| WELCOME |
|
comments, ephemera, speculation, etc. (protected political speech and personal opinion) - If this is your 1st visit to this page, please start at the bottom - 2021- 2021-07-10 f TOXIC BLACKNESS II A White Teacher Speaks Out
What is it like to teach black students? I recall a bad joke that explains, in crude terms, the relationship between blacks and whites in America today: ‘What do you call a
white man surrounded by 20 blacks?’
‘Coach.’ ‘What do you call a white man surrounded by 1,000 blacks?’ ‘Warden.’ I might add another line to this joke: ‘What do you call a white man surrounded by 30 blacks?’ ‘Teacher.’ Until recently I taught at a predominantly black high school in a southeastern state. I took the job because I wasn’t knowledgeable about race at the time, and black schools aren’t picky. The school offered me a job and suddenly I was in darkest Africa. Except, I wasn’t in Africa; I was in America. Blacks outnumbered whites about five to one at this school and there were hardly any Hispanics. Some of my classes were all-black, or nearly so, because the gifted and advanced classes siphoned off most of the white students and I taught regular classes. There were some black teachers but the majority were white. Most of the blacks I taught were from the area. They did not tend to travel very much, and I am sure there are regional differences in the ways in which blacks speak and act. However, I suspect my experiences were generally typical, certainly for Southern blacks. The mainstream press gives a hint of what conditions are like in black schools, but only a hint. Expressions journalists use like “chaotic” or “poor learning environment” or “lack of discipline” do not capture what really happens. There is nothing like the day-to-day experience of teaching black children and that is what I will try to convey. Noise Most whites simply do not know what black people are like in large numbers, and the first encounter can be a shock. One of the most immediately striking things about my students was that they were loud. They had little conception of ordinary white decorum. It was not unusual for five blacks to be screaming at me at once. Instead of calming down and waiting for a lull in the din to make their point — something that occurs to even the dimmest white students — blacks just tried to yell over each other. It did no good to try to quiet them, and white women were particularly inept at trying. I sat in on one woman’s class as she begged the children to pipe down. They just yelled louder so their voices would carry over hers. Many of my black students would repeat themselves over and over again — just louder. It was as if they suffered from Tourette syndrome. They seemed to have no conception of waiting for an appropriate time to say something. They would get ideas in their heads and simply had to shout them out. I might be leading a discussion on government and suddenly be interrupted: “We gotta get more Democrats! Clinton, she good!” The student may seem content with that outburst but two minutes later, he would suddenly start yelling again: “Clinton good!” Anyone who is around young blacks will get a constant diet of rap music. Blacks often make up their own jingles, and it was not uncommon for 15 black boys to swagger into a classroom, bouncing their shoulders and jiving back and forth, rapping 15 different sets of words in the same harsh, rasping dialect. The words were almost invariably a childish form of boasting: “Who got dem shine rim, who got dem shine shoe, who got dem shine grill (gold and silver dental caps)?” The amateur rapper usually ends with a claim — in the crudest terms imaginable — that all womankind is sexually devoted to him. For whatever reason, my students would often groan instead of saying a particular word, as in, “She suck dat aaahhhh (think of a long grinding groan), she f**k dat aaaahhhh, she lick dat aaaahhh.” Many rap lyrics are crude but some are simply incomprehensible. Not so long ago, there was a popular rap called “Tat it up.” I heard the words from hundreds of black mouths for weeks. Some of the lyrics are: Tat tat tat it up.
ATL tat it up. New York tat it up. Tat tat tat it up. Rap is one of the most degenerate things to have come out of our country, and it is tragic that it has infected whites to the extent it has. Black women love to dance — in a way white people might call gyrating. They dance in the hall, in the classroom, on the chairs, next to the chairs, under the chairs, everywhere. Once I took a call on my cell phone and had to step outside of class. I was away about two minutes but when I got back the black girls had lined up at the front of the classroom and were convulsing to the delight of the boys. Many black people, especially black women, are enormously fat. Some are so fat I had to arrange special seating to accommodate their bulk. I am not saying there are no fat white students — there are — but it is a matter of numbers and attitudes. Many black girls simply do not care that they are fat. There are plenty of white anorexics, but I have never met or heard of a black anorexic. “Black women be big Mr. Jackson,” my students would explain. “Is it okay in the black community to be a little overweight?” I ask. Two obese black girls in front of my desk begin to dance, “You know dem boys lak juicy fruit, Mr. Jackson.” “Juicy” is a colorful black expression for the buttocks. Blacks are the most directly critical people I have ever met: “Dat shirt stupid. Yo’ kid a bastard. Yo’ lips big.” Unlike whites, who tread gingerly around the subject of race, they can be brutally to the point. Once I needed to send a student to the office to deliver a message. I asked for volunteers, and suddenly you would think my classroom was a bastion of civic engagement. Thirty dark hands shot into the air. My students loved to leave the classroom and slack off, even if just for a few minutes, away from the eye of white authority. I picked a light-skinned boy to deliver the message. One very black student was indignant: “You pick da half-breed.” And immediately other blacks take up the cry, and half a dozen mouths are screaming, “He half-breed.” For decades, the country has been lamenting the poor academic performance of blacks and there is much to lament. There is no question, however, that many blacks come to school with a serious handicap that is not their fault. At home they have learned a dialect that is almost a different language. Blacks not only mispronounce words; their grammar is often wrong. When a black wants to ask, “Where is the bathroom?” he may actually say “Whar da badroom be?” Grammatically, this is the equivalent of “Where the bathroom is?” And this is the way they speak in high school. Students write the way they speak, so this is the language that shows up in written assignments. It is true that some whites face a similar handicap. They speak with what I would call a “country” accent that is hard to reproduce but results in sentences such as “I’m gonna gemme a Coke.” Some of these country whites had to learn correct pronunciation and usage. The difference is that most whites overcome this handicap and learn to speak correctly; many blacks do not. Most of the blacks I taught simply had no interest in academic subjects. I taught history, and students would often say they didn’t want to do an assignment or they didn’t like history because it was all about white people. Of course, this was “diversity” history, in which every cowboy’s black cook got a special page on how he contributed to winning the West, but black children still found it inadequate. So I would throw up my hands and assign them a project on a real, historical black person. My favorite was Marcus Garvey. They had never heard of him, and I would tell them to research him, but they never did. They didn’t care and they didn’t want to do any work. Anyone who teaches blacks soon learns that they have a completely different view of government from whites. Once I decided to fill 25 minutes by having students write about one thing the government should do to improve America. I gave this question to three classes totaling about 100 students, approximately 80 of whom were black. My few white students came back with generally “conservative” ideas. “We need to cut off people who don’t work,” was the most common suggestion. Nearly every black gave a variation on the theme of “We need more government services.” My students had only the vaguest notion of who pays for government services. For them, it was like a magical piggy bank that never goes empty. One black girl was exhorting the class on the need for more social services and I kept trying to explain that people, real live people, are taxed for the money to pay for those services. “Yeah, it come from whites,” she finally said. “They stingy anyway.” “Many black people make over $50,000 dollars a year and you would also be taking away from your own people,” I said. She had an answer to that: “Dey half breed.” The class agreed. I let the subject drop. Many black girls are perfectly happy to be welfare queens. On career day, one girl explained to the class that she was going to have lots of children and get fat checks from the government. No one in the class seemed to have any objection to this career choice. Surprising attitudes can come out in class discussion. We were talking about the crimes committed in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, and I brought up the rape of a young girl in the bathroom of the Superdome. A majority of my students believed this was a horrible crime but a few took it lightly. One black boy spoke up without raising his hand: “Dat no big deal. They thought they is gonna die so they figured they have some fun. Dey jus’ wanna have a fun time; you know what I’m sayin’?” A few black heads nodded in agreement. My department head once asked all the teachers to get a response from all students to the following question: “Do you think it is okay to break the law if it will benefit you greatly?” By then, I had been teaching for a while and was not surprised by answers that left a young, liberal, white woman colleague aghast. “Yeah” was the favorite answer. As one student explained, “Get dat green.” There is a level of conformity among blacks that whites would find hard to believe. They like one kind of music: rap. They will vote for one political party: Democrat. They dance one way, speak one way, are loud the same way, and fail their exams in the same way. Of course, there are exceptions but they are rare. Whites are different. Some like country music, others heavy metal, some prefer pop, and still others, God forbid, enjoy rap music. They have different associations, groups, almost ideologies. There are jocks, nerds, preppies, and hunters. Blacks are all — well — black, and they are quick to let other blacks know when they deviate from the norm. One might object that there are important group differences among blacks that a white man simply cannot detect. I have done my best to find them, but so far as I can tell, they dress the same, talk the same, think the same. Certainly, they form rival groups, but the groups are not different in any discernible way. There simply are no groups of blacks that are as distinctly different from each other as white “nerds,” “hunters,” or “Goths,” for example. How the world looks to blacks One point on which all blacks agree is that everything is “racis’.” This is one message of liberalism they have absorbed completely. Did you do your homework? “Na, homework racis’.” Why did you get an F on the test? “Test racis’.” I was trying to teach a unit on British philosophers and the first thing the students noticed about Bentham, Hobbes, and Locke was “Dey all white! Where da black philosopher a’?” I tried to explain there were no blacks in eighteenth-century Britain. You can probably guess what they said to that: “Dat racis’!” One student accused me of deliberately failing him on a test because I didn’t like black people. “Do you think I really hate black people?” “Yeah.” “Have I done anything to make you feel this way? How do you know?” “You just do.” “Why do you say that?” He just smirked, looked out the window, and sucked air through his teeth. Perhaps this was a regional thing, but the blacks often sucked air through their teeth as a wordless expression of disdain or hostility. My students were sometimes unable to see the world except through the lens of their own blackness. I had a class that was host to a German exchange student. One day he put on a Power Point presentation with famous German landmarks as well as his school and family. From time to time during the presentation, blacks would scream, “Where da black folk?!” The exasperated German tried several times to explain that there were no black people where he lived in Germany. The students did not believe him. I told them Germany is in Europe, where white people are from, and Africa is where black people are from. They insisted that the German student was racist, and deliberately refused to associate with blacks. Blacks are keenly interested in their own racial characteristics. I have learned, for example, that some blacks have “good hair.” Good hair is black parlance for black-white hybrid hair. Apparently, it