anisimov explains how these direct energy weapons are developed to penetrate through any type of barrier, using powerful generators, with a high degree of accuracy, and striking victims at any distance. These weapons are attached to a person’s biological field so that intellect and psychological type can be observed and studied, and depending on the program for that particular victim, artificially induce various illnesses into his organs.
The most ambitious (and chilling) of the USSR’s goals for mind-weapon programs provides a clear explanation on why humanity is not told the truth about the ill-effects on the human body caused by today’s WIFI and RF technology. They are the following:
– Controlling human behavior from a far distance using electromagnetic fields.
– Creating physical and biological influence and harm on humans using electromagnetic fields, magnetic fields, and acoustic waves, without their knowledge.
– Erasing information from the brain using electromagnetic fields.
– Creating a new race of bio-robots, using distant influencing of populations with the goal to create an obedient and loyal people to the government and its political system.
– Preplacing psychotronic weapons in space {satellites}, with the goal of controlling and managing the populations.
Is the above information a reason why on October 2nd, 2001, Congressman Dennis Kucinich introduced bill H.R. 2977, the “Space Preservation Act of 2001?” He was certainly aiming to outlaw space-based weapons and ultra-low frequency weapons systems, including psychotronic weapons that were directed at individuals or populations for mood management and mind control. The bill was referred to the House Committees on Science, Armed Services and International Relations—and was expediently vetoed.
What Anisimov goes on to mention in his book grabbed my attention, especially because I had warned (and still warn) people against being immunized with Covid mRNA vaccines. He affirms that the USSR’s secret service conducted vaccinations on the population, secretly injecting almost 30% of the populace with micro-schematic chips. The chips, once injected, allowed recipients to be radio-controlled and tested with radio frequencies. This resulted in creating controlled bio-robots for the Soviets’ ideological manipulations.
Could it be that the psychopathic gangsters running the Western nations faked a pandemic to warrant and mandate mass inoculation of the mRNA vaccines onto the public for the same reason the USSR secretly injected micro-chips into their population—to pave a pathway for people to receive signals inside their bodies for use of psychotronic weapons on a mass scale? This would explain why mRNA bioweapon technology was used in the development of the Covid vaccines, allowing for easy transport of genetic or other added nanoscale materials directly into cells.
Micro-chipped Covid vaccines might explain the reason why everyone was ordered to stand 6-feet apart from each other. Medically, the 6-foot rule carried no soundness, and was not recommended by CDC based on data; but makes sense by a rogue pack of wolves who needed to ensure signaling was working on a mass level. And since cell phones, computers, and other WIFI gadgets can be tracking devices and transmit signals, the governments worldwide are guaranteed the masses remain psychologically disrupted.
According to Anisimov, the Soviets used powerful generators and microwave apparatuses for their psychotronic weapons. These generators could be stationary or portable, located on earth or orbiting above via satellites. I suspect the attack on me and June comes from a satellite above. I discovered online that there is a top-secret military facility located at Fort Huachuca near Sierra Vista, Arizona, three hours away from where we had been living, which tests Ultra High Radio Frequency (UHF) Satellite Communications and Electronic Weapons. Electronic Warfare (EW) is the use of electromagnetic and directed energy to control the electromagnetic spectrum or attack an enemy. I have no idea what they are up to, but testing for ultra-high radio frequencies in relation to satellites is something every human being should be very worried about, especially in light of the information I am providing in this article.
It took some time for me and June to figure out that we were targets of a DEW. Our nightmare began mid-2024. June began feeling severe pain in her left ear. Antibiotics and over-the-counter medications did not bring relief. Then sporadic body tremors and brain fog hit her, which provided clue to a strong electromagnetic field going on inside our home. A few days later, a nerve-wracking radio frequency squealing sound battered our ears and brain, along with constant ringing and pressure. Upon examination I noticed a red-raw laser-like burn in June’s left ear canal. The sound, like a hot-wired energy ray, intensified at night, mainly between the hours of 8:00 pm and 6:00 am. Our entire bodies heated up like a microwave and our blood pressure soared. We could not get relief from the intensity of the torment on our mental and physical health. We were sleeping with metal and copper sheets over our heads to try and block the wave, but those barriers were useless. The pressure and sound became so unbearable at night that we fled our home and drove to various hotels each night, but that beam of energy followed us. We were confused and baffled because none of our neighbors heard the sound or felt sick.
A month later, the pitch died down enough for us to function inside the house during the day. Around this time, I experienced a rapid weight loss of about 40 pounds, lost the majority of muscle mass in my entire body, and my hair started falling out. I went to the doctor, and he prepared me for the possibility that I had cancer. I did not tell him about our troubles, but I suspected the intense radio frequencies had destroyed my health. I was right, a full body scan showed no cancer.
I resigned from my job and we moved from our home, hoping that by relocating to another state we would get our life back. Instead, that mind weapon followed us from state to state. As we drove across country, we noticed newly erected sky-high radio towers strategically located mile after mile, approximately ¼ to ½ miles apart on every highway, back road, in every rural town, busy city, and in every state. Next to these radio goliaths tall cell towers had also been raised. These towers enabled that high-pitch energy to continually assault our ears, and we suspected that our cell phones were transmitting signals of our whereabouts by those innumerable radio towers.
We were correct in our assessment regarding our phones. When we started parking a good distance away from our hotel rooms, and leaving our phones in the car, we felt relief from the pitch. We drove to the Eastern coast, and lodged at an extended-stay hotel for a month, and felt joy to get our minds back. But when our Arizona car tabs expired, and we had to register our cars in that new state, we provided the DMV with our hotel address. The following day, that pitch found us again, and we had to bolt from the hotel. We drove across the border to a neighboring state, and found another hotel. And for two more months we dodged the wave.
After that few months, we let our guard down, and believed we were free from the attack. We badly wanted to settle and moved into a nice house, but a week later, within eight hours of updating our address at the Social Security office, we were hit again with that weapon, causing us to flee our home again, and return to the previous hotel. It was obvious the US government was involved, because we became heavily targeted both times we updated our new addresses at government agencies.
In 2018, Stew Magnuson wrote an article in “National Defense,” titled Exclusive: Doctors Reveal Details of Neuro-Weapon Attacks in Havana. His article divulges the truth behind the mysterious 2017 attacks on American personnel while employed at the US Embassy in Havana, Cuba. Three expert physicians, Dr. Giordana, Dr. Hoffer and Dr. Balaban, investigated the 25 cases of reported illnesses, and concluded that Directed Energy Weapons, or more precisely stated, a series of wide-scale electronic neuroweapon attacks, caused the disruption and damage to the victim’s brains.
It is interesting to note that the DEW attacks in Havana did not happen at the Embassy, or in one location, but took place at numerous locations, either at a victim’s home or at a hotel. The targeted employees reported that it felt as though an invisible beam of energy had zeroed in on their whereabouts inside their dwelling places, and would only stop when they opened the front door. As well, the attacks seemed individually personalized because other personnel, living in the same dwelling place as the victims, but in other rooms, felt no symptoms whatsoever—strongly suggesting the sophistication of these psychotronic weapons in being able to lock in on individuals.
An article in Space and Defense (2016), called Attack on the Brain: Neurowars and Neurowarfare, by Armin Krishnan, is a revealing and honest draft on the dangers involved when Directed Energy Weapons are secretly tested and enacted without oversight and public knowledge. He reveals that the MK ULTRA mind-control documents of the 1950’s and 1960’s prove that the CIA and US military desired to have superior intelligence on hypnotic and physical control of the mind. Krishnan believes that neuroscience will lead to the development of neuroweapons, because neuroweapons can manipulate mental states, perceptions, thoughts, emotions, and behavior. And this explains why he mentions DARPA’s intrusive interest (after 9-11) on developing brain research for the National Security sector. DARPA played a big role in Covid vaccine development and implementation (let’s not forget the millions who died after taking the vaccine), and I am not surprised to see them putting their big noses in interests of the mind.
Krishnan mentions a quote from Vladimir Putin that should solidify the horrors of DEW technology:
“Such high-tech {mind} weapons systems will be comparable in effect to nuclear weapons, but will be more acceptable in terms of political and military ideology.” Vladimir Putin
Psychotronic weapons are tangible threats against humanity and can replace the use of biological or nuclear weapons. The controllers in power are striving to restructure world governments and need to keep the worlds’ populations habitually dependent on their EMF-charged technology. Citizens who are targeted as a whole for mind manipulation under these weapons (more than likely at night) might not feel symptoms, as the waves and beams of RF will be synchronized and aimed at a lax potency, to bring about controlled changes to mind and body. And if the government choses to eliminate individuals or entire populaces, they could increase frequencies on those towers using generators mounted on satellites above.
I have no doubt that the unhealthy saturation of tall radio towers spread uniformly across the landscapes of this nation is a “weaponized” move by this government for possible preparation of DEWs against the population. The taller the tower, the longer the range, as they can transmit signals over buildings and hills, and those higher power transmitters emit stronger signals, which can travel further, with signals possibly reaching up to 45 miles. So, why are those radio towers put up so close together across America, every ¼ to ½ mile apart in most cases? On the website “Steel in the Air,” a United States 2023 map reveals a whopping 175,000 active radio/cell towers. This is extremely disturbing!
I am wrapping this up with the last paragraph published on the US Electromagnetic Weapons and Human Rights report, which I mentioned at the beginning of this article, because I find it the best answer on how We the People can take back our country and preserve our minds, bodies, freedoms, and God-given rights to pursue happiness.
“For the US Government to unilaterally declare that our country will not comply with international human rights laws, nor uphold the core values of our nation’s foundation is an indication of extremism that supersedes the values and beliefs of the American people. When such extremism exists we need to take seriously the founders’ declaration that, to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed—That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to affect their Safety and Happiness.” Declaration of Independence 1776
References:
https://www.projectcensored.org/us-electromagnetic-weapons-and-human-rights-2/
https://press.armywarcollege.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1871&context=parameters
https://www.psicopolis.com/psipol/arch/psychotronic.htm
https://ehtrust.org/scientists-and-doctors-demand-moratorium-on-5g-warning-of-health-effects/
https://appliedenergetics.com/
https://www.theguardian.com/science/2021/jun/02/microwave-weapons-havana-syndrome-experts
https://www.ewg.org/news-insights/news/its-official-california-issues-caution-cell-phone-use
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0013935118300161?via%3Dihub
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/0039625788900884
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160412014001354
https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP96-00788R001300020001-6.pdf
https://www.usafa.edu/app/uploads/Space_and_Defense_9_1.pdf
https://www.themoscowtimes.com/archive/report-soviets-used-top-secret-psychotronic-weapons
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Havana_syndrome
https://techwellness.com/blogs/expertise/phone-track-you-when-it-is-powered-off-shut-down-emf
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radio_masts_and_towers
The post Today’s Technology: The Gateway to Psychotronic Weapons and the Reprogramming of Humanity appeared first on LewRockwell.
War Is a Certainty
Recently, an associate offered the following observation with regard to the likelihood of war in the immediate future:
“The big guys like to play chess with the world. It’s the biggest game. The bankers need ups and downs and wars to make money. The military needs wars to exist. The politicians need both to exist.”
Whilst he was reiterating a concept we have discussed on many occasions, it occurred to me that I have never seen the subject defined so succinctly, nor so informatively.
Let’s break it down:
The bankers need ups and downs and wars to make money
Just as bankers increase their profit as a result of upward and downward economic fluctuations, so, too, do they benefit from war. It is not unusual for a given bank to finance those who would create armed conflict, and indeed, they sometimes bankroll both sides. Whilst banks have other means of making money, war is often more profitable than conventional banking.
The military needs war
The military-industrial complex is in the business of selling armaments to governments. Although armament sales may tick over nicely in peace time, they boom in war time. Therefore, any armament supplier will benefit from war. It matters little whether it is an all-out war or a series of smaller ventures. The object is sales.
The politicians need both banks and war
This is true in the sense that politicians need both bankers and an active military to thrive. Political campaigns depend upon funding. Banks and armament suppliers have long been a major source of campaign funds for candidates of the primary political parties. (If each party is well-paid before the election, favourable treatment towards banks and armament suppliers is assured, regardless of which party wins an election.)
But there is further necessity for armed conflict with regard to politicians. First, it is a truism that a country rarely changes leaders during times of war, and nothing is more imperative to the politician than gaining a further term of office.
Second, nothing distracts the voting public like war. If a politician is receiving increased criticism from the voters, a good war can be counted on to get the voters concentrating more on the war than on the politician’s poor stewardship.
Third, governments typically remove the freedoms of a populace over time. Whilst citizens may object to the loss of their freedoms in normal times, they are often more willing to relinquish them “temporarily” in times of war, “for the good of the country.” Not surprisingly, lost freedoms are seldom reinstated after a war.
Consider the words of James Madison, the fourth US President:
“Of all the enemies of public liberty, war is, perhaps, the most to be dreaded, because it comprises and develops the germ of every other. War is the parent of armies; from these proceed debts and taxes; and armies and debts and taxes are the known instruments for bringing the many under the dominion of the few. In war, too, the discretionary power of the Executive is extended…. No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare.”
Generally speaking, the citizens of most countries would prefer to avoid war. After all, they rarely benefit from it. But then, the impetus for war is almost never generated by the people of a country. Unless a nation is actually attacked, in nearly every case, the people need to be talked into going to war.