is less kinky, easier to style, and considered more attractive. Blacks are also proud of light skin. Imagine two black students shouting insults across the room. One is dark but slim; the other light and obese. The dark one begins the exchange: “You fat, Ridario!” Ridario smiles, doesn’t deign to look at his detractor, shakes his head like a wobbling top, and says, “You wish you light skinned.” They could go on like this, repeating the same insults over and over. My black students had nothing but contempt for Hispanic immigrants. They would vent their feelings so crudely that our department strongly advised us never to talk about immigration in class in case the principal or some outsider might overhear. Whites were “racis’,” of course, but they thought of us at least as Americans. Not the Mexicans. Blacks have a certain, not necessarily hostile understanding of white people. They know how whites act, and it is clear they believe whites are smart and are good at organizing things. At the same time, they probably suspect whites are just putting on an act when they talk about equality, as if it is all a sham that makes it easier for whites to control blacks. Blacks want a bigger piece of the American pie. I’m convinced that if it were up to them they would give whites a considerably smaller piece than whites get now, but they would give us something. They wouldn’t give Mexicans anything. What about black boys and white girls? No one is supposed to notice this or talk about it but it is glaringly obvious: Black boys are obsessed with white girls. White parents would do well to keep their daughters well away from black schools. I’ve witnessed the following drama countless times. A black boy saunters up to a white girl. The cocky black dances around her, not really in a menacing way. It’s more a shuffle than a threat. As he bobs and shuffles he asks, “When you gonna go wit’ me?” There are two kinds of reply. The more confident white girl gets annoyed, looks away from the black and shouts, “I don’t wanna go out with you!” The more demure girl will look at her feet and mumble a polite excuse but ultimately say no. There is only one response from the black boy: “You racis’.” Many girls — all too many — actually feel guilty because they do not want to date blacks. Most white girls at my school stayed away from blacks, but a few, particularly the ones who were addicted to drugs, fell in with them. There is something else that is striking about blacks. They seem to have no sense of romance, of falling in love. What brings men and women together is sex, pure and simple, and there is a crude openness about this. There are many degenerate whites, of course, but some of my white students were capable of real devotion and tenderness, emotions that seemed absent from blacks — especially the boys. Black schools are violent and the few whites who are too poor to escape are caught in the storm. The violence is astonishing, not so much that it happens, but the atmosphere in which it happens. Blacks can be smiling, seemingly perfectly content with what they are doing, having a good time, and then, suddenly start fighting. It’s uncanny. Not long ago, I was walking through the halls and a group of black boys were walking in front of me. All of a sudden they started fighting with another group in the hallway. Blacks are extraordinarily quick to take offense. Once I accidentally scuffed a black boy’s white sneaker with my shoe. He immediately rubbed his body up against mine and threatened to attack me. I stepped outside the class and had a security guard escort the student to the office. It was unusual for students to threaten teachers physically this way, but among themselves, they were quick to fight for similar reasons. The real victims are the unfortunate whites caught in this. They are always in danger and their educations suffer. White weaklings are particularly susceptible, but mostly to petty violence. They may be slapped or get a couple of kicks when they are trying to open a bottom locker. Typically, blacks save the hard, serious violence for each other. There was a lot of promiscuous sex among my students and this led to violence. Black girls were constantly fighting over black boys. It was not uncommon to see two girls literally ripping each other’s hair out with a police officer in the middle trying to break up the fight. The black boy they were fighting over would be standing by with a smile, enjoying the show he had created. For reasons I cannot explain, boys seldom fought over girls. Pregnancy was common among the blacks, though many black girls were so fat I could not tell the difference. I don’t know how many girls got abortions, but when they had the baby they usually stayed in school and had their own parents look after the child. The school did not offer daycare. Aside from the police officers constantly on patrol, a sure sign that you are in a black school is the coke cage: the chain-link fence that many majority-black schools use to protect vending machines. The cage surrounds the machine and even covers its top. Delivery employees have to unlock a gate on the front of the cage to service the machines. Companies would prefer not to build cages around vending machines. They are expensive, ugly, and a bother, but black students smashed the machines so many times it was cheaper to build a cage than repair the damage. Rumor had it that before the cages went up blacks would turn the machines upside down in the hope that the money would fall out. Security guards are everywhere in black schools — we had one on every hall. They also sat in on unruly classes and escorted students to the office. They were unarmed, but worked closely with the three city police officers who were constantly on duty. Rural black schools have to have security too but they are usually safer. One reason is that the absolute numbers are smaller. A mostly-black school of 300 students is safer than a mostly-black school of 2,000. Also, students in rural areas — both black and white — tend to have grown up together and know each other, at least by sight. There was a lot of drug-dealing at my school. This was a good way to make a fair amount of money but it also gave boys power over girls who wanted drugs. An addicted girl — black or white — became the plaything of anyone who could get her drugs. One of my students was a notorious drug dealer. Everyone knew it. He was 19 years old and in eleventh grade. Once he got a score of three out of 100 on a test. He had been locked up four times since he was 13, and there he was sitting next to little, white Caroline. One day, I asked him, “Why do you come to school?” He wouldn’t answer. He just looked out the window, smiled, and sucked air through his teeth. His friend Yidarius ventured an explanation: “He get dat green and get dem females.” “What is the green?” I asked. “Money or dope?” “Both,” said Yidarius with a smile. A very fat black interrupted from across the room: “We get dat lunch,” Mr. Jackson. “We gotta get dat lunch and brickfuss.” He means the free breakfast and lunch poor students get every day. “Nigga, we know’d you be lovin’ brickfuss!” shouts another student. Some readers may believe that I have drawn a cruel caricature of black students. After all, according to official figures some 85 percent of them graduate. It would be instructive to know how many of those scraped by with barely a C- record. They go from grade to grade and they finally get their diplomas because there is so much pressure on teachers to push them through. It saves money to move them along, the school looks good, and the teachers look good. Many of these children should have been failed, but the system would crack under their weight if they were all held back. How did my experiences make me feel about blacks? Ultimately, I lost sympathy for them. In so many ways they seem to make their own beds. There they were in an integrationist’s fantasy — in the same classroom with white students, eating the same lunch, using the same bathrooms, listening to the same teachers — and yet the blacks fail while the whites pass. One tragic outcome among whites who have been teaching for too long is that it can engender something close to hatred. One teacher I knew gave up fast food — not for health reasons but because where he lived most fast-food workers were black. He had enough of blacks on the job. This was an extreme example, but years of frustration can take their toll. Many of my white colleagues with any experience were well on their way to that state of mind. There is an unutterable secret among teachers: Almost all realize that blacks do not respond to traditional white instruction. Does that put the lie to environmentalism? Not at all. It is what brings about endless, pointless innovation that is supposed to bring blacks up to the white level. The solution is more diversity — or put more generally, the solution is change. Change is an almost holy word in education, and you can fail a million times as long as you keep changing. That is why liberals keep revamping the curriculum and the way it is taught. For example, teachers are told that blacks need hands-on instruction and more group work. Teachers are told that blacks are more vocal and do not learn through reading and lectures. The implication is that they have certain traits that lend themselves to a different kind of teaching. Whites have learned a certain way for centuries but it just doesn’t work with blacks. Of course, this implies racial differences but if pressed, most liberal teachers would say different racial learning styles come from some indefinable cultural characteristic unique to blacks. Therefore, schools must change, America must change. But into what? How do you turn quantum physics into hands-on instruction or group work? No one knows, but we must keep changing until we find something that works. Public school has certainly changed since anyone reading this was a student. I have a friend who teaches elementary school, and she tells me that every week the students get a new diversity lesson, shipped in fresh from some bureaucrat’s office in Washington or the state capital. She showed me the materials for one week: a large poster, about the size of a forty-two inch flat-screen television. It shows an utterly diverse group — I mean diverse: handicapped, Muslim, Jewish, effeminate, poor, rich, brown, slightly brown, yellow, etc. — sitting at a table, smiling gaily, accomplishing some undefined task. The poster comes with a sheet of questions the teacher is supposed to ask. One might be: “These kids sure look different, but they look happy. Can you tell me which one in the picture is an American?” Some eight-year-old, mired in ignorance, will point to a white child like himself. “That one.” The teacher reads from the answer, conveniently printed along with the question. “No, Billy, all these children are Americans. They are just as American as you.” The children get a snack, and the poster goes up on the wall until another one comes a week later. This is what happens at predominately white, middle-class, elementary schools everywhere. Elementary school teachers love All of the Colors of the Race, by award-winning children’s poet Arnold Adoff. These are some of the lines they read to the children: “Mama is chocolate . . . Daddy is vanilla . . . Me (sic) is better . . . It is a new color. It is a new flavor. For love. Sometimes blackness seems too black for me, and whiteness is too sickly pale; and I wish every one were golden. Remember: long ago before people moved and migrated, and mixed and matched . . . there was one people: one color, one race. The colors are flowing from what was before me to what will be after. All the colors.” Teaching as a career It may come as a surprise after what I have written, but my experiences have given me a deep appreciation for teaching as a career. It offers a stable, middle-class life but comes with the capacity to make real differences in the lives of children. In our modern, atomized world children often have very little communication with adults — especially, or even, with their parents — so there is potential for a real transaction between pupil and teacher, disciple and master. A rewarding relationship can grow up between an exceptional, interested student and his teacher. I have stayed in my classroom with a group of students discussing ideas and playing chess until the janitor kicked us out. I was the old gentleman, imparting my history, culture, personal loves and triumphs, defeats and failures to young kinsman. Sometimes I fancied myself Tyrtaeus, the Spartan poet, who counseled the youth to honor and loyalty. I never had this kind intimacy with a black student, and I know of no other white teacher who did. Teaching can be fun. For a certain kind of person it is exhilarating to map out battles on chalkboards, and teach heroism. It is rewarding to challenge liberal prejudices, to leave my mark on these children, but what I aimed for with my white students I could never achieve with the blacks. There is a kind of child whose look can melt your heart: some working-class castaway, in and out of foster homes, often abused, who is nevertheless almost an angel. Your heart melts for these children, this refuse of the modern world. Many white students possess a certain innocence; their cheeks still blush. Try as I might, I could not get the blacks to care one bit about Beethoven or Sherman’s march to the sea, or Tyrtaeus, or Oswald Spengler, or even liberals like John Rawls, or their own history. They cared about nothing I tried to teach them. When this goes on year after year it chokes the soul out of a teacher, destroys his pathos, and sends him guiltily searching for The Bell Curve on the Internet. Blacks break down the intimacy that can be achieved in the classroom, and leave you convinced that that intimacy is really a form of kinship. Without intending to, they destroy what is most beautiful — whether it be your belief in human equality, your daughter’s innocence, or even the state of the hallway. Just last year I read on the bathroom stall the words “F**k Whitey.” Not two feet away, on the same stall, was a small swastika. The writing on that wall somehow symbolized the futility of integration. No child should be have to try to learn in such conditions. It was not racists who created those conditions and it wasn’t poverty either; it was ignorant, white liberals. It reminds me of Nietzsche: “I call an animal, a species, an individual corrupt, when it loses its instincts, when it prefers what is injurious to it.” One often hears from egalitarians that it doesn’t matter what color predominates in a future America so long as we preserve our values, since we are a “proposition nation.” Even if we were prepared to hand over our country to aliens who were going to “preserve our values,” it simply cannot be done with blacks. The National Council for the Social Studies, the leading authority on social science education in the United States, urges teachers to inculcate such values as equality of opportunity, individual property rights, and a democratic form of government. Even if teachers could inculcate this milquetoast ideology into whites, liberalism is doomed because so many non-whites are not receptive to education of any kind beyond the merest basics. Many of my students were functionally illiterate. It is impossible to get them to care about such abstractions as property rights or democratic citizenship. They do not see much further than the fact that you live in a big house and “we in da pro-jek.” Of course, there are a few loutish whites who will never think past their next meal and a few sensitive blacks for whom anything is possible, but no society takes on the characteristics of its exceptions. Once I asked my students, “What do you think of the Constitution?” “It white,” one slouching black rang out. The class began to laugh. And I caught myself laughing along with them, laughing while Pompeii’s volcano simmers, while the barbarians swell around the Palatine, while the country I love, and the job I love, and the community I love become dimmer by the day. I read a book by an expatriate Rhodesian who visited Zimbabwe not too many years ago. Traveling with a companion, she stopped at a store along the highway. A black man materialized next to her car window. “Job, boss, (I) work good, boss,” he pleaded. “You give job.” “What happened to your old job?” the expatriate white asked. The black man replied in the straightforward manner of his race: “We drove out the whites. No more jobs. You give job.” At some level, my students understand the same thing. One day I asked the bored, black faces staring back at me. “What would happen if all the white people in America disappeared tomorrow?” “We screwed,” a young, pitch-black boy screamed back. The rest of the blacks laughed. I have had children tell me to my face as they struggled with an assignment. “I cain’t do dis,” Mr. Jackson. “I black.” The point is that human beings are not always rational. It is in the black man’s interest to have whites in Zimbabwe but he drives them out and starves. Most whites do not think black Americans could ever do anything so irrational. They see blacks on television smiling, fighting evil whites, embodying white values. But the real black is not on television, and you pull your purse closer when you see him, and you lock the car doors when he swaggers by with his pants hanging down almost to his knees. For those of you with children, better a smaller house in a white district than a fancy one near a black school. Much better an older car than your most precious jewels cast into a school where they will be a minority. I have been in parent-teacher conferences that broke my heart: the child pleading with his parents to take him out of school; the parents convinced their child’s fears are groundless. If you love your child, show her you care — not by giving her fancy vacations or a car, but making her innocent years safe and happy. Give her the gift of a white school. Of course, even the whitest schools are riddled with liberalism. There is only one way to educate your children in a way that does not poison their minds. If at all possible, home school your children. Educate them yourself. (read more) 2021-07-10 e TOXIC BLACKNESS I Blackness Fatigue: Enough Is Too Much
Methinks the US may very well be heading toward a social explosion. The phrase “race war “is overwrought if it implies organized units and chains of command. However, in a country awash in firearms, a bloody, disorganized, continent-wide eruption is possible. To think “it can’t happen here” is complacently inattentive. We have already seen it in temporal and geographic piecemeal in the Fergusons and Portlands and Baltimores, in the armed anarchy of the cities. Arguably a broader uprising has failed to happen only because of intense pressure from government and media, and because whites have not acquired a sense of racial identity. If they do, or when they do, Katie bar the door. Both racial war, and its close cousin, ethnic war, result from contact between groups of different kinds—that is, diversity, which causes most of the world’s bloodshed. Americans seldom notice this. One reasons is that they are constantly told that diversity is a blissful state. But it isn’t. Consider: Catholics and Protestants in Ireland, Sunnis and Shia in many places, Jews and Moslems in Palestine, Hutus and Tutsis in Burundi, Hindus and Moslems in India and nearby, Tamils and Sinhalese in Sri Lanka, Chinese and Indonesians in Indonesia, French and Africans in Paris, and so on. The assertion that “diversity is our strength” seems an attempt to avoid realizing that it isn’t. Racial and ethnic conflicts are cruel, often explosive, and irrational. They seldom make sense because the devastation and hideousness are disproportionate to the assigned causes. For example, the differences between Protestants and Catholics in Ireland are so slight as probably to be undetectable to you and me, yet the two fought murderously for years, blowing up pubs packed with member of the other faction. In the American case, nice and good-hearted people will point out that blacks are warm and friendly people if they like you, immensely talented in this and that, have legitimate grievances’ against society, and so on. All true. And irrelevant. Similar things can be said about both sides in most ethnic conflicts. The prospect for bloodshed grows in the presence of other forms of social tension and is probably proportional to suppression of mention of the frictions. You can’t solve a problem if you don’t admit that it exists. The United States today is bent to the breaking point under many stresses other than racial. Severe economic uncertainty, declining standards of living, growing economic inequality, crushing debt loads to include student debt that hinders normal formation of families, hatred—not too strong a word—between Trump people and the coastal elites who rule the country, actual poverty in Appalachia, the Rust Belt, and the rural South, large and growing homeless populations, immigration, and the recent discovery that America consists of many cultures that do not like each other: New England, Alabama, West Virginia, Jews, Latinos, These constitute a poisonous accelerant that will detonate easily and intensify any conflict. Note that most of the whites involved in the Floyd eruption were not greatly interested in blacks. They appeared to be bored young with no prospects and much free-floating anger looking for an outlet. The prolonged rioting in Portland involved fairly few blacks. Blacks themselves are furious over being at the bottom of society, also with no prospects, a condition they blame, with encouragement from the media, on racism. If this were the case, it would be easy to correct. Then, ominously, the imposition of black cultural norms on whites. America is being utterly remade to conform to the desires of blacks, this being pushed by people most of whom do not like blacks. How many of them go to black ghettos to eat, or send their children to black urban schools? Rather the whites opposing “systemic racism” seethe with hostility to the deplorables, whom they detest. and want to shove blackness down their throats. In doing this they are threatening things dear to at least half of the white population: their culture, children, physical safety, and sense of propriety. This is not smart. The danger is that a flashpoint will come, that for example BLM will mob the wrong house in the wrong state and the occupants will open fire, leaving a dozen dead. The entire country would explode. Nice well-intentioned whites would not be able to protest that they supported the fight against systemic racism. That is not how racial and ethnic wars work. We are seeing a ferocious attack on the underpinnings of white European civilization , and for that matter of all actual civilizations. Japan, India, China, South Korea—none would buy into the enstupidation and degradation. Neither would Argentina or Mexico, which try to raise their cultural levels. Only America is on a downward path, in search of social justice. Consider: Math curricula are being dumbed down because blacks do poorly at math, English grammar instruction eliminated because blacks can’t or won’t learn it, entrance exams for the elite and demanding high schools eliminated because blacks don’t pass them, SATs dropped because blacks score poorly on them, promotion exams in police departments eliminated because blacks don’t pass them. Entrance requirements at medical school are lowered because not enough blacks pass them, AP courses in high school eliminated because too few blacks get into them. Dangerously, the government forbids white parents to have schools teaching what they regard as desirable material at what they regard as acceptable academic levels while requiring what they regard as civilized behavior. White parents are forced to see their children subjected to what they regard as obscene, semi-literate, violent, stupid, a culture dominated by what seems to them, (and would to any First World country) the opposite of cultivation. When parents whose daughter wants to go into electronic engineering see her forced into pseudo math taught by teachers who couldn’t recognize a partial derivative if it spoke to them in tongues, when she ought to be in AP calculus, they are not happy. But there is nothing they can do about it. Yet. Imposing black intellectual standards on a country that sees itself in competition with disciplined, studious, bright, and exceedingly numerous Chinese engineers has obvious consequences that already make themselves felt. Much of the white population, aware of this, becomes angry and angrier. The decline started perhaps when the Supreme Court disallowed the use of IQ tests by employers because blacks couldn’t pass them, and allowed affirmative action, racial discrimination against whites, because blacks couldn’t advance without it. This incapacity is the root of the racial problem. It cannot be solved, if it can be solved in any circumstances, in a politically chaotic and censored country that refuses to address it. Renaming buildings and toppling statutes will improve nothing while raising the level of anger among whites. Not all of this degradation arises from the demands of blacks. The conversion of universities from scholarly enterprises into profit centers required the admission of huge cohorts of students neither intellectually or culturally suited to higher education. These, like blacks, have neither the interest nor capacity for genuine schooling. America’s characteristic anti-intellectualism and resentment of superiority plays a part. The argument for it is embodied in the semi-literate gibberish of education majors who themselves are unsuited for schooling. But blacks have provided the throw-weight for the promulgation of peasantry. Pampered white rabble have found that they can force elimination of virtually anything they don’t like by calling it racist. The renaming of streets and buildings, the toppling of statues, the near worship of a negligible armed robber and semi-derelict, the renaming of military bases in narcissistic self-abnegation are winding a spring. It is dangerous that those angrily promoting the appeasement, the media, the talking heads in New York, do not see the advancing fury. [Of course they see it. They are deliberately provoking whites, so their justified reactions