Convincing the People
A good example of this is the US, who, since World War I, have needed convincing on almost every occasion when political leaders proposed war. In World War I, the Lusitania incident was created jointly by the UK and the US to motivate them. In World War II, the goading of Japan was needed. In Vietnam, the trumped-up Gulf of Tonkin incident was needed, and so on.
Suffice to say that, when bankers, the military industrial complex, the politicians, or all three decide to instigate war, war will come to pass. Whether it is a conservative government or a liberal government, if a clear threat does not exist, one will be invented.
At the present time in history, the countries of the First World have created the greatest pillaging of the state coffers that has ever occurred. As complacent as the peoples of both the EU and the US have been in recent decades, there does seem to be a growing understanding amongst the peoples that they have been scammed.
The respective governments are running out of rabbits to pull out of the hat to distract the masses. It would therefore seem that there has been no time in history in which war was so needed by national leaders—both as a distraction to the populace and as a last squeeze at the monetary lemon, prior to the inevitable crash.
And so, what does that mean to the reader? Assuming he is not invited to take part, shouldn’t the drums of war be of little interest to him? Well, in terms of his own physical safety, that may well be true, but here is an historical fact to consider:
Any country that is considering waging war against another country should first consider that the loser is almost always the country that runs out of money first.
No venture is more costly than warfare. The EU and the US are bankrupt now. Those presently living in those locales may escape actual duty in the military, but they will unquestionably be expected to pick up the tab through taxation and inflation.
Those who presently feel that their obligations to their governments are already barely manageable might wish to consider what they will be, both during and after a major war.
Reprinted with permission from International Man.
The post War Is a Certainty appeared first on LewRockwell.
‘The Land of Performance’: Trump Wanted a Perfect War, a Headline Showstopper
“Depending on who you ask, the US bombing of Iran’s nuclear facilities in Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan was either a smashing success that severely crippled Tehran’s nuclear programme, or a flashy show whose results were less than advertised … In the grand scheme of things, all of this is just drama”.
The big issue – second only to ‘what next in Iran’ and how they might respond — says Michael Wolff (who has written four books on Trump), is “how the MAGA is going to respond”:
“And I think he [Trump] is genuinely worried, [Wolff emphasises]. And I think he should be worried. There are two fundamental things to this coalition – Immigration and War. Everything else is fungible and can be compromised. It’s not sure those two elements can be compromised”.
The signal from Hegseth (‘we are not at war with the Iranian people – just its nuclear programme’) clearly reflects a message being ‘walked back’ in the face of MAGA pushback: ‘Pay no attention. We’re not really doing war’ is what Hegseth was trying to say.
So, what’s next? There are basically four things that can happen: First, the Iranians can say ‘okay, we surrender’, but that’s just not going to happen; the second option is protracted war between Iran and Israel with Israel continuing to be attacked in a way that it has never been attacked before. And thirdly there is attempted regime change — although this has never been successfully achieved by air assault alone. Historically, America’s regime changes have been accompanied by mass slaughter, years of instability, terrorism and chaos.
Lastly, there are those who warn that nuclear Armageddon is on the table with the aim of destroying Iran. But that would be a case of self-harm, since it likely would be Trump’s Armageddon too — at the midterm elections.
“Let me explain”, says Wolff;
“I have been making lots of calls – so I think I have a sense of the arc that got Trump to where we are [with the strikes on Iran]. Calls are one of the main ways I track what he is thinking (I use the word ‘thinking’ loosely)”.
“I talk to people whom Trump has been speaking with on the phone. I mean all of Trump’s internal thinking is external; and it’s done in a series of his constant calls. And it’s pretty easy to follow – because he says the same thing to everybody. So, it’s this constant round of repetition …”.
“So, basically, when the Israelis attacked Iran, he got very excited about this – and his calls were all repetitions of one theme: Were they going to win? Is this a winner? Is this game-over? They [the Israelis] are so good! This really is a showstopper”.
“So again, we’re in the land of performance. This is a stage and the day before we attacked Iran, his calls were constantly repeating: If we do this, it needs to be perfect. It needs to be a win. It has to look perfect. Nobody dies”.
Trump keeps saying to interlocutors: “We go ‘in-boom-out’: Big Day. We want a big day. We want (wait for it, Wolff says) a perfect war”. And then, out of the blue, Trump announced a ceasefire, which Wolff suggests was ‘Trump concluding his perfect war’.
And so, suddenly — with both Israel and Iran apparently co-operating with the staging of this ‘perfect war headline’ — “he gets annoyed that it doesn’t run perfectly”.
Wolff continues:
“Trump, by then, had already stepped into the role that ‘this was his war’. His perfect war. Television drama at the highest level: War to create a headline. And the headline is ‘WE WON’. I’m in charge now and everybody is going to do what I tell them. What we saw subsequently was his frustration at the spoiling of an outstanding headline: They’re not doing what he tells them”.
What is the broader ramification to this mico-episode? Well, Wolff for one believes Trump is unlikely to get sucked into a long complex war. Why? “Because Trump simply does not have the attention span for it. This is it. He’s done: In-boom-out”.
There is one fundamental point to be understood in Wolff’s analysis for its wider strategic import: Trump craves attention. He thinks in terms of generating headlines — each day, every day, but not necessarily the policies that flow from that headline. He seeks daily headline dominance, and for that he wants to define the headlines via a rhetorical posture — moulding ‘reality’ to give his own showstopping Trumpian ‘take’.
Headlines then become, as it were, a sort of political dominance which can subsequently metamorphose into policy — or not.
Nonetheless, it will not be quite as easy as Wolff suggests for Trump to simply ‘move the spotlight on’ from Iran — although Trump is a master at finding a new point of contention. For fundamentally, Trump has committed himself to the ancillary headline of ‘Iran will never have a bomb’. Note that he does not define that in policy terms, but gives himself wiggle-room for a possible later victory claim.
Yet, there is another fundamental point here: The Israeli attack on Iran on 13 June was supposed to collapse Iran like a house-of-cards. That is what Israel expected — and what Trump clearly expected too: “[Trump’s phone calls on the eve of the Israeli surprise attack] were all repetitions of one theme: Were they going to win? Is this a winner? Is this game-over? [The Israelis] are so good! This is really a show–stopper”. Trump foresaw the possible collapse of the Iranian State.
Well … it wasn’t ‘game over’. Israelis may be hugging themselves in excitement at the Mossad pièce de théâtre on 13 June; at the ‘professionalism’ of Mossad-led decapitations; the assassinations of scientists, the cyber and the sabotage attacks. Mossad is acclaimed by many in Israel — yet all were tactical achievements.
The strategic objective — the ‘be all’ and ‘end all’ of it — was a bust: The ‘House-of-Cards’ did not implode. Rather, it powerfully rebounded. Instead of Iran being rendered weaker, the attack succeeded in firing-up Shia and Iranian national identities. It has ignited a largely dormant national fervour and passion. Iran will be the more resolute in the future.
So, if the Israeli 13 June assault didn’t succeed, why would the plan go any better second time around and with Iran fully prepared? A long attritional war with Iran may be Netanyahu’s preference to fuel his own hoped-for ‘Great Victory’ headline. But Netanyahu cannot now pursue such delusions (neither can Israel survive an attritional war) – without substantive American help (which might not be forthcoming).
Though Trump’s very evident queasiness (as painted by Wolff’s interlocutors) over whether the Israeli sneak attack would prove to be a quick win or not, is suggestive of Trump’s inner temper: “Is this a winner? Is this game-over? It needs to be a win: It has to look perfect: In-boom-out”.
These repetitive enquiries to those around him spell more a lack of self-confidence, rather than suggest that he wants — or has the attention span — for a long-drawn out slug-match, bereft of a clear ‘game over’ moment.
Too, he will be rightly fearful of the effect on his MAGA base of a long war, as well as on young Trump voters (who are already beginning to drift away from Trump – as focus group polls suggest). Trump’s majorities in both Houses are incredibly precarious. $300m could tip them either way.
Recall too, the second fundamentally important point is that Israel was attacked in a way that it has never been attacked before. Israel still hides the extent of the damage inflicted by Iranian missiles; but even senior Israeli security watchers – as they digest the incrementally exposed extent of damage done to Israel — are drawing the bitter lesson that the Iranian ‘programme’ may not be able to be destroyed by military means. But only through a diplomatic agreement of some sort — if at all.
Regime Change also has been revealed as a chimaera. Iran has never been as united and as steadfast as it is now. The threat to kill the Supreme Leader also completely backfired. Four Shia leading religious authorities (Marja’iyya), including the celebrated Grand Ayatollah Sistani in Iraq, have issued rulings that any attack on the Supreme Leader would trigger a jihad fatwa obligating all of the Ummah (community) to join with religious war on America and Israel.
Negotiations between the US and Iran reaching an agreed outcome seem far off. The IAEA has made itself a major part to the problem, rather than forming any part of a solution. Trump’s attention span on the Ukraine ‘ceasefire’ ploy seems to be ebbing — and this possibly might be the eventual outcome with Iran too. Long negotiations leading nowhere, as Iran quietly re-starts its enrichment programme. And presumably Israel launching further assaults on Iran, leading to Iran’s inevitable response – and escalation.
The views of individual contributors do not necessarily represent those of the Strategic Culture Foundation.
The post ‘The Land of Performance’: Trump Wanted a Perfect War, a Headline Showstopper appeared first on LewRockwell.
Illiquid, Overvalued
As “dip buyers” get eviscerated, more dominos fall, and at a tipping point, the herd realizes the tide has reversed and it’s time to sell–but alas, it’s too late.
Illiquid, Overvalued describes a great many assets that are on the books as “rock-solid investments.” Illiquidity means there are few if any buyers for the asset being offered for sale, and this can arise from various conditions.
1. Credit is tight and expensive, limiting the pool of potential buyers to those with cash.
2. Nobody wants the assets because they’re grossly overvalued.
3. The pool of buyers with the expertise and financial backing needed to buy the asset is inherently limited.
4. “Animal spirits” have left the room and buyers are “on strike” due to caution / fear of future losses.
Bill Ackman outlined some useful principles of illiquidity in a recent commentary on X in his discussion of the illiquid nature of many assets held by Ivy league university endowment funds:
“Harvard’s endowment is principally invested in illiquid private assets including real estate, private equity, and venture capital funds.
Real estate and private equity funds are highly levered so relatively small changes in asset values can have a large impact on equity values. For example, if a real estate fund’s asset values decline by 15% and the assets are levered 60%, the fund’s equity value will decline by 37.5%.
The increase in cap rates and interest rates have impaired real estate and private equity asset values. These funds do not generally mark to market as public assets are marked leading to a wide disparity between public values and private values when overall values decline.
Venture funds generally mark their assets to the last round valuation so these marks can also be overstated as these values can become stale.
I believe that a substantial part of the reason why many private assets remain private despite the stock market near all time highs is that the public market will value private assets at lower values than they are being carried at privately.”
In other words, assets held privately can be “marked to fantasy” because they’re not exposed to the market’s appraisal of their liquidity and value, which are two sides of one coin: if nobody has the cash and willingness to buy the asset, its value is essentially zero, regardless of its “book value.”
When Alan Greenspan issued his mea culpa in late 2013 about missing the subprime mortgage implosion and the resulting Global Financial Meltdown (Why I Didn’t See the Crisis Coming Foreign Affairs), he identified two sources of his failure to “see it coming”:
1. He assumed markets would remain liquid, i.e. that a buyer would emerge for every seller
2. The total failure of everyone’s sophisticated models to predict the collapse of confidence.
The core failure lay in the models’ reliance on the notion that humans make decisions rationally as Homo economicus, when the reality is we are extremely prone to irrational exuberance (a.k.a. running with the euphorically greedy herd) and panic (running off the cliff with the herd). He invoked Keynes famous “animal spirits” as the missing variable in economic models.
Irrational “animal spirits” generate “tail risk,” events that supposedly happen only rarely but when they do happen, they trigger outsized consequences, and the Fed’s models failed to accurately account for “tail risk” because they happen more often than statistical models predict.
All this boils down to illiquidity caused by a panic-button urgency to sell and a profound reluctance to buy: When “animal spirits” are confident in ever-higher asset valuations, participants place a constant bid under the market because prices will keep going up so I’ll make more money. This constant bid is called liquidity: cash is flowing into the asset class, be it stocks or housing or cryptocurrencies or commodities.
When “animal spirits” turn to panic, sellers rush to sell as buyers vanish as they fear that prices will keep going down so I’ll lose more money. Buying into a downtrend is known as “catching the falling knife”: the initial “buy the dip” players have their heads handed to them on a platter, and those on the sidelines decide not to try to catch the falling knife.
This is an illiquid market: the bid keeps dropping until buyers are willing to gamble that “this is the bottom.” But should asset prices continue sliding after an initial euphoric pop higher–“the bottom is in, buy!”–then those who held back find their caution reinforced: that wasn’t the bottom after all, and everyone who jumped in lost money.
The post Illiquid, Overvalued appeared first on LewRockwell.
Tariffs Destroy Consumer Choice
Retail sales were down for May with the AP reporting, “The figure was pulled down by a steep drop in auto sales, after Americans ramped up their car-buying in March to get ahead of Trump’s 25% duty on imported cars and car parts. Excluding autos, sales fell 0.3% in May.”