can be crushed and they can be caged like the 6 January non-insurrectionists.] These people, substantially congruent with the coastal elites, elected Trump by being contemptuous of Middle America and blandly unaware of the brewing storm. They are doing it again. Yet it is black crime that is likely to provide the ignition. The figures are stark, undeniable, at the level of states, municipalities, FBI. These numbers are unknown in any other civilized country. It is perilous that black men rape white women at a high rate, while the reverse barely happens. Sexual transgression pushes primordial buttons that are not wise to push. At what seem shrinking intervals black mobs burn cities, loot and destroy stores., wreak havoc on neighborhoods, and go largely unopposed. Governments at all levels fear them, know that if they respond forcefully, the entire country will go up in flames. The police are cowed and neutered, so crime rises sharply. Whites, intimidated—intimidated so far—flee. Many cities are now only formally part of the United States. The black mobs do as they please without consequence. The appeasement of blacks, fear that they might riot, runs through society. Increasingly jurisdiction simply give up on enforcing the law. Cities like Chicago and New York have abolished cash bail to that criminals immediately go free, and immediately often offend again. Baltimore and Chicago no longer prosecute minor offenses such as prostitution and urinating in public. San Francisco has made shoplifting of goods worth less than $950 a misdemeanor, the shoplifters not being Asians, with the result that to this date seventeen Walgreens have closed (video). Cities stop prosecuting the jumping of subway turnstiles as this is done only by blacks and Hispanics. The latter won’t riot. The former will, and governments know it. When blacks very often racially attack whites, the media suppress the story. There are many, many of these attacks, covered briefly in local media but ignored by the majors, caught on video that circulates widely online. Herein lies a great peril. Blacks are accustomed to getting anything they want and growing confident, expect whites forever to back away. Perhaps, living in concentrated ghettos, not reading, poorly educated, they do not realize the certain outcome of an actual war. They are fed by white farmers from afar, heavily outnumbered, with electricity dependent on fuel supplies from sources run by whites. Twenty-four Black on White Homicides in a Month. Read it. This goes on all the time. Over and over. The racial attacks on whites and Asians share an unsettling explosiveness, an apparent lack of impulse control or awareness of consequences. A black shoots a store clerk for telling him to pull up his mask. Or black man stabs 96-year-old Asian woman. A black man shoots a white woman because she cut him off in traffic. Black man throws white five-year-old off third-floor balcony. Black man stabs four-year-old to death. Black man shoots white five-year-old in head. The psychology here is strange. Shooting a child with no provocation in front of witnesses, or throwing one off a balcony in front of witnesses, or shooting a clerk for saying “Please pull up your mask,” all certain to lead to life in prison or close to it, is baffling. Government and the media hide what is going on. In crime stories they increasingly do not publish the race or photo of perpetrators. This, they say, would perpetuate stereotypes, as indeed it would. Stereotypes are the aggregate observations of many people over time and are almost always accurate. But there is another, and worse, pattern. For example, when a black was shot in Ferguson, black witnesses lied, saying that he had his hands up and said, “Don’t shoot!” The media bought this and propagated it. They invariably go for the bad-white-innocent-blacks narrative and ghetto blacks, who don’t, and often cannot read, believe it and understandably become enraged. An uprising follows. In particular the media do not make public the very real hatred of blacks for whites. Exceptions and degrees, yes, but the centerline is a powerful hostility. If you doubt this, and the brewing reaction, watch this video by Jared Taylor, one of many white advocates never seen in the media. About the video, two points: First, the examples of black hatred are documented, verifiable, and many. Second, whatever you may think of him, he is an example of what a great many quietly say—quietly because you can lose your job for saying the wrong thing. What the country is doing hasn’t worked, isn’t working, and shows no sign of working. Things get worse by the month. With Biden, Harris, Pelosi, and so on apparently doing everything they can to infuriate the other half of the country—gun control, open borders, erasing the South, anti-white indoctrination in the schools, promotion of sexual curiosities, on and on, anger will grow. As the man associated with Finland Station asked, “What is to be done?” Unfortunately nothing can be done. Anything that might work is politically impossible, and anything that is politically possible won’t work. Cosmetics, moral preening, lowering of standards, party politics—none of these will fix the country. In calmer times, saner heads might prevail. Partial alleviation might be achieved by allowing, or encouraging, voluntary segregation, taking white police out of black neighborhoods, letting black neighborhoods decide what laws to enforce within their own boundaries, letting the races decide for themselves what to teach their children, and to the extent possible allowing racial autonomy. Instead, the elites will double down on what isn’t working and nothing will get better, except the monthly sales at gun shops. (read more) 2021-07-10 d HISTORY'S GREATEST DRUG-DEALER Black Brains Shatter: the
Intellectual and Ethical Bankruptcy of [Only] Black
Lives Matter
If you’re looking for a truly powerful pleasure-drug, then forget heroin, cocaine or crystal meth. They’re crude, fast-fading and unreliable. No, for a real rush that’s guaranteed not to fade or falter, you need what [Only] Black Lives Matter (BLM) and their allies are on — the three most powerful pleasure-drugs known to humanity. History’s greatest drug-dealer The three drugs are called narcissism, self-righteousness and malice. And not only are they completely legal and available in unlimited quantities at no cost to the addict, you can receive full instructions in their use from the most prestigious and respected institutions in the Western world. From the Ivy League to Oxbridge, from the New York Times to the Guardian, from the ADL to the BBC, expert drug-dealers are ready and eager to teach you everything you need to know about where to obtain your supplies and how to inject. But the greatest drug-dealer of all lived and died in the nineteenth century. Fortunately, we still have his instruction-manuals and a host of his disciples have worked to interpret and explain them for each new generation. And who was that world-historic dealer in narcissism, self-righteousness and malice? It was Karl Marx (1818-83), of course. Marx himself never won the power he longed to wield and abuse, but the “toxicity” of his ideas (as Guardianistas would put it) was just as apparent to some of his contemporaries as it was to those who suffered under Marxist regimes during the twentieth century. The Polish philosopher Leszek Kołakowski (1927-2009) lived through Stalinism and his magisterial critique Main Currents of Marxism (1978) reported the prophetic words of the Russian anarchist Mikhail Bakunin (1814—76): Bakunin … not only
combated Marx’s political programme but, as he
often wrote, regarded Marx as a disloyal,
revengeful man, obsessed with power and determined
to impose his own despotic authority on the whole
revolutionary movement. Marx, he said, had all the
merits and defects of the Jewish character; he was
highly intelligent and deeply read, but an
inveterate doctrinaire and fantastically vain, an
intriguer and morbidly envious of all who … cut a
more important figure than himself in public life.
(pg. 248) Bakunin … inveighed against universities
as the abodes of elitism and seminaries of a
privileged caste; he also warned that Marxist
socialism would lead to a tyranny of intellectuals
that would be worse than any yet known to man.
(Main Currents of
Marxism, Vol. I, The Founders, Clarendon Press,
Oxford, pg. 250)
Yes, Karl Marx was indeed highly intelligent and fantastically vain, but his latter-day disciples in Black Lives Matter are only fantastically vain. High intelligence is not characteristic of Blacks and BLM are not bucking the trend. Their crusade is emotional, not intellectual. And it’s emotional in the most direct and satisfying way, being fuelled by those three mighty pleasure-drugs of narcissism, self-righteousness and malice. But I think Black brains would shatter if they were asked to properly address one simple question: Why are Whites the evil exploiters and Blacks the virtuous victims? Omnia Ex Alea On a progressive reading of history and human biology, there is only one possible answer: It was pure, unadulterated chance. Whites are evil exploiters and Blacks are virtuous victims simply because that’s the way the historic dice happened to roll. If the dice had rolled another way, it would have been the other way around. Blacks could just as easily have enslaved Whites, just as easily have set forth from the heartless headquarters of a cruel capitalist Africa to ravage the gentle, egalitarian societies of a peaceful pastoral Europe. After all, progressive dogma insists that “We Are All the Same Under the Skin” and that “There Is Only One Race — the Human Race.” But Blacks themselves haven’t created that dogma or imposed it so effectively on academia and the media. Blacks don’t have the necessary intelligence and ability to spin seductive webs of high-sounding words. But Jews do. And it’s Jews who have been the most effective creators of and propagandists for the progressive dogma of absolute and unequivocal equality between all human groups. “There is only One Race — the Human Race.” Furthermore: “There is Only One Brain — the Human Brain.” The Jewish progressive Stephen Jay Gould (1941–2002) preached those falsehoods throughout his career in award-winning best-sellers like The Mismeasure of Man (1981). And the Jewish progressive Jared Diamond (born 1937) continues to preach them. Diamond is perhaps the greatest living exponent of the idea that the superiority of White Europeans in warfare, technology and science is owed to mere biographical accident. You might say Diamond preaches the doctrine of Omnia Ex Alea — “all things from the dice.” In other words, all apparent White achievements are the product of undeserved luck. But Diamond’s underlying goyophobia, or hatred of White gentiles, is apparent even as he preaches this supposedly objective doctrine. Why did Europe conquer Africa and not vice versa? It was Omnia Ex Alea, ladies and gentlemen — the biogeographic dice just happened to roll in Europe’s favour: (read more) 2021-07-10 c LANGLEY, NATO, PENTAGON DRUG LORDS NATO-CIA-Pentagon: Junction of
the Real Druglords and Warlords.
The Casualties of CIA-NATO Afghan Operations Include Heroin-Related Deaths Are you aware of the heroin epidemic that has been on fire all across America- since 2001? Thanks to the government-corporate media outlets you probably are not. Between 2002 and 2013, heroin-related overdose deaths in the US quadrupled, with more than 10,000 people dying of heroin overdoses in America in 2014 alone. Afghanistan has been the number one source globally of both opium and heroin: Heroin from
Afghanistan has killed more people than the 55,000
Americans killed in the Vietnam War. An American
now gets killed every 32 minutes by Afghan heroin.
With US heroin deaths tripling every four years,
an American will get killed by heroin every 16
minutes by 2020.
There were 189,000 heroin users in the US in 2001, before the US-NATO invasion of Afghanistan. By 2016 that number went up to 4,500,000 (2.5 million heroin addicts and 2 million casual users). Heroin deaths shot up from 1,779 in 2001 to 10,574 in 2014 as Afghan opium poppy fields metastasized from 7,600 hectares in 2001 (when the US-NATO War in Afghanistan began) to 224,000 hectares in 2016. (One hectare equals approximately 2.5 acres). Ironically, the so-called US eradication operation in Afghanistan has cost an estimated $8.5 billion in American taxpayer funds since the US-NATO-Afghan war started in October 2001. Interestingly, while the mainstream and pseudo-alternative media outlets keep playing up drugs from Mexico, we hardly hear a peep on the massive amount of Afghan-sourced heroin. To put it in perspective: In 2014, according to the DEA drug threat assessment, Mexico produced an estimated 42 metric tons of heroin. Afghanistan produced 6,400 metric tons of opium that same year. The largest share of US heroin is Afghanistan-sourced. It is coming from US-occupied Afghanistan. There is no other mathematical possibility: Mexico with 10,500
hectares of opium could not possibly supply even
1/20th of the heroin demand in the US. What has
the DEA been doing about the vast majority of
heroin which is coming in from Afghanistan?
Looking at facts and figures regarding the heroin epidemic, it becomes obvious that the DEA has been a colossal failure and they refuse to answer most questions asked of them. Perhaps, the DEA would answer questions (or plead the 5th) at Congressional Hearings. First, ‘the Mexicans did it” which is to say that the 173 tons of raw opium from Latin America (from 10,500 hectares in Mexico and 1,500 hectares in Colombia) were converted into 17.3 tons of heroin and all 17.3 tons were imported into the US, where it would not supply even 5% of the US heroin demand. If all countries on Earth growing opium, except Afghanistan, were to convert their opium to heroin and send it to the US, it wouldn’t be enough for even half of the current US heroin demand. With the obvious parallels and undeniable correlations, any critical mind would begin spewing the following questions: How did Afghan opium spread from 7,600 hectares prior to the US-NATO invasion to 224,000 hectares since the invasion? What is the correlation between US heroin deaths rising from 1,779 in 2000-pre Afghan invasion, to more than 10,000 in 2014 alone? Parallels & Flashbacks Forty years ago the United States was hit by another major heroin epidemic. During the 1970’s, during the Vietnam War, heroin making its way to the United States from the Golden Triangle became an epidemic. It was estimated that more than 200,000 people in New York City alone were using heroin. At one point in time, you were able to find used syringes on public playgrounds. As in the case of Afghanistan, the CIA-Pentagon War Lords-Drug Lords were at the top of the chain: In the 1960s and early
1970s, the CIA recruited the Laotian Hmong tribe
to fight communist forces in the region. The CIA encouraged the Hmong to grow
opium instead of rice to make them dependent on
CIA air drops of food. The agency could then
force their compliance by threatening to
withdraw the food aid. To make the deal even
sweeter, they even located a heroin refinery at
CIA headquarters in northern Loas and used Air
America, a passenger and cargo airline that was
covertly owned and operated by the CIA, to
export the Laotian opium and heroin. Much of it
ended up in Vietnam, causing an epidemic of
heroin addiction in US soldiers.
CIA ties to international drug trafficking goes back to the Korean War: In 1949, two of Chiang
Kai-shek’s defeated generals, Li Wen Huan and Tuan
Shi Wen, marched their Third and Fifth Route
armies, with families and livestock, across the
mountains to northern Burma. Once installed, the
peasant soldiers began cultivating the crop they
knew best, the opium poppy.
When China entered the Korean War, the CIA had a desperate need for intelligence on that nation. The agency turned to the warlord generals, who agreed to slip some soldiers back into China. In return, the agency offered arms. Officially, the arms were intended to equip the warlords for a return to China. In fact, the Chinese wanted them to repel any attack by the Burmese. Soon intelligence began to flow to Washington from the area, which became known as the Golden Triangle. So, too, did heroin, en route to Southeast Asia and often to the United States… The CIA did, however, lobby the Eisenhower administration to prevent the Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs, the DEA’s predecessor, from establishing monitoring posts in the area to study the traffic. Let’s take a few documented facts from records and reports submitted to the US Congress in 1999 by FAS: 1960s- In support of the US war in Vietnam, the CIA renewed old and cultivated new relations with Laotian, Burmese and Thai drug merchants, as well as corrupt military and political leaders in Southeast Asia. Despite the dramatic rise of heroin production, the agency’s relations with these figures attracted little attention until the early 1970s. MAY 1970- A Christian Science Monitor correspondent reported that the CIA `is cognizant of, if not party to, the extensive movement of opium out of Laos,’ quoting one charter pilot who claimed that `opium shipments get special CIA clearance and monitoring on their flights southward out of the country.’ At the time, some 30,000 US service men in Vietnam were addicted to heroin. 1972-The full story of how Cold War politics and US covert operations fueled a heroin boom in the Golden Triangle broke when Yale University doctoral student Alfred McCoy published his ground-breaking study, The Politics of Heroin in Southeast Asia. The CIA attempted to quash the book. 1973- Thai national Puttapron Khramkhruan was arrested in connection with the seizure of 59 pounds of opium in Chicago. A CIA informant on narcotics trafficking in northern Thailand, he claimed that the agency had full knowledge of his actions. According to the US Justice Department, the CIA quashed the case because it might `prove embarrassing because of Mr. Khramkhruans’s involvement with CIA activities in Thailand, Burma, and elsewhere.’ For those who consider alternative media outlets such as Newsbud conspiracy hubs, here is a report, albeit watered-down, by the New York Times, published in 1993: During
the Vietnam War, operations in Laos were largely a
CIA responsibility. The agency’s surrogate there
was a Laotian general, Vang Pao, who commanded
Military Region 2 in northern Laos. He enlisted
30,000 Hmong tribesmen in the service of the CIA.
These tribesmen continued to grow, as they had for generations, the opium poppy. Before long, someone – there were unproven allegations that it was a Mafia family from Florida – had established a heroin refining lab in Region Two. The lab’s production was soon being ferried out on the planes of the CIA’s front airline, Air America. A pair of BNDD agents tried to seize an Air America DC-3 loaded with heroin packed into boxes of Tide soap powder. At the CIA’s behest, they were ordered to release the plane and drop the inquiry. Author and activist William Blum noted in his book Rogue State, “The CIA
flew the drugs all over Southeast Asia, to sites
where the opium was processed into heroin, and to
trans-shipment points on the route to Western
customers.”
Do you remember the Iran Contra scandal and the days when Crack Cocaine was the major drug that destroyed communities and lives across the United States in the early 1980’s? Another fact obscured by the mainstream media, so that many still have either not heard about it or consider it another conspiracy story. The United States supported the Contras in their fight against the Sandanista government in Nicaragua. Officially barred from arming and funding the Contras by Congress, the CIA came up with a scheme to sell arms to Iran and use the funds to illegally arm and supply the Contras. CIA-protected drug smugglers flew down to Nicaragua loaded with arms to supply the Contras and flew back loaded with Columbian cocaine. A decade later, investigative reporter Gary Webb used official government documents to prove that the CIA had sheltered these drug smuggling operatives and followed the trail of this cheap Columbian cocaine to the beginning of the crack epidemic in South-Central LA. Ironically, again, during this same period American Taxpayers were funding DEA operations that were supposedly countering crack-cocaine suppliers and operations. (see also) (read more) See also: Extensive Heroin Use in US. The Real Afghanistan Surge is in Opium Production See also: Heroin Dealer in Chief. Afghanistan, Source of 90% of The World’s Heroin See also: The Politics of Heroin and the Afghan US Pullout. Private Mercenary Occupation See also: The Spoils of War: Afghanistan’s Multibillion Dollar Heroin Trade 2021-07-10 b LANGLEY DRUG LORDS [...] The Taliban, for their
part, are unfazed. Spokesman Suhail Shaheen was
adamant that any foreign troops that are not out by
the 9/11 deadline will be regarded as – what else? –
occupiers.
Whether the Taliban will be able to establish dominance is not an issue; it’s just a matter of when. And that leads us to the two really important questions: • 1. Will the CIA be able to maintain what Seymour Hersh initially, and later myself, described as the Afghan heroin ratline that finances their black ops? • 2. And if the CIA cannot continue to supervise opium poppy field production in Afghanistan as well as coordinate the subsequent stages of the heroin business, where will it move to? Every thinking mind across Central and South Asia knows that the Empire of Chaos, for two long decades, was never interested in defeating the Taliban or fighting for “the freedom of the Afghan people.” The key motives were • to keep a crucial, strategic forward base in the underbelly of “existential threats” China and Russia as well as intractable Iran – all part of the New Great Game; • to be conveniently positioned to later exploit Afghanistan’s enormous mineral wealth; • and to process opium into heroin to fund CIA ops. Opium was a major factor in the rise of the British empire, and heroin remains one of the world’s top dirty businesses funding shady intel ops. 2021-07-10 a Just because black
people have a higher crime rate than white people
does not make the police racist or America a white
supremacist country. Asians have a lower crime rate
than white people but white people are smart enough
to not go around claiming that cops are racist or
that America is as Asian supremacist country.