This is no surprise to my wife. In a recent visit to her favorite luxury import car dealer, she was told, “Germany hasn’t sent us any cars in six months. We have no inventory.” Expecting sympathy from her MAGA-inclined girlfriends when she says there are no cars to buy, they respond to this tariff anecdote with “good.”
One of my wife’s great regrets was never meeting Murray Rothbard. But his words explain what she’s annoyed about, “Protectionism not only injures the American consumer directly, by using coercion to prevent him [or her] from buying the cheaper textiles or cameras or automobiles that he [or she] would like to buy.”
In her case, it isn’t cheaper automobiles she’s looking for, but autos that she likes that are her preference and that are, in her mind, of higher quality than automobiles made in the US. She’s desired these cars since she was a little girl and now she can afford them, but current government policy is keeping her from getting a new one.
The administration’s tariffs will raise the price of domestic vehicles and keep auto workers employed. But at the same time “injure all American consumers by keeping up prices, keeping down quality and competition, and distorting production.”
My wife’s BFFs wax patriotic about all this tariff nonsense, believing the country will be better off. And believe me, no one in this group is missing any meals. But, as Rothbard wrote,
Protectionism is simply a plea that consumers, as well as general prosperity, be hurt so as to confer permanent special privilege upon groups of less efficient producers, at the expense of more competent firms and of consumers. But it is a peculiarly destructive kind of bailout, because it permanently shackles trade under the cloak of patriotism.”
“But tariffs are two things if you look at it,” the president said in October, in an interview with Bloomberg News editor-in-chief John Micklethwait. “No. 1 is for protection of the companies that we have here, and the new companies that will move in because we’re going to have thousands of companies coming into this country.”
The idea that foreign companies of any size will move their operations to the US in a matter of months is magical thinking. When Micklethwait said such changes would “take many, many years.” Trump’s retort was they will come right away. These companies will just pack a suitcase and catch a plane.
Ryan Zinke—who served as Secretary of the Interior for two years during Trump’s first term—tells us why Trump loves tariffs. “Tariffs are a tool the president enjoys because it’s personal power,” Zinke told HuffPost. “It’s personal ― he doesn’t have to go through Congress. He can exercise personal power.” Back in the good old days, tariffs took an act of Congress.
The president is a mercantilist. And, as Rothbard explained, “the mercantilist, of the sixteenth century or today, looks at trade from the point of view of the power elite, big business in league with the government.… the mercantilists want to privilege the government business elite at the expense of all consumers…” Even consumers who just want to buy a new car of her choice.
Note: The views expressed on Mises.org are not necessarily those of the Mises Institute.The post Tariffs Destroy Consumer Choice appeared first on LewRockwell.
The De-weaponization of the CIA
“All the world can now see the truth: Brennan, Clapper and Comey manipulated intelligence and silenced career professionals — all to get Trump.” — CIA Director John Ratcliffe
Former CIA Director Brennan Faces Perjury Problems After CIA Director Ratcliffe’s Review Uncovers Russia Hoax Testimony Lies. But will Trump’s Department of Justice do anything about it? The Democrats intended to imprison Trump and tried to assassinate him. Republicans, however, are afraid that prosecuting a high ranking official discredits the US government in the eyes of citizens and the world. Brennan will get a pass so Republicans can save Washington’s reputation. See here.
Remember how the whore media and the whore Democrats lied through their teeth about a Putin/Trump conspiracy to steal the 2016 election? Remember the group of whores who created a mysterious website, PropOrNot, that branded those of us who wrote objectively about the Russiagate charges “Putin agents/dupes”? Labeling me a “Russian agent” scared away half of my subscribers. It shows how frightened Americans are to be associated in any way with an unapproved narrative.
Were you one of the millions of dumbshit Americans who fell for the completely transparent “Russiagate” hoax?
Americans are so naive. They fall for every lie told to them. Remember the “war on terror”? It was a war for Greater Israel. For two decades American lives and money were squandered in destroying 5 Arab countries for Israel. Israel never needed to make peace, because Israel had dumbshit Americans to fight wars for them.
Israel is still relying on Americans. Netanyahu, who is indicted in Israel for financial crimes and in the international court for crimes against humanity, says Washington’s destruction of five countries “transformed the Middle East beyond recognition.” Netanyahu arrived yesterday in Washington for the third time in six months to give Trump his marching orders for Iran and to solidify Israel’s falsely claimed recent battlefield victory over Iran. Netanyahu says he is ready to “expand the circle of peace.” He has come to tell Trump how to do this for him.
Perhaps Ratcliffe can deliver a truthful report on the “war on terror” and how the Zionist neoconservatives launched it with their “New Pearl Harbor”–9/11–but that would be a bridge too far.
The post The De-weaponization of the CIA appeared first on LewRockwell.
Imperial Hypocrisy About “Terrorism” Hits Its Most Absurd Point Yet
The US has removed Syria’s Al Qaeda franchise from its list of designated terrorist organizations just days after the UK added nonviolent activist group Palestine Action to its own list of banned terrorist groups.
The western empire will surely find ways to be even more hypocritical and ridiculous about its “terrorism” designations in the future, but at this point it’s hard to imagine how it will manage to do so.
Antiwar’s Dave DeCamp writes the following:
“Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced on Monday that the Trump administration is revoking the Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO) designation for Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), the al-Qaeda offshoot that took power in Damascus in December 2024.
“HTS started as the al-Nusra Front, which was the official al-Qaeda affiliate in Syria until the group’s leader, Ahmed al-Sharaa, who is now Syria’s de facto president, rebranded. In 2016, Sharaa, who was known at the time as Abu Mohammad al-Jolani, announced he was disassociating from al-Qaeda, and thanked the ‘commanders of al-Qaeda for having understood the need to break ties.’
“Sharaa renamed his group HTS in 2017 and ruled Syria’s northwestern Idlib province until he led the offensive that ousted former Syrian President Bashar al-Assad at the end of last year. The US has embraced the new Syrian leader despite his al-Qaeda past, which included fighting against US troops in Iraq.”
US Revokes Terror Designation for HTS, the Al-Qaeda Offshoot That Took Over Syria
by Dave DeCamp@DecampDave #Syria #HTS #AlQaeda https://t.co/1uNEYYWAD0
— Antiwar.com (@Antiwarcom) July 7, 2025
This move comes as Sharaa holds friendly meetings with US and UK officials and holds normalization talks with Israel, showing that all one has to do to cease being a “terrorist” in the eyes of the empire is to start aligning with the empire’s interests.
So that was on Monday. The Saturday prior, the group Palestine Action was added to the UK’s list of proscribed terrorist groups under the Terrorism Act of 2000, making involvement with the group as aggressively punishable as involvement with ISIS.
The “terrorism” in question? Spraying red paint on two British war planes in protest against the UK’s support for the Gaza holocaust. A minor act of vandalism gets placed in the same category as mass murdering civilians with a car bomb when the vandalism is directed at the imperial war machine in opposition to the empire’s genocidal atrocities.
Even expressions of support for Palestine Action are now illegal under British law, leading to numerous arrests over the weekend as activists expressed solidarity with the organization. Pink Floyd’s Roger Waters, who is British, has been formally reported to UK counterterrorism police by UK Lawyers for Israel following the musician’s public statement saying “I support Palestine Action. It’s a great organisation. They are non-violent. They are absolutely not terrorist in any way.”
Roger Waters reported to counter-terror police after declaring support for Palestine Action
This is the ridiculousness of the country, it borders on the absurdhttps://t.co/W0p5FUlQ1k
— Esheru (@EsheruKwaku) July 7, 2025
So let’s recap.
Nonviolent protest against a genocide that’s being backed by the western empire: Terrorism. Banned. Nobody’s allowed to support this.
Being actual, literal Al Qaeda but aligning with the interests of the western empire: Not terrorism. Okie dokie. This is fine.
These hypocrisies and contradictions of the empire are worth drawing attention to because they clearly show that the empire does not stand where it claims to stand. For decades we’ve been told that western military explosives are falling from the sky in the middle east and Africa because there are terrorists there who need to be stopped, but it turns out “terrorism” is just a meaningless label that means whatever the empire needs it to mean at a given time and place.
Iran’s IRGC is labeled a terrorist group because the Iranian military is not aligned with the US empire. Israel’s IDF is not labeled a terrorist group despite its constant use of violence upon civilian populations in order to advance political goals. Palestine Action is labeled a terrorist group because it opposes the empire’s genocidal atrocities. Al Qaeda in Syria is no longer a terrorist group because it’s making nice with Israel and doing what the empire wants.
“Terrorist” just means “anyone who inconveniences the empire in any way.” It really is that simple.
_________________
My work is entirely reader-supported, so if you enjoyed this piece here are some options where you can toss some money into my tip jar if you want to. Click here for links for my mailing list, social media, books, merch, and audio/video versions of each article. All my work is free to bootleg and use in any way, shape or form; republish it, translate it, use it on merchandise; whatever you want. All works co-authored with my husband Tim Foley.
The post Imperial Hypocrisy About “Terrorism” Hits Its Most Absurd Point Yet appeared first on LewRockwell.
Of Micronations and Coincidences
A New Approach for Elon Musk?
Considering the reality that power is an addiction for those feeding at the trough of government might and money, it was probably inevitable that Elon Musk’s crusade to root waste out of the American government would stall and prove unable to surmount the high barrier of congressional approval. Musk’s meltdown on social media over the failure of the United States Congress to codify his DOGE cuts into law was a popcorn-worthy entertainment event, but in terms of substance to adapt and pursue a new course to address America’s problems, its been something of a nothingburger. Insults, insinuations, and clever phrases do not change policy or direction of a country. Musk apparently believes that through these actions he will help stir up popular pressure on Congress to get the DOGE cuts through. However there are powers at play far more entrenched in the swamps of DC than he is. These are better positioned to ensure that those cuts never happen, even if it means the collapse of the imperialist system. To put it simply, Musk is outclassed in this battle on enemy ground. He caused some significant damage to the structures of the imperialists’ power (i.e.: the shuttering of USAID and certain other agencies), but long-term success was never an achievable outcome against entrenched opposition such as what he encountered.
With he and Donald Trump apparently parting ways, the question now arises as to what is next for Musk. The majority of his ideas to date regarding recovery from this setback has revolved around founding a new political party, but he is likely to quickly discover as the late Ross Perot did that that is easier said than done. Furthermore, though many people in America appreciate his work with DOGE, there are still significant concerns about certain other beliefs and projects which Musk has been dabbling in, such as Neuralink and other technocratic projects. These concerns are significant obstacles to getting general support across America for any broader agenda he might wish to accomplish.
There is another way for Musk to try and experiment more with his ideas. It is a route laden with risk and demanding a certain type of attention to detail which only control freaks could be expected to have. However Musk has often been described as thriving on taking risks. In addition, there are aspects to his personality which can be considered to be indicators of a control freak mentality which, some argue, has played a key role in his success to date. With this being the case, the scenario now about to be proposed may not be as far-fetched as some think.
This route would resolve many of the loose ends lying around in the aftermath of Musk’s departure from the Trump administration. It would bring resolution for Musk himself, and for the people who respect his intelligence, but also want his more controversial ideas contained to an extent for now until more research has been done. This route would call for Musk to withdraw to his recently incorporated little town of Starbase on the border of Texas and Mexico, where he has headquartered his space exploration company SpaceX. Once there he should build up infrastructure and make preparations for Starbase to become the North American continent’s first true example of what in Europe is called a “microstate.”
The term “microstate” (or “micronation” as the more accurate term) is a relatively recent addition to the political lexicon, meant to give a grouping label to those independent nations whose territory encompasses a very small plot of land. In Europe this would apply to countries such as Andorra, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Monaco, San Marino and Vatican City. Their small size enables the leaders to more easily communicate with the population and more quickly recognize problems when they arise. They are also easier to manage and keep functioning as opposed to over-large nations where bureaucracy and corruption eventually undermine the country’s political and economic foundations, bringing it’s existence to an end. Though they may have some limitations economically (i.e.: not very much farmland or natural resources), currently existing micronations have all managed to find their own ways to develop themselves economically and so keep the country functioning. These countries are a real life contradiction to the Elitist narrative that only large countries are viable politically. Their example provides a blueprint for how Musk should proceed into a future where the old political systems are disintegrating.
Using his SpaceX venture along with trade as the main economic foundation, Elon Musk should put pieces in place to declare the Independence of Starbase in the near-future. He can establish himself as the figurehead “Grand Duke” while allowing the citizens to run their own governance for the most part. He should then open Starbase for a period to welcome in all those who believe in his ventures and experiments who are also willing to become part of Musk’s new nation to help with developing these ideas. With this established, Musk will have carved out his own niche politically both for himself and his supporters. They can pursue their dreams and ideas without infringing or being infringed upon by other interests within the larger landmass of North America.
The viability of this independence venture would be helped by the fact that Starbase is strategically located where the Rio Grande river meets the ocean along the border of Texas and Mexico. With strong secession movements existing in both Texas and the northern provinces of Mexico, Starbase would be politically free to chart it’s own path regardless of what direction the independence efforts in the neighboring areas take. It can also offer friendship and business opportunities to both of it’s neighbors to use the Starbase facilities for space exploration ventures, which will likely be growing in importance and intensity through the twenty-first century. This would give Starbase the business it would need to keep it’s citizens thriving economically. Agreements respecting sovereignty, while providing for common self-defense help in the event of aggression from other powers, could also be brought about with these same neighbors. These would help ensure Starbase retains it’s independence while not being isolated either.