Every year in America black men rape over 35,000 white women. Every year in America white men rape under 10 black women. These statistics tell us all we need to know about how to fix crime, it’s called personal responsibility. Stop being a criminal and the police will leave you alone. — mkr 2021-07-09 h SPECTACLE OF TURBULENCE & CONTENTION VII The Four Horsemen of our
Apocalypse:
2021-07-09
gGeorge Soros, Xi Jinping, Bill Gates and Joe Biden  The New Testament's Book of Revelation has long puzzled and inspired biblical scholars as to the meaning of the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse. Most agree that they represent four catastrophes that will befall humanity during the "end times." The White Horse's rider carries a bow and wears a crown. He is generally thought to symbolize conquest. Fast-forward to today, and consider the work of George Soros. For decades, he has spent millions of his billions on his quest to destroy the United States and other nations. He recruits and funds Antifa and BLM, supplies their riot gear and weapons, pays for their transportation and accommodations where necessary. He funds the political campaigns of pro-criminal anti-victim district attorneys like Chesa Boudin in San Francisco and Kim Gardner in St. Louis. Crime is skyrocketing in each city where a Soros-funded D.A. holds office. These anti-American radicals engender violence and chaos and renounce law and order. They have defunded the police. Along with the rest of the left and the founders of BLM, Soros is committed to undermining all traditional American values and to promoting anything in opposition to those values. Like the rider of the White Horse, he has succeeded wildly over the past twenty years. The Red Horse is, appropriately, the general secretary of China, Xi Jinping, leader of the Chinese Communist Party. Aside from his horrific crimes against humanity, Xi began co-opting the Biden family when Joe was V.P. The Biden family is inextricably linked with the CCP; China has the goods on the Bidens that could expose their greed and grift for all to see. The Red Horse is said to represent war, bloodshed, murder, and revolution. How many millions has Xi pumped into our universities, media, entertainment, sports, and mainstream press to see his preferred narratives spread throughout the land? Incalculable. Bill Gates and his acolytes like Anthony Fauci could very well be riders of the Black Horse. The rider of the third horse holds a pair of scales. In the Bible, black is often connected with food shortages and famine. Gates now owns more American farmland than any other corporation or entity — 242,000 acres worth $690M. Would he like to employ Marxist agricultural policies like those Stalin implemented, policies that create famine? Between 4 and 7 million people were starved to death in the Holodomor. But Gates is also the man who wants us to eat fake meat and bugs. Gates has long encouraged a reduction of population and is a vaccine enthusiast. His oral polio vaccine spread polio across Africa. He is the self-appointed vaccine czar, a "Vaccine Monster," a defender of "monopoly medicine" according to The New Republic. Sixty-seven percent of Americans are said to have been vaccinated by now, jabbed with an experimental form of gene therapy. There have been thousands of vaccine deaths and injuries, and no one knows what the long-term effects may be over time. Here is an excellent short video that explains the risks. Between Gates's known drive for depopulation and his enormous influence over the COVID vaccines, he may well symbolize famine and death. The money he stands to make is of course incidental. The rider of the last horse, the Pale Horse, is death, and "Hades followed with him." Certainly, everyone not wearing ideological blinders knows by now that Joe Biden is non compos mentis. He is not of sound mind. He can barely read his teleprompter and needs note cards to answer the simplest of questions. He often suffers brain freeze and appears to be lost, even frightened. So Biden represents death in two ways; his own mental and physical deterioration and the death of America. In the five months he has held office, his administration, whoever is calling the shots, has instigated the wholesale invasion, à la Camp of the Saints, that is occurring over our southern border. The proposed and already approved irresponsible spending has kick-started inflation that will inevitably continue to rise. Gas prices are sky-high, thanks to the shuttering of the Keystone pipeline, while Biden handed Russia the Nord Stream pipeline Trump had sanctioned. Biden and his minders have prioritized the demands of the LGBT, Antifa, and BLM activists and embraced the toxic, racist-to-its-core Critical Race Theory to further pit people against one another. He and they set out to undo every policy President Trump put in place that had so benefited the American people. The Trump-fearing left, aided by establishment RINOs, engineered a fraudulent election and used COVID to force an entire population into isolation. The lockdowns destroyed hundreds of thousands of small businesses while allowing their corporate pals to remain open. Now they want to mandate vaccines even for people who choose not to submit to them for very rational reasons. The odious Fauci is angry at those people. "Get over it. Get over this political statement. Save yourselves and your family." He seems to believe that those who resist an experimental jab are doing so for political reasons when in fact, right or wrong, they have made their decision precisely to save themselves and their families. Those people he is so angry at are not going to be swayed by a mandate or door-to-door thugs from an American Stasi. Fauci is as clueless as he is egomaniacal. He and the Biden administration are again resorting to fear-mongering, more panic porn — "the variants, the variants." The Soros/Xi/Gates/Biden cavaliers are despicable people, tyrants, united in their cause, determined to sabotage what the Founders created, including the Constitution. Is there a cultural realignment, a patriots' rebellion, a second American Revolution afoot? There is evidence all around us. Parents are fighting back against the racist absurdities of CRT and the demands of the LGBT crowd. Steve Bannon's War Room has over sixty million listeners. The truth of BLM is leaking out as well. Its leaders, avowed Marxists, are as acquisitive as any other faux civil rights organization. Better they heed Thomas Sowell's maxim:
People are waking up to the damage done to this country by the wrecking crew that is the Biden administration. What this cabal is doing is by design despite Kamala Harris' obvious incompetence and Biden's dementia. Will and Ariel Durant wrote:
We
are seeing savagery now on the streets of some of
our cities. It has to stop. Our
four horsemen must be relegated to the visions of
the Apostle John and defeated by an energized
America. (read
more) SPECTACLE OF TURBULENCE & CONTENTION VI It is Time to End Compulsory
Public Education
What is mandated public education but enslavement of the young? The State is teaching second graders “restorative justice.”. High schoolers are instructed that their families “reinforce racist/homophobic prejudices.” Government officials – teachers and school board members – are targeting parents for their opposition to the teachings of critical race theory. And we grovel to the State, begging them to make it stop. This is not the profile of a free people. The fight against the government’s efforts to teach and promote evil will always exist as long as there are public schools. The evil may be different in degree – it won’t always be critical race theory or the like – but it’ll still be present. The struggle to control curriculum will take place not in the classroom but in the courts, the legislature, the school board, and the agencies. And this struggle, this fight against the State, will continue until we address the greater problem. Until we excise the cancer. Until we end State control over families. What I mean is
this: The
State has no authority to compel a child attend
public school. It is time to end compulsory
education. A Brief History Mandated education is a relatively new idea in the West. In America, it grew from colonial-era laws requiring towns to appoint teachers or create schools once they got to a certain size. Around that same time in Europe and England, schools emerged within the community and from the churches to provide religious training and practical instruction. Public education in America proliferated in the early 1800’s.1 By 1890, “the majority of states and territories had passed mandatory attendance laws,” providing penalties (usually unenforced) for truancy and offering exemptions for equivalent education.2 By the early 1900’s, compulsory education laws were even more common in the United States. The Supreme Court had endorsed State power to “compel [school] attendance.”3 Save for a few publicly dissenting voices, the authority of the State to “impose reasonable regulations for the control and duration of basic education”4 has gone unopposed. One would have to think that this has to do with public opinion. It’s tough to find parents that disagree with K-12 education generally. Every parent wants their child to be educated. Instead, they differ on the specifics: private or public school, the subjects emphasized, secular vs. religious instruction, etc. Similarly, the Supreme Court has no appetite for considering laws compelling public schooling. (One of the failures of originalism has been their silence on this issue.) Instead, it takes up cases involving the rights of students. They’ll decide on matters involving the violation of a 13 year-old student’s Fourth Amendment rights after a strip search. They’ll consider whether, under the First Amendment, a school may ban student speech that promotes illegal drug use. A young person may be forced to go to a government school – a restraint of their movement and freedom – but at least the Court lets them speak. Their freedom of association might be violated, but at least they can’t be subject to unreasonable strip searches. Even prisoners have rights. This gets us to the question of authority. By what authority does a State have to compel attendance at a government school? The Supreme Court has held that students do not shed their constitutional rights at the schoolhouse gate.5 What of the right to not attend school? Is the right to not be forced to attend a government school lesser than the freedom of speech? To this you might respond that society needs to have an educated populace, for kids to stay off the street. A more discerning mind might say that public education is a babysitter so the parents can work. A true cynic would agree with all of that and add that the public school system is a jobs program. Anyway, those are all State interests; they have nothing to do with State authority. A Christian might observe that God created three institutions: the family, the church, and the civil government. Each has a separate jurisdiction. The government enforces civil and criminal laws; the family is governed from within, with parents providing discipline and educating their children as they see fit; and the church has jurisdiction over matters of religion and its members. Under Christian philosophy, then, the State exceeds its jurisdiction when it involves itself in matters reserved for the family. Something to think about. But I digress. And I’ll rephrase the attendance question in a way that’s more accurate: “By what authority does a State have to force a child attend a government school, where they are taught poisonous and evil doctrines?” I disagree that this is a power inherent to a State. This wasn’t a power accepted at the formation of this country or when the Constitution was drafted. Even where there were laws mandating schooling, they didn’t mandate public education. There’s a big difference there. To that you might say it’s the consent of the governed: “The voters gave the State the authority to compel public education.” My parents never gave the State that authority. Did yours? Oh, you might answer that democracy allows for such laws. The majority – by way of votes – determines the education of the country’s youth. Ah, the cliché of democracy. Voters that don’t know your child can control how your child is education? Which one
of you would give a stranger that power? Do you
not see the problem? Here is the truth: the consent of the governed is a myth. And even if there were consent – and there certainly is not – consent of the governed isn’t good enough. It is the consent of the parents that matters. And what is the parental consent? There is none. Even the concept of “Parental Oversight” of public schools and teachers is a legend promoted by those interested in retaining their power. Let’s say your child goes to a public school.6 If you disagree with their curriculum, that means you’re in the minority. Too bad. The majority – through their elected officials, not yours – have already picked what’s being taught. And if you fight their curriculum in court, they have the law on their side. The Supreme Court has held that educators have broad discretion to set curriculum so long as it is “reasonably related to a legitimate pedagogical concern.”7 This would include curriculum and viewpoints against which the parent or child disagrees. Their values, not yours. With little chance for relief in the courts, you’re going to need to change the decision-makers to exercise your God-given parental right to oversee the education of your child. Good luck. Your plan of action would be: (1) establish an agenda; (2) recruit candidates; (3) rally voters; (4) get your people elected; and (5) have the elected officials carry out your wishes. Not one parent can change the agenda of the educational “elite.” And even if you are successful (a near impossibility), it would be too late. Your child has already been brainwashed, and thus victimized, by the nonsense they’re peddling. Where do you re-educate the child who has been taught he is an oppressor? How do you heal the psychological damage to a 9-year old who feels guilty for being white? And even if there is change at the local level, how much will it really matter? The Biden Department of Education plans to promote racial equity in schooling, brainwash students on “their own biases,” and endorses the inaccurate (and terrible) “1619 project.” Their plan to revolutionize American schools includes quotes from radicals Ibram X. Kendi (who alleges “Trumpism is the violent defense of white male supremacy”) and Becki Cohn-Vargas (who wants to educate young children on anti-racism and has endorsed garbage articles that claim “objectivity” or “neutrality” are parts of white supremacy culture). All the while, mere disagreement with the insane educational priorities of the racially obsessed will make you a target. They’ll fight you every step of the way. If not in court then on the streets. If not at the school board then on the internet. Exercise your First Amendment rights and these government officials will put you on their list. It’s happening in Loudon County, Virginia. Teachers, school staff, elected officials, and even the county prosecutor were part of a Facebook group that:
After some parents objected to the teaching of critical race theory, one teacher promised to shut down their “hateful garbage” while another teacher called a parent a “douche.” They fight with the support of the NAACP, which had e-mailed school officials to inform them that a teacher’s husband had criticized critical race theory. According to Rosiak, the e-mail stated the NAACP was hopeful the teacher “does not share the same ideologies as her husband.” Loudon County is the exception, not the rule. These brawls typically aren’t so public. (Though Loudon County shows just how audacious these people have become.) Likewise, the change in policies aren’t done out in the open. Instead, they’re done in the bureaucratic back rooms, within the school boards, at the school districts. Most parents don’t know what’s going on until it’s too late. One final point. For the sake of argument, let’s say that the government does have authority to compel a child attend a public school. What happens when “education” transforms from reading, writing, and arithmetic to critical race theory and the LGBTQ agenda? Does the State have the power to compel such education? Under current law, yes. If you accept the State’s authority to compel education, don’t you accept the State’s authority to define “education”? You can think about that answer. Conclusion. It’s hard to overstate what this fight is about, because it’s about nearly everything. It’s not just about what gets taught in the schools. It’s about the power of the State over the rights of the parents. It’s about indoctrination starting in elementary school. It’s about retaliation at the local level, fights in the courts, and forced compliance with their twisted worldview. To break this down in its simplest form: this is good vs. evil fighting over the mind of a child. Victory is
removing the child from their grasp. References 1 For background, see W.