Will Elon Musk seriously consider this approach? It is hard to say at this point. However, as the man has proven himself very unpredictable in terms of direction since he first appeared on the public stage, it is fair to say that with him any direction is possible. Hopefully he is far-seeing enough to eventually recognize what many already have: namely that the Imperial Empire of DC is crumbling, and the original governing structures are beyond saving. Once he realizes that, this option may suddenly become a very viable one in his mind. An added benefit of him recognizing and pursuing this option would be that other potential micronations, such as Liberland in the Balkans, might finally be given the more serious treatment they deserve on the world stage.
Palantir and the L.A. Riots – Coincidence?Some weeks ago a “noticing” movement began to arise with respect to certain things unfolding in Trump World. First, attention was brought to the fact that Donald Trump had signed an executive order back in March directing that federal government agencies should seek to more readily share data with each other. This is a practice which had been discouraged in the past. There are real fears that a centralized database would make it easier for the federal government to find ways to persecute it’s citizens for exercising their rights if the government was opposed to certain viewpoints held by the individuals in question. Furthermore, it was revealed that the major technology company that was being tasked with centralizing this data was “Palantir”, a company specializing in surveillance technology, and owned by a Silicon Valley group including controversial tech oligarchs Peter Thiel and Alex Karp. This development alarmed many within MAGA world. It also raised serious questions as to what was really going on behind the scenes in the Trump administration by many who had supported and voted for Trump in the recent election. Though other members of the Palantir board attempted to reassure the public that the program was not nefarious or unusual, their responses still left many questions unanswered. These reassurance attempts were also largely unconvincing to those understanding the truth that the problem lies in the existence of the surveillance system itself, not in who is running it.
On the heels of this revelation, an overlooked provision which had been slipped into Trump’s “Big Beautiful Bill” came to more intense public notice. The provision banned all state governments in America from regulating AI for a decade, placed all control of AI integration in the federal government thus centralizing AI surveillance, and made provisions for AI to be integrated into certain federal agencies. With the Palantir surveillance model based in AI, many quickly realized that the states were being banned from taking steps against the unfolding of the centralized surveillance state. Faced with this revelation, some leading grassroots figures, such as Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene, quickly came out and condemned the ban, with Greene stating emphatically that she would oppose the bill specifically because of this provision. Leadership in the United States Senate attempted to assuage the fears raised by replacing the outright ban with a financial penalty for any state seeking to regulate AI. However, such half-hearted correction measures do not cut it with the public any longer after what was revealed thanks to the government’s COVID response.
With opposition growing to this implementation of a new stage of the surveillance state, especially within the MAGA constituency, it was apparent something drastic was going to be needed to undercut the opposition and get it through. Then suddenly, as if out of nowhere, riots abruptly erupted in Los Angeles surrounding Trump’s immigration agenda, taking the spotlight off the surveillance question and forcing law and order issues back into the forefront of the public’s attention. The riots have only intensified as the Trump administration has sent military force in to control the situation. Fears are now growing that the riots could spread across the country. Protests in San Francisco against Trump’s immigration agenda have turned violent and other cities across the country are also seeing growing protests which have the potential to turn violent.
A key technique for any advocates of centralizing government power is to use the power of emotions to overwhelm the truth of logic. That alone should make this sudden turn of events suspicious for those who believe in freedom. Fear is a key tool in the arsenal of those who push for government to assert more power, and seeing violence explode in the middle of an effort to combat a serious expansion of the surveillance state should make everyone very concerned. While some things can indeed be coincidences, America has reached a point where, as commissioner Jim Gordon told detective John Blake in The Dark Knight Rises: “You’re not allowed to believe in coincidence any more.”
Sources:
Will Secession Be the Real Winner in November?
This article was originally published on The State of Division.
The post Of Micronations and Coincidences appeared first on LewRockwell.
War in the Middle East, The Rothschilds
On about 20 September 2001, just ten days after the destruction of the World Trade Centre buildings on 9/11, recently retired U.S. Army General Wesley Clark was visiting the Pentagon for meetings with Secretary Rumsfeld and Deputy Secretary Wolfowitz when he was assailed by another General whom he had formerly commanded.
This General advised General Clark that the US was going to attack seven countries in five years.
A few weeks later, a similar meeting between the same officers led General Clark to be confidentially shown a memo from the Secretary of Defense’s office earlier that day.
Handing Clark the memo, the officer reported
‘This is a memo that describes how we’re going to take out 7 countries in 5 years, starting with Iraq, and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and, finishing off, Iran.’ Watch ‘US Plans for the Middle East’.
Video: Plans for the Middle East. US Army General Wesley Clark
Video: This Version of the Video by Hamza dated 2016, 02 24 differs from that initial version released by Democracy Now. It documents the 7 countries.
As history now documents, with the notable exception of the last country on this list – Iran – each of these countries (together with Afghanistan and Palestine) has been destroyed, to a greater or lesser extent, by military violence inflicted by the United States, often together with its NATO and/or other allies, and/or Israel. Needless to say, there has been zero accountability for these gross violations of international law.
Why did the United States want to ‘take out 7 countries’?
Why does the United States (and Israel) still want to ‘take out’ Iran?
Understanding Conflict
When tackling conflict at this level, it is imperative to understand the ‘conflict configuration’ as a preliminary step in addressing key elements of the conflict. This understanding will require research, listening to those involved parties who are accessible and keeping an open mind to third-party sources.
After all, if one does not understand the conflict – the primary and secondary parties to it (which might include ‘invisible’ parties driving conflicts from the background), the key and subsidiary issues at stake, the importance (intellectually, behaviorally, materially) of each of these issues to the various parties to the conflict, as well as why these issues are important – it is not really possible for a genuine resolution of the conflict (one in which each party to the conflict feels satisfied with the outcome so that it will stand over time) to be achieved.
But there is a deeper dimension to conflict that is routinely overlooked: The ‘emotional profile’ of the key parties. At its most extreme, this includes the sanity, or otherwise, of the conflicting parties, including those parties operating from the background. For one explanation that highlights the critical importance of emotions to conflict, see ‘Love Denied: The Psychology of Materialism, Violence and War’.
I emphasize the emotional component of conflict not only because it is central but because it makes it easier to perceive that if one or more parties to the conflict is emotionally damaged in one way or another (or even insane), then resolution of the conflict might require more than the processes ordinarily employed.
Conflict in West Asia
So I want to start ‘unpacking’ the conflict that has recently flared when Israel attacked Iran on 13 June 2025 – see ‘Israel Attacks Iran’ – followed by the US attack on Iranian nuclear facilities on 22 June – see ‘Trump: We “obliterated” Iran’s nuclear program, and now, “peace”’ – and the immediately subsequent ceasefire agreement. See ‘Iran confirms ceasefire with Israel’.
Before proceeding, I want to emphasize that there are far more elements to this conflict than can be ‘unpacked’ in this one article.
And to simply note that both the Israeli attack on Iran and the US attack on Iran were illegal under international law.
But, as with the previous military assaults on countries in West Asia and North Africa in the 21st century, when international law has been violated, there have been no meaningful legal repercussions for these transgressions. Nor will there be.
There is no mystery about why this is the case even if many analysts considering these conflicts, significant numbers of ‘ordinary’ people and even some national leaders believe it should happen. To understand why, it is only necessary to understand how the world works. Without that understanding, any number of delusions will spread easily, and be accelerated by government and corporate media, throughout concerned communities. And vast amounts of effort will be wasted on initiatives in relation to the conflict that can go nowhere.
So How Does the World Work?
As I have explained many times previously, all major political and economic structures and processes were created by the Global Elite over past centuries using their extensive network of partners, fronts, agents and employees, including those deeply embedded in what many refer to as the ‘Deep State’: the key intelligence, bureaucratic, military, technocratic and lobbyist personnel who persist in countries independently of the (elected or otherwise) government of the day and the electoral cycle. Notably, a great deal of control is exercised through the banking system that functions internationally and within each country. You can read one account of this in Historical Analysis of the Global Elite: Ransacking the World Economy Until ‘You’ll Own Nothing.’
The central figures in this Global Elite are the members of the Rothschild family who have operated at the centre of this Elite since the late 18th century and exercise staggering control over many key aspects of the global economy, starting with banking, energy, weapons, mining, infrastructure (including railways), media and biotechnology.
Their estimated wealth exceeds $US100 trillion, dwarfing those ‘fortunes’ held by those ‘wealthy individuals’ – such as Bill Gates, Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk – misleadingly promoted as the ‘wealthiest’ by corporate media. See Big Oil & Their Bankers in the Persian Gulf pp. 487-8.
Since the beginning of their reign, the Rothschilds have acquired a vast global network of income-producing assets by investing, wisely and often illegally, in a phenomenal variety and number of ventures, usually leaving another name prominently on display of any newly acquired asset, including those acquired or partly acquired as a result of saving a corporation from bankruptcy. In this way, their ownership and control is concealed so that, for example, other prominent families who are known to be excessively wealthy, such as the Morgans and Rockefellers, are fronts for the Rothschilds but not widely recognized as such.
See Hidden History: The Secret Origins of the First World War p.222. and
As noted above, two industries that the Rothschilds dominate are banking and the weapons industry.
And it is well-documented that the Rothschilds have helped finance both sides of most wars since the Napoleonic wars in the early 19th century. In these circumstances, the Rothschilds profit from weapons sales to most or all parties to all wars as well as the loans to buy the weapons and the loans to pay for reconstruction post-war. Again, you can read an account of this in Historical Analysis of the Global Elite: Ransacking the World Economy Until ‘You’ll Own Nothing.’
Thus, as Niall Ferguson, an official biographer of the Rothschilds, has noted: by the late 19th century, direct Rothschild investment in major ‘armaments companies’ (now better known as weapons corporations) and related industries was substantial. He candidly noted ‘If late-nineteenth-century imperialism had its “military-industrial complex” the Rothschilds were unquestionably part of it.’ See The House of Rothschild – Volume 2 – The World’s Banker, 1849-1998, p. 579.
Beyond this, of course, effective Rothschild control of key global institutions – including the City of London, the Bank for International Settlements, the Bank of England and the US Federal Reserve – and many critical industries, not to mention most national governments, was already giving it enormous power to reshape world order to suit its purposes before the advent of World War II. Consider the United States.
In his exceptionally detailed investigation into three major historical events of the C20th – the Bolshevik Revolution, the rise of Franklin D. Roosevelt and the rise of Hitler – Professor Antony Sutton identified the seat of political power in the United States not as the US Constitution authorized but ‘the financial establishment in New York: the private international bankers, more specifically the financial houses of J.P. Morgan, the Rockefeller-controlled Chase Manhattan Bank, and in earlier days (before amalgamation of their Manhattan Bank with the former Chase Bank), the Warburgs.’
‘For most of the twentieth century the Federal Reserve System, particularly the Federal Reserve Bank of New York (which is outside the control of Congress, unaudited and uncontrolled, with the power to print money and create credit at will), has exercised a virtual monopoly over the direction of the American economy. In foreign affairs the Council on Foreign Relations, superficially an innocent forum for academics, businessmen, and politicians, contains within its shell, perhaps unknown to many of its members, a power center that unilaterally determines U.S. foreign policy. The major objective of this submerged – and obviously subversive – foreign policy is the acquisition of markets and economic power (profits, if you will), for a small group of giant multi-nationals under the virtual control of a few banking investment houses and controlling families.’ See Wall Street and The Rise of Hitler, pp.125-126.
Of course, control of national governments and key national institutions by powerful if obscured actors has long been the case and extends far beyond the United States as explained by preeminent historian Professor Carroll Quigley in his classic work published in 1966. See Tragedy and Hope: A History of the World in Our Time. pp.5-6.
‘[T]he powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert by secret agreements arrived at in frequent private meetings and conferences. The apex of the system was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basle, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world’s central banks which were themselves private corporations…
‘It must not be felt that these heads of the world’s chief central banks were themselves substantive powers in world finance. They were not. Rather, they were the technicians and agents of the dominant investment bankers of their own countries, who had raised them up and were perfectly capable of throwing them down. The substantive financial powers of the world were in the hands of these investment bankers (also called ‘international’ or ‘merchant’ bankers) who remained largely behind the scenes in their own unincorporated private banks. These formed a system of international cooperation and national dominance which was more private, more powerful, and more secret than that of their agents in the central banks.’
The Present
If we jump to the present, analyst Paul Craig Roberts makes an observation and poses a fundamental question:
‘Think about America’s waste of resources and prestige during the first quarter of the 21st century. Trillions of dollars spent destroying Iraq, Libya, Syria, and Somalia with zero gain. No one except military/security war profits got anything from these wars. There was no terrorist threat. Washington brought no one democracy, only destruction.
‘Think about the destruction Washington brought to entire countries for no purpose than Israel’s absurd idea of a Greater Israel. The millions of dead, permanently maimed, and dislocated people, many of whom have located in Europe and the US burdening those taxpayers with their upkeep. WHO BENEFITTED??’ See ‘President Trump’s Plan for the Middle East’.
‘Who benefitted?’ is indeed the question. As Roberts notes, it wasn’t the USA or its people. And it wasn’t the people of other countries, including those in Israel or NATO countries, either. And it certainly wasn’t the people in the countries destroyed.
So clearly it is time to shift the focus from those apparently driving this conflict – such as Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and US President Donald Trump, who have much to gain by appearing to drive it – to those parties who are actually driving it. This can done simply by asking: ‘Have Netanyahu and Trump benefitted, personally, from the joint Israeli-US attack on Iran?’
In the case of Netanyahu, and despite his well-documented corruption, he has been a faithful servant of the Zionist elite for decades routinely acting to implement their program throughout West Asia. And faithful servants, chosen for their role, are defended, whatever their ills.
As one article in the Jerusalem Post acknowledged, Miriam Adelson ‘and her late husband Sheldon were viewed as kingmakers, puppeteers, or just another set of billionaires trying to shape Israeli politics in their image. Their immense wealth, their influence over both Israel and the US, and – perhaps most of all – their endless support for Benjamin Netanyahu made them divisive figures’. They ‘pour[ed] hundreds of millions into Netanyahu’s political survival…. It turns out that when you have Miriam Adelson’s resources and access, you don’t just influence policy – you rewrite it.’ See ‘Dr. Miriam Adelson, the modern-day Rothschild Israelis have finally recognized’.
And what of Trump? Is he just someone’s puppet too?
In April 1990 ‘Trump made a bold bet on Atlantic City when he opened a third casino there – the colossal Taj Mahal…. Even riskier: He financed the project with $675 million in junk bonds at a 14% interest rate. Within months Trump was struggling to make the massive bond payments as Atlantic City floundered.’
Consistent with a business tactic they have employed for more than 200 years, through an agent (Wilbur Ross) the Rothschilds offered Trump ‘a prepackaged bankruptcy deal: Trump would give up 50% of his stake in the Taj but would receive better debt terms and would remain in control.’ As a result, ‘The Donald was back in business: He ultimately made similar deals for his other troubled properties.’ See ‘Getting Donald Out Of Debt: The 25-Year-Old Ties That Bind Trump and Wilbur Ross’.
As with all such deals with the Rothschilds, Trump continues to pay off his ‘forever debt’. These days, one way he does that is by deploying the power of his presidential position to serve their divergent ends as part of the payback. Thus, for example, while deceiving the Iranian leadership that he was negotiating with them, the subsequent evidence shows that Trump was finalising plans to attack Iran’s three nuclear sites – and precipitate events leading to regime change – through an intense bombing campaign. See ‘The Hidden Agenda behind Trump’s Attack on Iran’.
Moreover, as discussed by Prof Michel Chossudovsky and Drago Bosnic, certain evidence points to the notion that this strike was ‘political theatre’.
This evidence includes the facts that it would have taken months, at least, to plan and organize the attack and, more importantly, the damage from radiation release, if the attack had been fully successful, would have been more catastrophic than what happened following the disasters at Chernobyl and Fukushima.
Watch ‘“Political Theater”: Trump’s Attack against Iran’.
This suggests that the real motive was, indeed, regime change. So what would have been the advantage of precipitating regime change in Iran?
As noted above, any consideration of Rothschild history must lead to an awareness that they precipitate wars to reshape world order where necessary and to capture control of resources, in whatever form these take. And its legacy of gaining control of such resources – including mineral resources such as oil and gas, gold, diamonds, rubies…. depending on the context – is well documented.
Thus, just as the war to expel the Palestinians from Gaza will, among other opportunities, open access for the Rothschilds to profit enormously by exploiting the gigantic Leviathan maritime natural gas resources in the Mediterranean Sea off the coast of Gaza – see ‘The Geopolitics of Elite Insanity, Part 2: Creating Eretz Yisrael to Reshape World Order’ – regime change in Iran would open the possibility of the Rothschilds re-establishing their key role in the ownership and exploitation of oil and gas in Iran, which they lost following the Iranian revolution in 1979 when the assets of all foreign oil companies operating in Iran were seized. See ‘Iran’s Oil Nationalization: A Triumph Over Western Imperialism’.
It would also force open the possibility of Iran surrendering some or total control of the Central Bank of Iran which is not a member of the Rothschild-controlled Bank for International Settlements.
So who benefits from this war (given the long list of people who do not)? As has been the case for the past 200 years, the Rothschilds (and other Elite families) certainly do. And so do their agents beginning, in this case, with Netanyahu and Trump.
And that is the reason why this war is not over and it might go nuclear. Several commentators – including Mike Whitney and Scott Ritter – have noted this.
See:
‘Here’s Proof That Israel Lost the War (and signs that the conflict is about to resume)’ and
‘Will Bibi Ask Trump to Nuke Iran? Ritter Says “Yes”’.
Resisting War
For more than 100 years, millions of people have joined antiwar groups of various kinds. And for more than 100 years, some members of some of these groups have engaged in a range of activities to demonstrate their opposition to war, either as an institution or in a particular context.
However, the antiwar movement has been singularly ineffective in its impact in ending war as an institution. It has no comprehensive analysis of the institution of war (and no comprehensive analysis of violence, of which war is just one subset) nor, even within the confines of its various limited analyses (such as the feminist and socialist critiques), a comprehensive strategy to end war. For a fuller critique of the antiwar movement and an explanation of what is necessary to end war, see ‘Rage Against the War Machine: What Rage?’ If you want to understand the origin of violence which generates a vast range of outcomes, including war, see ‘Why Violence?’ and ‘Fearless Psychology and Fearful Psychology: Principles and Practice’.
Similarly, the antiwar movement has no shared critique of any particular war that is remotely adequate and no strategy to end any particular war including the ones in West Asia where a number – some ‘hot’, some ‘cold’ – are being fought at the moment.
Thus, devoid of an accurate understanding of the configuration of any war, including this war, it is not possible for the conflict underlying it to be resolved. And efforts to end it will be misdirected to actions that are strategically useless, such as protest demonstrations or public statements directed at Elite agents, in this case, governments or international organizations including the United Nations. See ‘International Days of Action Against War on Iran’ and ‘Urgent Appeal for Action Regarding Israeli Regime’s Unlawful Military Aggression Against Iran’.
In any case, of course, no state or group of states, or their international organizations, can or will attempt to hold the Rothschilds and other Elite families to account. These families operate beyond the rule of law and beyond constraint of any kind.
Thus, if we are to have any chance of ending this war or war itself, those of us who identify as ‘ordinary’ must take on these Elite actors and their agents ourselves.
And we can do this effectively if we undertake the challenge using sound strategy. You can read a list of strategic goals for ending wars by scrolling down this page to ‘Strategic goals that would be appropriate in a nonviolent struggle to end war’ and access the remaining details of a comprehensive strategy for doing so elsewhere on this website.
The power to end this war and all war is in our hands. Will we use it?
The original source of this article is Global Research.
The post War in the Middle East, The Rothschilds appeared first on LewRockwell.
Netanyahu and Trump Host Libertarian Dinner!
Who knew corrupt mass murderer Bibi Netanyahu is actually a closet libertarian? Peace must soon follow, as the first and second greatest nations of the planet, Israel and the US, break bread on a theme of peace and prosperity, extolling the virtues of self-determination for all people.
Oh to be a Fight Club waiter at Monday’s night White House dinner, as the leaders and staffs of the two most fight-loving countries that have ever existed dine at US taxpayer’s expense, while ditching the US taxpayer’s will.
The food is probably good, but the relationship is toxic.
Trump, Biden-like and taking the Biden administration’s lead, keeps sending billions to Israel to decimate, depopulate and subsume Gaza, in pursuit of the Zionist lebensraum. It is Donald Trump’s genocide now.
Principles like “do not steal” land, life, or liberty are noticeably absent, but if you read the papers, Trump and Bibi have a plan for Gaza that includes – or more likely solely consists of – “freedom” to “exit.” Trump and Bibi agree Gaza should not be a prison, despite being operated as one by the occupation power for decades, with a level of dehumanization that defines “mowing the grass” as a routine op to keep the numbers of Gazans down.
But Bibi was full of love for liberty, and respect for world peace – he even brought to Mr Trump a letter where he nominated the Orange Man for the Nobel Peace Prize. Bibi explained, “He’s forging peace, as we speak, in one country, in one region after the other….[I’m] nominating you for the Peace Prize, which is well deserved, and you should get it.”
Given endless war, endless state deceit, meshed collusion in war by the billionaire classes on all sides for fun and profit, what can proponents of liberty take away from this dinner?
I think there are several key points we can work with.
First, for the state, every day is opposite day. Israel, opportunistically founded as a political response to the extremities of Naziism in World War II, has transformed itself into the ideal Nazi nation. As for the United States, the land of liberty has become a new kind of prison. Citizen-prisoners are subsidized through fiat, their own and the state’s, and produce in the way the old Soviet Union produced, as the state bureaucracy demands and designs for payment in company scrip – mostly for the war and security state.
Second, our leaders, as Ambassador Chas Freeman observes in the linked video above, are simply delusional. To be delusional is to believe things that are not true. It’s a broad brush, as easily applied to our own family members and neighbors as to our political leaders. But in Israel, and in the United States, the respective populations have been continuously instructed, through state media narratives, school and university systems, and their own mainstream political parties, to believe many things that are not true. Naturally, American and Israeli history are favorably airbrushed, with major uncomfortable actions and events glossed over or ignored. Yet, our understanding of history can be made more accurate, upon discovery. This is why the question “What about Building 7” or calls to “Remember the USS Liberty” are so powerful – they engage the individual to explore the global library. But in terms of logic, math, economics, ethics and the analysis of history, we the people in the Second and First most important countries of the world are taught wrong, on purpose.
Of course, Americans should be free to leave the public schools without facing the wrath of the truant officer. But Donald Trump himself, educated in a private school over 65 years ago, was taught the same garbage, and the same lack of intellectual critique, analysis, and exploration. Trump states that his B-2 assault on three non-facilities in Iran with bunker busters halfway around the world is a Truman-esque feat, and should be lauded exactly as we have been taught to laud Truman’s experimental and unnecessary dropping of atomic bombs of two non-military cities in Japan, after the Japanese Army had already been defeated.
To be honest, Hiroshima was chosen as the target in 1945 because of the expected ability to study the resultant damage, based on a mountain range that would focus the explosion. Nagasaki was an add-on to the original target list of five locations, as a replacement for Kyoto. This occurred because Harold Stimson, a predecessor to Pete Hegseth, had taken his honeymoon in Kyoto, and apparently had pleasant memories of the city. It is, and was then, well understood that the two recipients of Fat Man and Little Boy were less military targets than civilian, and of the list of original target cities, the ones chosen contained the more civilians and less military industrial capability. Eisenhower was right in 1960, in warning of the integrated industrial, scientific, and academic powers that influence the American way of war, and promote American intolerance of peace.
Third, the US government and its “friends” constitute a direct and immediate threat to American citizens. Many on the left and right are concerned that the American version of Bibi’s “free to leave” policy for “those who are not welcome here” or those “here illegally” will be applied, as it is today in “greater” Israel, to people who have every right to be where they are. Many on the left and right are sensing, and seeing, how quickly and easily the state can erect a full array of concentration camps, institute and fund a police state, and formally invalidate the First and Fourth Amendments.
Second Amendment advocates, and observers of the United States as a haven for personal arms and ammunition, correctly assume that a foreign army would be unable to conventionally conquer the US, or to effectively occupy it after a nuclear exchange. The US may, like Afghanistan, be a place where great powers go to die. I’ll admit this is a comforting thought. But if our own government, under any autopen in the Executive Suite, chose to reduce our country to ashes, it most certainly has home field advantage. As we speak, much of the southern border is already under martial law lite. This is accomplished through a “good cause” edict, via a vast network of US military bases, training areas, and federal/state land. As of last year, the state owned 40% of total US territory, land where the Constitution is already suspended, land immediately available to a state at war. The population of the US is concentrated on the east and west coast urban centers, and procedures to lock down cities and national trade and commerce, church and local politics are well established. Eminent Constitutionalist John Whitehead explains how war fuels the surveillance state. We must ask, to what end? I think we already know, and it isn’t to keep us healthy and free to leave.
Thus, we observe a state dinner hosted by country #2 for country #1, where, as just like in the T-Bone Cafe, there is only one question, “What don’t you want.” From the looks on the faces at the dinner, they are trying to decide if they don’t want the ultra-homogenized imitation liberty, or they don’t want yesterday’s political fellatio. Bless their hearts.
The post Netanyahu and Trump Host Libertarian Dinner! appeared first on LewRockwell.
What’s Old Is New
In 2017, when we were still attending the local Novus Ordo parish Mass (and about a year and a half before we discovered the Latin Mass), I wrote a blog post where I was wrestling with the ephemeral, lamenting planned obsolescence, and worrying about the faith of my young children in withstanding the cultural zeitgeist of secularism. There I wrote:
In many ways I fear the faith I am caring for, trying so carefully to preserve, maintaining its integrity and instilling the rituals and remembrances in our family life as my children are young, will be rejected when they come of age. “Sorry dad,” they will say, “we don’t want your stuff.” An old missal, a rosary polished from years of fingering—they’ll become like cherry armoires and cast-iron cookware: of no perceived use to them.
Everybody has their preferred style, but there is something to be said for a quality handmade chair, an old stone church, a set of steel hand tools because it carries with it a memory, a legacy, and a history. Non-denominationalism is the IKEA of worship and architecture today. It is modern, sleek, relevant, and sterile. Its roots do not run deep, the foundation like that of a vinyl-clad townhouse.