Reese, America's
Public Schools: From the Common School to "No
Child Left Behind" 11-12 (2005)
3 https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/262/390/ 4 https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/406/205/#tab-opinion-1949691 5 Vernonia School
Dist. 47J v. Acton, 515 U.S. 646, 655-656,
115 S.Ct. 2386, 132 L.Ed.2d 564 (1995) (quoting Tinker at 506, 89 S.Ct. 733).
6 I’ll acknowledge that private schools are an option for some parents if you acknowledge that millions of parents can’t afford them. 7 Hazelwood Sch. Dist. v. Kuhlmeier, 484 U.S. 260, 273 (1988). 2021-07-09 f SPECTACLE OF TURBULENCE & CONTENTION V (the Alzheimer in Chief, a compilation) This was Biden’s press conference today. Is he okay? pic.twitter.com/w58YW9nBtZ — Ian
Miles Cheong @ stillgray.substack.com (@stillgray)
July
8, 2021
2021-07-09 e SPECTACLE OF TURBULENCE & CONTENTION IV FBI Seth Rich Documents:
Emails Suggest Assassination Discussions
The Stasi FBI released thousands of pages of documents today on murdered DNC operative Seth Rich [who gave the DNC treasure trove to Wikileaks. It was not a Russian hack as the mainstream media and Democrats and Deep State cons have said for years.]. This was after they denied for years they had anything on the case. [...] The documents were posted today on the FBI Vault — Have at it… https://vault.fbi.gov/seth-rich/seth-rich-part-01-of-01/view [...] Now this… The FBI documents included these two documents that mention Robert Mueller and Hillary Clinton from pages 134 and 135. [from the emails:} "... who knows hitmen better than Robert Mueller" & "Clintons hired to murder Seth Rich "Crooked mueller says he would have done same thing ... hired a hitman" (read more) 2021-07-09 d SPECTACLE OF TURBULENCE & CONTENTION III New Evidence Indicates Enough
Illegal Votes In Georgia To Tip 2020 Results
In Georgia, there was both an audit and a statewide recount confirming Biden’s victory, but ignored in the process was evidence that nearly 35,000 Georgians had potentially voted illegally. New evidence indicates that more than 10,300 illegal votes were cast in Georgia in the November 2020 general election — a number that will continue to rise over the next several months, potentially exceeding the 12,670 votes that separated Joe Biden and Donald Trump. While this evidence does not change the fact that Joe Biden is our [illegitimate] president, all Americans who genuinely care about free and fair elections and the disenfranchisement of voters should demand both transparency and solutions to prevent a repeat in future elections. This evidence also vindicates former President Trump and his legal team for the related public (and private) comments and legal arguments made in challenging the Georgia election results. Under the cover of COVID-19, Georgia, like many other states, flooded residents with absentee ballot applications. Also like sister states, Georgia ignored various legislative mandates designed to prevent fraud and to ensure the integrity of the vote. These facts, coupled with the closeness of the presidential contest in Georgia and other states, led to a flurry of accusations and litigation charging vote fraud, illegal voting, and violations of the Elector’s Clause of the constitution. In Georgia, there was both an audit and a statewide recount confirming Biden’s victory, but ignored in the process was evidence that nearly 35,000 Georgians had potentially voted illegally. Under Georgia law, residents must vote in the county in which they reside, unless they changed their residence within 30 days of the election. As Jake Evans, a well-known Atlanta election lawyer, told me, outside of the 30-day grace period, if people vote in a county in which they no longer reside, “Their vote in that county would be illegal.” Soon after the November general election, Mark Davis, the president of Data Productions Inc. and an expert in voter data analytics and residency issues, obtained data from the National Change of Address (NCOA) database that identified Georgia residents who had confirmed moves with the U.S. Postal Service. After excluding moves with effective dates within 30 days of the general election, and by using data available from the Georgia Secretary of State’s Office, Davis identified nearly 35,000 Georgia voters who indicated they had moved from one Georgia county to another, but then voted in the 2020 general election in the county from which they had moved. Casting Doubt on Potential Illegal Votes Some of those moves could have been temporary, involving students or members of the military, Davis stressed, adding that under Georgia law temporary relocations do not alter citizens’ residency status or render their votes illegal. But, given the margin separating the two presidential candidates, approximately one-third of the votes at issue could have altered the outcome of the election. Yet the media, the courts, and the Secretary of State’s Office ignored or downplayed the issue. “It was disconcerting to see the media and the courts largely ignore serious issues like these, especially since the data I was seeing showed very legitimate issues,” Davis said. “In fact, I heard members of the Secretary of State’s team admit some votes were cast with residency issues, but then claimed there weren’t enough of them to cast the outcome of the election in doubt,” Davis added. “That was not at all what I was seeing, and as far as I am aware the Secretary of State’s Office has never put an actual number on the ones they did see.” While frustrated, Davis told me that he never stopped working on these issues. “In May I received an updated voter database from the Secretary of State’s office, and I imported the data and compared voter’s addresses to the NCOA information I processed in November.” The Data Speak for Their Self When Davis ran the data, he found that, of the approximately 35,000 Georgians who indicated they had moved from one county to another county more than 30 days before the November general election, as of May, more than 10,300 had updated their voter registration information, providing the secretary of state the exact address they had previously provided to the USPS. Those same 10,000-plus individuals all also cast ballots in the county in which they had previously lived. “That number continues to increase every day as more and more people update their registrations,” Davis said. “I have little doubt that the total number will eventually meet and then exceed President Biden’s margin of victory in Georgia.” Davis, who has testified as an expert witness multiple times in disputed election cases, believes Trump might have won a challenge to the Georgia election results had a court actually heard his case. “Under Georgia law, a judge can order an election be redone if he or she sees there were enough illegal, irregular, or improperly rejected votes to cast the results of the election in doubt, or if they see evidence of ‘systemic irregularities,’” Davis said. “These issues were absolutely systemic,” Davis stressed, noting “they occurred in every county in the state, in every state house, state senate, and in every congressional district in the state.” Evans, who holds the distinction of being the only lawyer in Georgia history to successfully overturn two elections in the same race, concurred. Under Georgia law, Evans explained, “an election should be overturned either if (1) more votes than decided the election were illegal, wrongfully rejected or irregular, or (2) when there were systemic irregularities that cast in doubt the results of the election.” “In the case of the 2020 general election,” Evans told me, Davis’s analysis indicates both factors could have been in play. Davis’s data proves significant because critics of Trump’s challenge to the certification of Georgia’s election results framed the NCOA information as either unreliable or of an insufficient magnitude to cast the outcome of the election in doubt. But by updating their voter registration information with the same address as contained in the NCOA database, the voters themselves have established the reliability of that information. Further, by updating their address for purposes of their voter registration, these same voters are confirming their move is not temporary. “When a person updates their voter registration to a new address, they are informing the county board of elections and correspondingly the Secretary of State that they regard the new address as their legal residence,” Evans explained. What Do Georgia Officials Know? Upon learning of this new development, the Georgia Secretary of State’s Office quietly opened an investigation into potentially illegal voting by residents who had moved between counties. Davis provided his data to the office in May, with a detailed explanation of his analysis. During my interview last week with Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, there was confusion over which, of the many investigations opened by his office, I had sought further information. Immediately following the interview, both his press secretary, Walter Jones, and his deputy secretary of state, Jordan Fuchs, called me back to follow up on my questions on the status of that investigation. “There is no need to have access to Social Security numbers or birth dates,” Davis told me. “Every voter has a unique eight-digit voter identification number,” Davis explained that these voter identification numbers tie to the voters’ names and addresses and to vote-history data, which documents when and where their votes are cast and comes from the secretary of state’s own data. Davis provided access to that data, following the execution of a non-disclosure agreement, and I confirmed Davis’s representation. Davis also provided processing certification verifying receipt of the NCOA data. “I provided this exact same information to Frances Watson, the chief investigator for the secretary of state,” Davis told me, sharing a copy of the email sent to Watson. When asked for the status of Watson’s investigation and other details, while both were receptive to questions, neither Jones nor Fuchs could provide definitive answers. While on Friday Fuchs promised to give Watson permission to speak with me, and while both the deputy secretary of state and the press secretary promised to arrange an interview with Watson and to track down answers to several questions, to date, no further information has been provided and no interview has been arranged, notwithstanding several follow-up communications. Hopefully, that is because Watson is busy investigating the strong evidence of illegal voting and not because the Secretary of State’s Office is attempting to bury the story — and the fact that Trump might have been right after all — until after Raffensperger fights off a primary challenge. Clarification: This original article stated, “Yet during my interview last week with Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, he seemed unfamiliar with this most recent evidence of illegal voting.” Since publication, Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger’s office confirmed he is aware of the latest in the investigation, and that during his interview he was responding to questions posed about out-of-precinct voting. (read more) 2021-07-09 c SPECTACLE OF TURBULENCE & CONTENTION II Chicago Schools Claim Dishing
Out Condoms To 5th Graders Is Needed Because Racism
[In other words, they know that
black boys and girls can't keep their underwear on.]