In the secular arena, modern progressives destroy everything they touch. They tear down with no real cohesive or thought-out plan of how to rebuild. They tear down the family and religion, statues and monuments, traditional sexual mores. They are impatient, and content to slap up temporary shanties until they can figure out what next thing comes next. Social change can’t happen fast enough. Out with the old, in with the new, until new becomes old and then off to the dump again.
But things get destroyed in the process. Timeless things, priceless things—immortal souls, traditional families, rituals and connections to our past and our ancestors and predecessors.
My prediction goes beyond furniture and housewares, beyond trends and tastes and kitchen renovations. When we hit the modern bottom, when the demons start to tip the scales and become too powerful, when the non-denominational particleboard gets wet and warped, when the trans-everything nonsense hits fever pitch…a few will start to pine for an ancient faith. They will go online to order and meetup; they will seek and they will not find (Jn 7:34) except in those pockets in which it has been preserved as the pearl of great price that it is, a soft glow of candles in stained glass windows in the darkness, shards of light reflecting off a gold monstrance in the sanctuary, the quiet ancient chant of plainsong beckoning behind thick solid wood doors. It will be exotic and intimidating, ethereal and forbidden, austere and arduous, foreign and yet completely familiar. The Faith of our fathers, the Faith handed down, the Faith communion that takes place in real time…it will be both old, and new.
What I didn’t realize then was we would be rounding the corner as a family a couple years later, finding a local pocket of those devoted to the usus antiquior. The rest, they say, is history—the 1962 Missal became our liturgical “docking station” where everything synched. We eventually began attending a diocesan Latin Mass every Sunday where we began to lay down roots. The hope was not that the Tridentine liturgy would be our salvation or the “silver bullet” that would guarantee the transmission of the Faith to our children as (eventual) adults; it simply seemed like a solid foundation, built on rock, that had stood the test of time for generations.
People attend the Latin Mass for a myriad of reasons. For some it may be ideological; for some, aesthetic. For many (like us), it recalibrates the needle of what it means to worship. We are not there to see friends (though we enjoy each other’s company outside the church after Mass). We are not there to “share a communal meal.” We are not there for entertainment or good preaching.
We enter into worship primarily as an act of sacrifice. In this, the “Mass of the Ages” expresses unequivocally its single-minded purpose. As Msgr. George Moorman states in The Latin Mass Explained, “Sacrifice answers the craving of human nature.” There is no ambiguity when one steps into a Latin Mass: this is Catholicism.
The post What’s Old Is New appeared first on LewRockwell.
Donald Trump forgets name of Japanese PM – calls him “Mr. Japan”
Thanks, Johnny Kramer .
The post Donald Trump forgets name of Japanese PM – calls him “Mr. Japan” appeared first on LewRockwell.
America’s Untold Stories: JFK Assassination Bombshells with Robert Tanenbaum and Robert Groden
The Truth Is Out. In this episode of America’s Untold Stories, Mark Groubert and Eric Hunley are joined by two historic insiders—Robert Groden and Robert Tanenbaum—to break down the JFK assassination like never before.
Groden, the photographic expert behind the Zapruder film’s public release, and Tanenbaum, former Deputy Chief Counsel of the HSCA, reveal shocking insights based on their research. They detail why Lee Harvey Oswald was not the killer, what the U.S. government withheld for decades, and how the official narrative collapsed under new scrutiny. If you think you know the story of November 22, 1963—think again.
*****************************************
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
*****************************************
On Locals with a private chat and afterparty https://unstructured.locals.com/post/…
Robert Groden’s books can be ordered from emailing directly to janetclair29 @ gmail.com
Robert Tanenbaum’s book “That Day in Dallas: Lee Harvey Oswald Did NOT Kill JFK” (affiliate link) https://amzn.to/4liSLRn
The post America’s Untold Stories: JFK Assassination Bombshells with Robert Tanenbaum and Robert Groden appeared first on LewRockwell.
America…First? Flip-Flopping Trump Vows More Weapons To Ukraine
The post America…First? Flip-Flopping Trump Vows More Weapons To Ukraine appeared first on LewRockwell.
Space Shuttle Theatre
George Giles wrote:
The space shuttle was a horrific disaster. While sucking up hundreds of billions of tax dollars it failed in every single specification that was its justification for existence. The shuttle’s ancillary behavior was all the astronauts it killed. The Soviet launch system has proven vastly safer and lower cost. Think about that.
Libertarian critic Doug Bandow said of the shuttle almost thirty tears ago “you would be hard pressed to find a more expensive way to put payload in orbit.”
Congress told NASA after the Challenger exploded to resurrect the Saturn V a bargain at only $10 million each. NASA replied that they cannot since the tooling and plans were gone. This was not an accident.
Nonetheless the space shuttle continues to punish the taxpayer. Trump’s One Bloated Horrific bill has $85 million buried in it to ship a shuttle from DC to Texas where it will be monument to fraud, waste and abuse. Still the taxpayer burden for this ‘icon’ will not end with delivery, but will be a continuing resolution where if outdoors will have to be maintained against the corrosive effects of sun and weather. If indoors it will require a large space requiring heat in winter and air conditioning in the nine month summer near Houston.
Surely President Trump as a conservative must have been drowsy when reading the 1100+ page bill as he would have removed this particular item as nonsensical.
The post Space Shuttle Theatre appeared first on LewRockwell.
Echi di tirannia
Ricordo a tutti i lettori che su Amazon potete acquistare il mio nuovo libro, “Il Grande Default”: https://www.amazon.it/dp/B0DJK1J4K9
Il manoscritto fornisce un grimaldello al lettore, una chiave di lettura semplificata, del mondo finanziario e non che sembra essere andato "fuori controllo" negli ultimi quattro anni in particolare. Questa 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/echi-di-tirannia)
Anni dopo l'imposizione dell'obbligo di vaccinazione contro il Covid-19, mi ritrovo in uno stato di riflessione, alle prese con i cambiamenti epocali che si sono verificati in quel periodo. Il mondo che conoscevamo è cambiato radicalmente, quasi da un giorno all'altro. Gli stati hanno emanato provvedimenti drastici e libertà che molti di noi davano per scontate sono improvvisamente diventate privilegi. È stato un periodo pieno di paura, confusione e pressione. Ora, con il senno di poi, il peso di ciò che è accaduto sembra ancora più pesante.
Ho capito che abbiamo vissuto una delle violazioni dei diritti umani più sconcertanti della storia recente. Al centro di questa crisi si trova il passaggio di due Rubiconi: l'erosione del Primo emendamento della Costituzione degli Stati Uniti e la violazione del Codice di Norimberga. Entrambi sono stati creati sulla scia di tragedie storiche: una dopo la Rivoluzione americana, l'altra dopo la Seconda guerra mondiale. Entrambe sono fondamentali, concepite per salvaguardare i diritti umani e proteggere dagli abusi di potere. Trasgredendo questi confini, ci siamo addentrati in un territorio pericoloso che richiede urgenti riflessioni e azioni concrete.
Le prime regole: pilastri della libertà e dell'etica
La garanzia della libertà di parola sancita dal Primo Emendamento è una pietra angolare della democrazia, nata dal crogiolo della rivoluzione contro la tirannia. I nostri Padri fondatori, avendo sperimentato in prima persona l'oppressione di un governo che soffocava il dissenso, sancirono questo diritto a proteggere la libera circolazione delle informazioni, consentendo alle persone di ascoltare tutti i lati di una questione e prendere le proprie decisioni. Durante la pandemia abbiamo oltrepassato questo confine sacro. La censura ha prevalso e le prospettive alternative sui vaccini, comprese le legittime preoccupazioni sulla loro sicurezza e sui loro effetti a lungo termine, sono state soppresse. I media generalisti, i social media e i governi hanno fatto eco a un messaggio univoco: “Sicuro ed efficace”. Le voci dissidenti sono state etichettate come disinformazione e messe a tacere, tradendo il principio stesso che avrebbe dovuto prevenire tali abusi di potere.
Altrettanto importante è il Codice di Norimberga, emanato dopo gli orrori della Seconda guerra mondiale, il quale avrebbe dovuto costituire uno standard internazionale inderogabile. La sua prima e più importante regola afferma: “Il consenso volontario del soggetto è assolutamente essenziale”. Questo principio è così importante che, dopo i Processi di Norimberga, vennero giustiziate persone per averlo violato. Eppure, durante la pandemia, abbiamo oltrepassato anche questo limite.
Le persone venivano costrette a vaccinarsi sotto la minaccia dell'esclusione dalla vita pubblica. Ci veniva detto che avremmo perso il lavoro o che ci sarebbe stato negato l'accesso a vari aspetti della società se avessimo rifiutato il vaccino. Bambini sani venivano esclusi dagli spazi pubblici perché i loro genitori non volevano somministrare loro un farmaco sperimentale. Le famiglie si trovavano di fronte a scelte impossibili sotto un'immensa pressione sociale ed economica, in palese violazione del Codice di Norimberga che impone che tutti gli interventi medici fossero volontari e liberi da coercizioni.
L’erosione dei diritti e della fiducia
La violazione di questi due principi fondamentali ha creato un ambiente di coercizione e disinformazione. Le persone non sono state solo costrette a sottoporsi a interventi medici; sono state costrette al silenzio. Ogni tentativo di mettere in discussione la narrazione ufficiale o di chiedere maggiori informazioni è stato accolto con censura ed esclusione. Questa erosione dei diritti ha avuto conseguenze di vasta portata.
- Mancanza di consenso informato: senza la piena trasparenza sugli ingredienti del vaccino e sui potenziali rischi a lungo termine, un vero consenso informato era impossibile. Le persone venivano invitate a prendere decisioni che avrebbero cambiato la loro vita senza informazioni cruciali.
- Soppressione del dibattito: la censura dei punti di vista alternativi ha impedito la possibilità di un consenso informato. Senza un dibattito aperto e l'accesso a diverse prospettive, come si può affermare che le persone abbiano fatto una scelta veramente informata?
- Violazione dell'autonomia fisica: gli operatori sanitari in prima linea, un tempo considerati eroi, venivano licenziati quando sceglievano di non rispettare le disposizioni. Molti avevano già un'immunità naturale da precedenti infezioni, eppure le loro decisioni mediche personali non venivano rispettate.
- Politica sanitaria pubblica illogica: è diventato chiaro che i vaccini non bloccavano la trasmissione del Covid-19, che era la giustificazione centrale per i provvedimenti obbligatori. Se i vaccini non fossero riusciti a prevenire la diffusione, la vaccinazione sarebbe diventata una decisione personale in materia di salute, proprio come decidere cosa mangiare o bere. Eppure le persone erano comunque costrette a rispettarla nonostante gravi minacce.
- Impatto personale: gli obblighi hanno cambiato l'intero corso della mia vita e di quella di molti altri. Le relazioni si sono logorate, le situazioni lavorative sono state compromesse e le traiettorie geografiche si sono spostate, mentre le persone cercavano ambienti in linea con i propri valori.
Una crisi dei diritti umani e della fiducia istituzionale
L'assenza di un riconoscimento pubblico di queste violazioni è impressionante. Come abbiamo potuto sopravvivere a un disprezzo così palese per i diritti umani senza alcun riconoscimento o assunzione di responsabilità? Il Primo emendamento è stato sancito per proteggere la libertà di parola e il Codice di Norimberga è stato creato per prevenire questo tipo di abusi; eppure entrambe queste tutele fondamentali sono state violate su larga scala.
Questa combinazione – la perdita della libertà di parola e l'abbandono del consenso informato – ha creato una crisi di fiducia che potrebbe richiedere generazioni per essere sanata. Come possiamo fidarci dei governi, dei media generalisti, o persino delle istituzioni mediche quando nascondono le informazioni e ci costringono ad obbedire senza fornire tutti i fatti?
Le lezioni dimenticate della storia
Ciò che forse è più sorprendente è quanto poche persone sembrassero conoscere appieno le implicazioni del Primo emendamento o fossero addirittura a conoscenza dell'esistenza del Codice di Norimberga. Come siamo arrivati a questo punto? Forse perché gli anziani che hanno vissuto le conseguenze della Seconda guerra mondiale – coloro che hanno compreso le lezioni della storia – sono scomparsi. Gli echi delle tragedie storiche erano fin troppo inquietanti: le stesse tattiche di disinformazione, paura ed ingerenza governativa hanno manipolato il sentimento pubblico, trasformando l'empatia in paura.
Nel corso della storia, quando l'umanità ha affrontato i suoi momenti più bui, siamo emersi con nuova saggezza e nuove garanzie. La Rivoluzione americana ha dato vita alla Costituzione e alla sua Carta dei diritti. Le atrocità della Seconda guerra mondiale hanno portato al Codice di Norimberga e alla Dichiarazione universale dei diritti dell'uomo. Questi documenti rappresentano i migliori sforzi dell'umanità per imparare dai nostri errori e prevenire futuri abusi. Ora, dopo aver violato questi sacri principi, ci troviamo a un altro momento cruciale. È tempo di riflettere sulle nostre azioni, riconoscere i nostri passi falsi e forgiare nuove tutele per il futuro.
I pericoli del silenzio
Senza una presa di coscienza pubblica, ci stiamo muovendo su un terreno pericoloso. Se non c'è il riconoscimento di queste violazioni, se non c'è una riflessione collettiva, allora diamo il via libera a questo fenomeno. La mancanza di responsabilità invia un messaggio chiaro: non esiste limite che non possa essere oltrepassato, nessun principio che non possa essere ignorato e nessun abuso di potere che non sarà tollerato.
Mentre andiamo avanti, è fondamentale ricordare questo capitolo della nostra storia, non per soffermarci sul passato, ma per garantire che non ripeteremo mai più questi errori. Dobbiamo riaffermare il nostro impegno per i diritti umani, il consenso informato e la libertà di parola. Solo riconoscendo quanto accaduto e chiedendo conto ai responsabili possiamo sperare di costruire un futuro in cui tali violazioni siano impensabili.
Una strada da percorrere: proteggere i nostri diritti fondamentali
Mentre emergiamo dall'ombra degli obblighi di vaccinazione contro il Covid-19, ci troviamo in una fase cruciale. Gli eventi degli ultimi anni hanno rivelato la fragilità delle nostre libertà più care e la facilità con cui i principi sanciti dal Primo emendamento e dal Codice di Norimberga possono essere erosi. Tuttavia questo periodo difficile ha anche risvegliato una rinnovata consapevolezza di questi diritti fondamentali. Ora dobbiamo incanalare questa consapevolezza in azione, lavorando instancabilmente per prevenire future violazioni e sanare le profonde ferite inflitte alla nostra società.
Il nostro percorso futuro inizia con il rendere il nostro governo responsabile. Dobbiamo sostenere la creazione di una commissione bipartisan per indagare sulla gestione della pandemia, concentrandosi in particolare sulle potenziali violazioni della libertà di parola e del consenso informato. Questa commissione non dovrebbe fungere da caccia alle streghe, ma da mezzo per comprendere i nostri passi falsi e garantire che non si ripetano mai più. Allo stesso tempo dobbiamo promuovere una legislazione che rafforzi la tutela di informatori e dissidenti, soprattutto in tempi di crisi. La nostra democrazia prospera grazie al libero scambio di idee e dobbiamo garantire che punti di vista diversi possano sempre essere espressi in modo sicuro, anche di fronte a una pressione schiacciante a conformarsi.
È necessario rafforzare le tutele legali e politiche per proteggere i nostri diritti nelle crisi future. Dovremmo sostenere gli sforzi legali che sfidano e chiariscono i limiti del potere governativo durante le emergenze di salute pubblica. Inoltre dobbiamo sostenere una legislazione che richieda esplicitamente che tutte le misure di salute pubblica aderiscano ai principi del Codice di Norimberga, in particolare per quanto riguarda il consenso informato. Integrando i comitati etici a tutti i livelli di governo, possiamo contribuire a garantire che il processo decisionale sia in linea con i diritti umani, anche nelle circostanze più difficili.
L'istruzione svolge un ruolo cruciale nella salvaguardia delle nostre libertà. Dobbiamo promuovere l'inclusione di un'educazione civica completa nei programmi scolastici, con particolare attenzione al Primo emendamento e all'etica medica. Promuovendo una profonda comprensione di questi principi nella prossima generazione, creiamo una popolazione meglio equipaggiata per riconoscere e contrastare le violazioni delle proprie libertà. Campagne di sensibilizzazione pubblica sull'importanza della libertà di parola e del consenso informato per il mantenimento di una società libera dovrebbero essere sostenute e amplificate.
Forse il compito più impegnativo, ma vitale, che ci attende è quello di risanare le relazioni personali messe a dura prova dagli eventi degli ultimi anni. Per colmare le divisioni create durante questo periodo difficile, dobbiamo affrontare le nostre relazioni frammentate con compassione e chiarezza. Avviare discussioni calme e razionali con familiari o amici da cui ci si è allontanati può creare uno spazio per un dialogo aperto. Praticando l'ascolto attivo ed esprimendo empatia, possiamo sforzarci di comprendere le paure e le motivazioni alla base delle decisioni altrui, anche se non siamo d'accordo con loro. Cercare un terreno comune in valori ed esperienze condivise, stabilendo al contempo dei limiti per le interazioni future, può impedire di riaprire vecchie ferite.
Rinnoviamo il nostro impegno ai principi
Mentre lavoriamo per una riconciliazione, dovremmo considerare la via del perdono, riconoscendo che molti hanno agito per paura o confusione. Tuttavia, nel perdonare, non dobbiamo dimenticare. Mantenere una memoria nitida degli eventi accaduti servirà da guida per prevenire future violazioni dei nostri diritti e delle nostre libertà.
Il nostro percorso futuro richiede più di una semplice riflessione; richiede un processo di riconciliazione e un fermo impegno nei confronti dei nostri principi fondamentali. Solo attraverso un'incrollabile dedizione alla libertà di parola, al consenso informato e all'autonomia individuale possiamo sperare di ricostruire la fiducia che si è incrinata. La posta in gioco non potrebbe essere più alta: le nostre azioni oggi, incluso il modo in cui ci riconciliamo con questo difficile capitolo della nostra storia, determineranno se lasceremo in eredità alle generazioni future una società che custodisce la libertà o una che ignora con superficialità le libertà conquistate a fatica.
Mentre andiamo avanti, portiamo con noi questa consapevolezza, rimanendo sempre vigili nella difesa dei nostri diritti e offrendo compassione a chi ci circonda. Il nostro impegno verso questi principi, unito ai nostri sforzi per guarire le nostre comunità, plasmerà la società che lasceremo alle generazioni future: una società che valorizza sia la libertà individuale che il benessere collettivo, promuovendo un equilibrio che rispetti la dignità e i diritti di ogni persona.
La scelta è nostra ed è il momento di agire. Attraverso azioni ponderate, sforzi sinceri per comprenderci e riconnetterci gli uni con gli altri, e un impegno incrollabile per i nostri diritti fondamentali, possiamo uscire da questo periodo difficile con le nostre libertà rafforzate e le nostre comunità rinnovate. Facciamo in modo che questa sia la nostra eredità: una società che ha imparato dai propri passi falsi, ha sanato le proprie divisioni e si è nuovamente impegnata nei principi eterni di libertà e dignità umana. Così facendo, onoriamo la saggezza di coloro che ci hanno preceduto, creando garanzie dopo periodi di grande conflitto, e diamo un potente esempio da seguire alle generazioni future.
[*] traduzione di Francesco Simoncelli: https://www.francescosimoncelli.com/
Supporta Francesco Simoncelli's Freedonia lasciando una “mancia” in satoshi di bitcoin scannerizzando il QR seguente.
Catholic Priest Says ‘Effeminate’ Men Are the Root Problem in Marriages
What is the biggest problem within Catholic marriages today? According to a traditional priest, it’s “effeminate” men.
By effeminate, he doesn’t mean a man who’s light in his loafers. He means a man who doesn’t spiritually lead his family, and so fails in his most important role.
Especially among traditional Catholics, much attention regarding marriage is given to the problems of feminism and wives’ call to submission. LifeSiteNews asked Father Adam Purdy, FSSPX, to what extent he sees feminism as a marital problem, versus the problem of overbearing husbands.
While he did not entirely dismiss either of these as real issues, he maintained that he sees much more often a “different problem” – that of men who are “weak,” “not virtuous,” and who don’t practice the virtue of religion, which is “the most important virtue for a husband and a father to have,” Purdy told LifeSiteNews.
This is the very crux of the marriage – because as the spiritual head of his family, it is the husband who is called to take the lead in his family’s practice of the faith.
What does exercizing the virtue of religion in the home look like for the husband (and father)? According to Purdy, setting a schedule in which “prayer and religion takes priority in the house” and leading his family in prayer are two major pillars of his spiritual headship.
“How often do we have situations where dad doesn’t pray with the family? Mom’s in charge of the rosary or mom’s in charge of morning prayers,” said Purdy, acknowledging that sometimes it may be necessary for mom to lead prayer when dad has to go out to work early, for example.
Fathers also don’t often ensure that prayer and religion are prioritized to begin with. “How many families don’t actually have a schedule? The only thing they have is dinner time, between five and six, and that’s it. Many families don’t say a family rosary,” Purdy noted.
It is critical that husbands make sure the family follows a rule of life, almost like that of a religious community, said Purdy. “There has to be a rule in the house, and most don’t have it. That’s the problem of the man.”
“How many families have silence? How many families have community prayer? How many families do reading? There are so many things that could be imitated from a monastery. But we’re listening to Mick Jagger on the way to school in the car. We’ve got the TV on at home all hours of the day,” observed Purdy.
He explained that fathers should take time out for activities that will help build the devotion of their family, the way a priest makes time for community activities like processions and picnics and formation talks, to foster the devotion of his flock.
More typically, religion ends up taking “a backseat to other things,” and this has bigger consequences than men realize, both for their own family and for society.
Most fundamentally, God is the true, deep, and lasting motivation to live a good – that is, virtuous – life. “How do you convince your children to be good if God isn’t the reason?” noted Fr. Purdy.
In addition, while God should take first place for His own sake, when He doesn’t come first, the result is a de facto disorder of priorities, in which other concerns become blown out of proportion and even secondary priorities may take a backseat to other interests, since religion directs and orders everything else.
Even more consequentially, the lack of proper order in a family does a disservice to society, because “the family is the building block of society,” and “You can’t build up society if you don’t have God first,” noted Purdy.
He pointed out that these men who have abdicated their spiritual headship are a product of our culture, which itself has “become effeminate” and “produces vice rather than virtue.”
Men’s neglect of their religious responsibility, then, also “merits eventually the scorn of the woman,” as well as her attempt to take over the religious leadership of the children “in spite of him,” which Purdy affirmed a woman must do if her husband is failing in that regard.
Authority goes hand-in-hand with servant leadershipThe prior also talked about what the husband’s proper approach to his wife should look like, and touched on disordered attitudes about this that can be found in traditional communities.
“There is a lot of abuse of the idea of the authority of the husband,” said Fr. Purdy, noting that such abuses include the ideas that “The woman is my servant; the woman doesn’t speak; the woman does all the work; the woman has to just do what I say.”
He cited an example he has seen of a husband who looks at his wife as “more as a servant rather than a helpmate,” and “more as one to be told what to do rather than to mutually enhance each other.”
For a proper model of leadership, the husband should look to Jesus Christ, since as St. Paul said in a letter to the Ephesians, the husband is called to love his wife as Christ loved His Church.
“He laid out His life for His Church. He has compassion and mercy for His Church. He gives us all the means to do good and to succeed and to grow stronger in everything spiritually. He’s the lifeblood of his Church. The husband in a way has to be that,” Purdy told LifeSiteNews.
And, in fact, Christ exemplified servant-leadership, with an attitude not that He is above certain tasks, but that says, “I’m going to be there with you. I’m going to be doing the same work that you’re doing. I’m also going to be getting my hands dirty.”
“That’s our Lord. A father has to be the same,” said Purdy. In so doing, he should seek to “alleviate some of the burden of his wife,” and not refuse certain household tasks because they are the woman’s domain.
“A lot of marriages don’t work because the man, when he comes home from work, he doesn’t realize” the burden of his wife, who has “been with five kids for 10 hours and is about ready to cry and pull her hair out at the same time.”
Purdy told LifeSiteNews how his father instilled in him and his siblings the attitude that one should seek to please one’s wife, by, for example, cleaning the house well together while his mom was away from home.
“How many guys are like that today? Not a lot,” Purdy noted.
A husband also demonstrates his love of his wife through simply giving her his time and attention. “I think that a woman thrives on recognition and acknowledgement and gratitude and honor and respect… every woman would like to know that she’s appreciated, that she’s loved. That her husband looks to spend time with her. And you see men that just don’t do that very well. They will come home and turn on a TV, and don’t even pay attention to their kids. It’s a failure, big time,” said Purdy.
This will foster his wife’s own love and support for her husband. She should seek to build him up, and never berate or belittle him which, according to Purdy, is the “worst thing a woman can do in an argument with her husband.” A wife is called most especially to practice the virtue of charity in her marriage, with both her husband and children, Father noted.
While it does not excuse the sins or faults of a wife, ultimately, the authority of the husband means that in a sense, the marriage starts with him.
“I put the burden of success in a marriage on the shoulders of the man, because he’s supposed to be the mind,” said Purdy. “He’s supposed to be able to calculate what it is that I can deliver to my spouse so that she will be the most. She will be in her glory. And if he does that, she does go into her glory. But when she’s in her glory, she turns it back to him. It’s like – for lack of a better word – a give and take.”
The post Catholic Priest Says ‘Effeminate’ Men Are the Root Problem in Marriages appeared first on LewRockwell.
UN Slams Trump on Education, Demands Globalized Control
The United Nations and its “human rights” bureaucracy are unhappy with American education — especially President Trump’s policies and proposals.
Instead of local or parental control, the UN is pushing for radical changes: more federal power, less educational choice, government oversight of private schools, and the promotion of controversial ideological content — all at taxpayer expense. It also wants education globally redefined as a UN-backed “human right.”
UN Investigates U.S.
The UN’s latest attack on U.S. education, parental rights, state and national sovereignty, and the Constitution came in the form of an investigation and “country report” to the UN’s dictator-dominated “Human Rights Council.” The outfit, which regularly praises mass-murdering regimes while condemning Western nations, frequently targets the God-given rights of Americans enshrined in the U.S. Constitution.
Among other demands on education, the United States needs more federal involvement in and oversight of government and private schools, not less, argued the senior UN official in her report last month following an in-depth investigation of U.S. education policy.
Blasting Trump’s efforts to shut down or at least reduce the power of the U.S. Department of Education, the UN bureaucrat claimed they would hurt low-income students, weaken “civil rights,” disrupt “higher learning,” and produce other alleged horrors.
“The loss of federal oversight could deepen inequities, harm marginalized students and undermine social mobility,” argued UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Education Farida Shaheed, the radical Pakistani activist who investigated the United States.
The final report does acknowledge that under the U.S. Constitution’s Tenth Amendment, education is not a federal responsibility. However, it frames that as a problem. And it then proceeds to claim that the U.S. government is obligated under “international law” to impose the UN’s agenda on education nationwide anyway.
Perversion, Leftism & Racial Obsession Needed
Aside from blasting what remains of local control and decentralized policymaking on education across America, the UN special rapporteur also called for more ideologically driven mandates. The goal: Make sure children learn what the UN thinks they must learn.
States including Florida and Texas were singled out for passing laws trying to protect students — especially young students — from indoctrination with Marxist-inspired critical race theory; LGBT propaganda; diversity, equity, and inclusion; gender ideology; and sexually explicit material.
Shaheed claimed the laws produce a “chilling effect” undermining “inclusive education” — a euphemism for grotesque “sex education,” racial collectivism, and gender propaganda.
“Censorship laws restricting classroom discussions on race, gender identity and other ‘divisive concepts’ limit students’ access to critical knowledge,” she claimed, blasting state efforts to protect children from racial, sex, and gender indoctrination as “censorship.”
State and district policies keeping porn and other obscene material out of tax-funded schools are supposedly hurting children, too. “Book bans and content restrictions silence marginalized voices, preventing students from accessing a full and accurate understanding of history and social dynamics,” claimed the radical UN activist.
The Broader Push
It is all part of the broader UN push to standardize education globally. As outlined in UN agreements going back decades, one of its primary goals is to shift the attitudes and values of children toward UN-approved beliefs.
In an interview she did last year with the UN’s education agency, Shaheed brazenly called for governments to control what is taught. There is a need for governments to ensure “that standards are outlined that all private sector providers must adhere to in accordance with the right to quality education.”
Ultimately, education must teach children to become so-called sustainable global citizens, UN leaders and agreements have been saying openly since at least the 1990s. Agenda 21 and the 2030 Agenda Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) both state that clearly.
The UN Human Rights Council has long advocated for hijacking control over private schools, too. In fact, a decade ago, the dictator-controlled outfit claimed governments have an obligation to monitor and regulate all non-government education, even imposing government standards on all.
Tax-funded Universities & “Freedom”
The supposedly secular Pakistani activist-turned-UN “expert,” whose last name means martyr who dies for Allah or Islam, also slammed government efforts to rein in college campuses’ violent “pro-Palestine” riots funded by billionaire extremist George Soros and other insiders. Among other concerns, she denounced “disproportionate disciplinary actions.”
When it came to the escalating attacks against Jews, Shaheed claimed not to see it. “I do not know antisemitism is actually on the rise,” she responded when asked if she would be investigating one of the major issues that caused Trump to take on Harvard, Columbia, and other once-prestigious universities.
She expressed deep concerns over Trump’s efforts to protect taxpayers and students from rogue universities feasting on public money, too. Under the guise of “respecting institutional autonomy,” the UN rapporteur claimed the U.S. government is obligated to do what she said.
“While the Harvard case has drawn global attention, it is emblematic of a much broader pattern of coercive assault on academic freedom and institutional autonomy: from book and subject bans in schools to discriminatory censorship laws and punitive measures against universities, their students and faculty,” Shaheed said.
Blasting what she described as “criminalization” of student protests, Shaheed suggested that international legal mechanisms are required to override American policies developed by Americans. “The Special Rapporteur … has consistently expressed her serious concerns in allegation letters sent to the Government of the United States,” the report says.
Redefining Education as a Globalist “Human Right”
Among the most alarming demands by the UN rapporteur: a redefinition of education itself to bring American schools into line with the UN’s vision on “human rights” and “equity.” Those two loaded terms mean something very different to the UN than the traditional understanding held by Americans, of course.
“The Special Rapporteur strongly encourages the federal Government and all States to consider expressly recognizing education as a fundamental human right for everyone,” Shaheed said.
By contrast, consider the definition of education in the 1828 Webster’s dictionary, the first American dictionary. “To give children a good education in manners, arts and science, is important; to give them a religious education is indispensable; and an immense responsibility rests on parents and guardians who neglect these duties,” it says. (Emphasis added.)
For virtually all of human history, education of children has been a responsibility of parents. But under the UN’s agenda, indoctrination pretending to be education becomes a human right enforced at the barrel of a government gun.
“The right to education requires States [governments] to deliver free, quality, public education for everyone,” the UN’s final report declared (emphasis added). That is clearly an ominous call for forcing all children into federalized government “education” based on UN principles while marginalizing alternatives to government-controlled schools.
Incompatible Views
As stated above, the UN’s view of “quality education” would differ significantly from the views of everyday Americans. As the UN’s own agreements make clear, it believes children should learn globalism, environmentalism, feminism, multiculturalism, and even UN-approved “spirituality.”
Perhaps even more significant is the total incompatibility of the UN’s understanding of “human rights” with the traditional American and Christian understanding of God-given rights from the Creator. Under the biblical understanding and the American system of government, unalienable rights pre-exist government. Indeed, governments exist to protect those rights, not grant them.
Under the UN’s bizarre version of “human rights,” however, rights are granted by governments and can be restricted or abolished at will. Adding insult to injury, those fake government-imposed “rights” may “in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations,” according to Article 29 of the UN’s “Universal Declaration of Human Rights.”
In other words, the UN’s supposed human rights are the revocable, government-granted privileges of people to take from their neighbors by force, instead of the unalienable God-given rights protected by the Constitution.
Obviously, the two views on human rights are not just different — they are fundamentally incompatible with each other at a basic level. The fact that some of the world’s most brutal communist and Islamist dictatorships sit proudly on the UN Human Rights Council exemplifies the conflict well.
More Globalism Needed
The implications of this redefinition of education as a UN-granted human right are enormous. Consider Article 26 of the controversial UN “Universal Declaration of Human Rights,” the organization’s foundational “human rights” document. It states clearly that education must be “compulsory” and that it “shall further the activities of the United Nations.”
In short, if parents, private schools, tutors, and even government schools are not promoting the UN’s agenda in “education,” they are depriving children of their “human rights” enshrined in UN agreements. Depriving children of their UN-defined human rights is considered to be a serious offense.
The UN rapporteur has been very explicit on the issue of indoctrinating children with UN-backed ideologies. “There is a growing understanding of the need to embed sustainable development values … in educational processes, and efforts are being made to incorporate sustainable development principles into educational curricula to prepare students for the challenges of the future,” she said in a Q&A with the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) last year.
The post UN Slams Trump on Education, Demands Globalized Control appeared first on LewRockwell.
Cage Match
Who knows what to believe these days? Well, what would you expect after years, even decades, of anti-reality operations by everyone from the CIA to The New York Times to Harvard U. Is it any wonder that reality-optionality is making the people both apathetic and insane?
We are told now by the FBI that there is no evidence that Jeffrey Epstein ran a blackmail operation against the politicos of Western Civ, or that a “client list” existed, or that JE was murdered in his jail cell. It well might be true that there is no evidence, strictly speaking.
Messrs. Patel and Bongino, coming into office rather late in the Epstein game, were apparently left with big bag of nuthin. What else can they truthfully report? So, they had to put it out there, knowing a whole lot of people would be miffed. “We’ve got nuthin, sorry.” Were they chagrined to do that? Evidently so. Of course, this Epstein business has been going on for years and years and it is certainly possible that the most damning evidence has been destroyed by interested parties.
Personally, I find it implausible that absolutely nothing ever leaked, no video of, say, Tony Blair or Bill Clinton violating a child, if it ever happened. Everything else in our world leaks, eventually. And there were supposedly how many cameras around the Epstein properties, and how many thousands of hours of video recordings? There is more video of Bigfoot than of compromised Epstein bigshots. Just sayin’.
AG Pam Bondi, the FBIs boss, also has some ‘splainin’ to do. In February, she claimed to have the Epstein client list “sitting on my desk right now to review,” and hinted it would be released shortly. That material, when released, turned out to be the old dog-eared flight logs that have been circulating through every news outlet for years. Did she not know the difference between an alleged “client list” and the old flight logs? Let’s face it: seems kind of dumb. . . seems like the AG got played. . . and now the mob on “X” is having sport with her.
Among the miffed, apparently, is Elon Musk. At the height of his feud with Mr. Trump, on June 5, Elon put out a message on his “X” platform saying, “@realDonaldTrump is in the Epstein files. That is the real reason they have not been made public. Have a nice day, DJT!”. This intemperate utterance naturally prompts you to wonder: how (or what) might Elon know about any supposed Epstein evidence? At this point, the FBI might send somebody to inquire. Did Elon, who has more money than even Scrooge McDuck, somehow manage to buy up all those alleged blackmail tapes? Does he otherwise know where they might have disappeared to? Has he ever seen anything? Anyway, he didn’t produce any actual evidence.
Is Elon losing it, a little bit. His grip, that is. Mr. Trump thinks so. He declared over the weekend that Elon has “gone off the rails” . . . has become “a train wreck.” Well, what you can see in this very public, very regrettable cage-match between two giant public personalities is that Elon has lost his cool and the president has not.
For one thing, Elon is apparently incensed over the One Big Beautiful Bill (OBBB) just signed into law because it ends the electric vehicle mandate left over from the “Joe Biden” regime, as well as the whopping $7,500 federal tax credit for new electric cars — loss of which which is apt to break Tesla’s business model. The bill also calls for sunsetting subsidies for battery production by 2028, meaning Tesla’s Powerwall business is likewise affected. Mr. Trump took pains to explain that he’d informed Elon from the get-go (and repeatedly) that all those subsidies were done for when he got elected.
Elon was visibly perturbed over the process that produced the OBBB, the proverbial political sausage-making (i.e., a nasty business you’d be appalled to watch). It appeared, he said, to un-do all of his DOGE spending cuts so laboriously made. Mainly, Elon deplored the failure to address the $36-trillion-plus national debt, widely recognized as a time-bomb on a short fuse liable to sink the whole USS United States. I will tell you a harsh truth: nobody will do anything about the national debt. The sheer math of our annual debt service is simply impossible. Our country is heading into some sort of bankruptcy proceeding, some kind of ferocious “work out” — as they say in the banking board-rooms.
Mr. Trump is betting that re-industrialization of the USA will produce enough of the right sort of growth — that is, production of real things of real value, as opposed to mere financial shenanigans — that the debt reckoning can be overcome somehow. Or mitigated. It’s a bold risk, and many pieces of the scheme are indeed falling into place: tariffs, bigly investment capital from foreigners, a general realignment of trade relations, tax reform, downsizing of government.
But a virulent opposition, the mad-dog remnants of the Democratic Party, seeks to wreck Mr. Trump’s program (and perhaps the USA altogether), and it is a miracle that the president has gotten this far with his plan. Personally, I’m doubtful that the energy resources will be there to underwrite this reindustrialization, but that is a topic for another day.
And now Elon, peeved as he is, proposes to bring another big obstacle onto the scene, his proposed new “American Party.” Looks like he is making a tactical blunder, and his distraught emotional demeanor suggests poor decision-making. Frankly, I’ve been concerned about Elon’s soundness-of-mind since he came on-board Mr. Trump’s band-wagon last summer. There was something peculiar about his spastic rompings on stage, his jerky movements, his garbly speeches. You wonder if all the talk about his world-beating “genius” has messed with his mind.
Also, frankly, I’ve long thought that attempting to colonize Mars was absurd, or at least premature. Shouldn’t we rather make an effort to demonstrate that we can live on this planet successfully before we venture off to a new one? After all, this Earth is perfectly suited to our needs and Mars is absolutely not. I doubt that even the most extreme transhuman program would avail to implant us up there.
To cut to the chase: the grandiosity of Elon’s plans, and the oddness of his public performances, suggests to me that he has gone a bit crazy in the pure sense of the word. This new party he proposes looks like a crazy play by a crazy person. He can throw zillions of dollars into it, and create a whole lot of political mischief, but what would that prove? How would that make him any better than such obvious villains as George Soros and Bill Gates?
Reprinted with permission from Kunstler.com.
The post Cage Match appeared first on LewRockwell.
![[Most Recent Quotes from www.kitco.com]](http://www.kitconet.com/charts/metals/gold/t24_au_en_euoz_2.gif)
![[Most Recent Quotes from www.kitco.com]](http://www.kitconet.com/charts/metals/silver/t24_ag_en_euoz_2.gif)
![[Most Recent Exchange Rate from www.kitco.com]](http://www.weblinks247.com/exrate/exr24_eu_en_2.gif)
Commenti recenti
3 giorni 9 ore fa
5 settimane 17 ore fa
8 settimane 1 giorno fa
17 settimane 5 giorni fa
19 settimane 2 giorni fa
20 settimane 16 ore fa
24 settimane 1 giorno fa
27 settimane 1 giorno fa
29 settimane 1 giorno fa
30 settimane 6 giorni fa