 Chicago Public Schools, the third-largest school district in the United States, plans to provide condoms to students 10 years and up this fall to enact “anti-racist pedagogy.” The board of education’s policy passed in December and mandates all institutions serving fifth grade and older to have a “condom availability program.” According to the policy, dishing out contraception to minors who have largely yet to undergo puberty is “medically accurate” and “provides strategies to support all students that are inclusive of gender identity, gender expression, sexual orientation, sexual behavior, race, and disability.” Six hundred schools in Chicago will receive thousands of condoms, courtesy of The Chicago Department of Health. Doctor Kenneth Fox, who works for the district, indicated to the Chicago Sun-Times he believes it is a reasonable precaution even though many students being given the prophylactic are just in 5th grade. “When you don’t have those protections and don’t make those resources available then bad stuff happens to young people [who can't keep their underwear on],” Fox said. “You have elevated risks of sexually transmitted infections, of unintended pregnancies, and that’s very preventable stuff.” Oddly enough, the policy is guided by critical race theory dogma. Chicago Public Schools released an “equity statement” in the policy that states it “seeks to mitigate the effects of numerous inequities experienced by CPS students, such as access to sexual health education and services.” In the “program components” section of the sex education policy, the district argues it is providing “age appropriate” opportunities to teach “consent and healthy relationships, anatomy and physiology, puberty and adolescent sexual development, gender identity and expression, sexual orientation and identity, sexual health, and interpersonal violence.” In order for parents to opt their children out of the additional mandatory sex education lessons outlined through the policy, they will need to write a “written objection.” The parent of a high school sophomore in Chicago, Maria Serrano, told the Sun-Times the district is out of line. “My question is, ‘Oh my G-d, how is it that CPS wants to give condoms to kids?'” said Serrano. “They are 10 years old, 11, 12. They are kids. So why is CPS thinking about providing condoms?” If schools run out of condoms, principals have been told to ask the government for more. The Sun-Times asked the district why middle school kids are being targeted, to which Fox said the decision was “informed by a developmental understanding of [black] children.” Fox also said sex education is a matter of “equity and justice,” although it is unclear why holding off on condom distribution for middle-schoolers, let alone any students, would go contrary to either. Chicago Public Schools did not immediately respond to a request for comment. (read more) See also: New CPS program puts free condoms in
nearly every school — including elementaries
When Chicago Public Schools students head back to their schools next month, any school with kids in the 5th grade and up will offer birth control. [...] "Under the CPS policy, schools that teach fifth grade and up must maintain a condom availability program as part of an expanded vision of sexual health education. That means all but a dozen, which enroll only younger grades, of the more than 600 CPS schools will have condoms." Editor's Note: The sexual incontinence
of blacks and their violence and criminality are due
to impulsivity (lack of self control) and high time
preference and IQ.
Racism has nothing to do with those genetic factors. Whites are not responsible for those genetic traits of lower class blacks. Neither the fictitious Marxist constructs of systemic or structural racism, nor white guilt among certain liberals can explain, change or atone for black sociopathologies. The black slave-trading kingdoms along the Atlantic coast of Africa selected slaves that could be caught easily, could perform heavy manual labor and would be tractable. We live now with the choices made by the African suppliers of the Atlantic slave trade. 2021-07-09 b SPECTACLE OF TURBULENCE & CONTENTION I "Hide Your Grandparents":
Cuomo Vows To Handle Gun Violence Like He Did
COVID-19
Elderly New Yorkers beware; Governor Andrew Cuomo (D) vowed on Thursday to tackle the state's skyrocketing violence by gunmen in the same manner as he administration dealt with COVID - in which he notably ordered COVID patients to be housed in elder care facilities - where the most vulnerable live, leading to countless unnecessary deaths. "We know how to deal with an epidemic," he said during a briefing. "We wanna do with gun violence, what we just did with COVID," he said. — News 8 WROC (@News_8)
July
8, 2021
* Cuomo's comment sparked immediate ridicule:
Let's also remember that several Cuomo aides were reportedly feeding deliberately false data to the DoJ and suppressing a Health Department report that threatened to disclose a far higher number of nursing home deaths, according to an April report in the New York Times. An
impending Health Department report threatened to
disclose a far higher number of nursing home
deaths related to the coronavirus than the Cuomo
administration had previously made public. Ms.
DeRosa and other top aides expressed concern about
the higher death toll, and, after their
intervention, the number - which had appeared in
the second sentence of the report - was removed
from the final version.
The revisions occurred as the governor was on the brink of a huge payoff: a book deal that ended with a high offer of more than $4 million, according to people with knowledge of the book’s bidding process. In February, Cuomo's top aide Melissa DeRosa privately apologized to Democratic lawmakers over a decision to withhold the state's nursing-home COVID-19 death toll out of fear that it would be "used against us" by the Trump Justice Department, according to the New York Post. Perhaps Cuomo will simply make it legal for gang members to possess firearms, while taking every possible step to prevent law-abiding citizens from defending themselves? (read more) 2021-07-09 a “Hence it is that such
democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence
and contention; have ever been found incompatible
with personal security or the rights of property;
and have in general been as short in their lives as
they have been violent in their deaths.”
— James Madison, Federalist Paper 10 2021-07-08 j IS BIG BROTHER STILL DESTABILIZING HAITI? Haiti President Jovenel Moïse’s
assassination partially caught on video
"These were mercenaries," a high-ranking Haitian government official says The assassination of Haitian President Jovenel Moïse appears to have been partially caught on camera — with the dramatic clips revealing the sound of multiple gunshots and scenes of armed men following the ambush. "DEA operation! Everybody stand down!" someone with an American accent is heard saying in English over a loudspeaker in footage first shared by the Miami Herald. "DEA operation! Everybody back up, stand down!" the warning continued, according to footage filmed around 1 a.m. Wednesday by one of the president’s neighbors in the hills above Haiti’s capital, Port-au-Prince. An Eyepress video provided by Reuters also caught the sound of more than 30 gunshots ringing out, with a barking dog the only other audio in the background. A group of heavily armed men was also filmed by a neighbor standing around the president’s home in Pelerin 5, with one person forced to lie face-down in the middle of the road. The Miami Herald suggested the men might have been part of the security response after the attack. However, some appeared to be speaking in Spanish, which would match the claim by Haitian government officials that some of the hit team "were speaking" the language, rather than Haiti’s typical French or Haitian Creole. They appeared to be part of a convoy of at least five vehicles that was filmed slowly driving away from where the controversial 53-year-old president was shot dead and the first lady injured. The convoy showed the "gunmen leave after the assassination," according to another Eyepress clip shared by Reuters. Despite the DEA announcement, sources [Deep State sources?] insisted to the Miami Herald that the killers are not thought to be attached to the US agency. "These were mercenaries," a high-ranking Haitian government official told the paper. Interim Prime Minister Claude Joseph — who said he was taking control of the nation — damned the assassination as a "hateful, inhumane and barbaric act." (read more) 2021-07-08 i BIG BROTHER IS LOSING CONTROL NEW!
President Donald J. Trump: “The Fake News and Big Tech (and Dems!) coordinated attack on the millions of people in our Country, who call the 2020 Presidential Election disgraceful and corrupt, is failing. More and more people are calling it RIGGED and STOLEN.” pic.twitter.com/jXSCq5KYBH — Liz Harrington (@realLizUSA) July 7, 2021 2021-07-08 h BIG BROTHER IS A "VACCINE" NAZI HHS Sec. Xavier
Becerra: “The federal government has spent
trillions of dollars
to keep Americans alive during this pandemic. So it is absolutely the government’s business [to know who is vaccinated.] It is taxpayers’ business if we have to continue to spend money.” pic.twitter.com/iMm9UupBup — CNN (@CNN) July 8, 2021 Editor's Note: Becerra, in Spanish, means, heifer (young female calf), but he is still full of bullsh*t. Interestingly, vaccinus, in Latin, means, of or derived from a cow (vacca). Please search: Edward Jenner and variolation for more details. 2021-07-08 g ARIZONA AUDIT If a forensic audit
was ordered for a bank and the bank managers:
1. blocked access to the bank 2. withheld / deleted information 3. said they did not posses the passwords to the computers… THEY WOULD GO TO JAIL! Shouldn’t election officials be held to the same standard? If a forensic audit was ordered for a bank and the bank managers: 1. blocked access to the bank 2. withheld / deleted information 3. said they did not posses the passwords to the computers… THEY WOULD GO TO JAIL! Shouldn’t election officials be held to the same standard? — Audit War Room (@AuditWarRoom) July 7, 2021 * Obstruction of
Justice: the act of willfully interfering with
the process of justice and law…
by furnishing false information or otherwise impeding an investigation or legal process. Does this sound familiar? — Audit War Room (@AuditWarRoom) July 7, 2021 2021-07-08 f NOBEL PEACE PRIZE WINNER ON BLACK / WHITE RELATIONS Albert Schweitzer’s Warning to White
People in Africa
Albert Schweitzer (1875 – 1965) was an Alsatian who dedicated his life to alleviating the suffering of Blacks in Africa, likely due to his Christian convictions. He was extremely intelligent and excelled in many fields (music, theology, philosophy and medicine), which means he could have easily led a very comfortable life anywhere in Europe, but instead he chose to become a medical missionary in Africa. [...] Due to Schweitzer’s dedication he won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1951. [...] "I
have given my life to try to alleviate the
sufferings of Africa. There is something that
all white men who have lived here like I must
learn and know: that these individuals are a
sub-race. They have neither the intellectual,
mental, or emotional abilities to equate or to
share equally with white men in any function of
our civilization. I have given my life to try to
bring them the advantages which our civilization
must offer, but I have become well aware that we
must retain this status: the superior and they
the inferior. For whenever a white man seeks to
live among them as their equals they will either
destroy him or devour him. And they will destroy
all of his work. Let white men from anywhere in
the world, who would come to Africa, remember
that you must continually retain this status;
you the master and they the inferior like
children that you would help or teach. Never
fraternize with them as equals. Never accept
them as your social equals or they will devour
you. They will destroy you.” from African Notebook,
1939
Although I have never been to Africa, I must assume that Schweitzer was speaking the absolute truth as he knew it (read more) 2021-07-08 e FEROCIOUS RESTAURANT CRITICS [Black] Couple Opened Fire On Burger
King Workers "Over A Spicy Chicken Sandwich"
A Tennessee couple is facing attempted murder charges after they allegedly opened fire at Burger King employees following a dispute “over a spicy chicken sandwich,” according to a criminal complaint. Police report that Tavarus McKinney, 22, and Keonna Halliburton, 20, got into an argument earlier this month with Burger King workers at a restaurant in Memphis. The duo, cops say, complained that Halliburton’s chicken sandwich was too spicy. After the “initial altercation,” McKinney and Halliburton departed for a few minutes, but returned in their Ford Escape and allegedly “fired multiple shots from the road into the parking lot.” Two female victims were hit by gunfire, while two other women “were also shot at during this time.” Pictured above, McKinney and Halliburton were charged after several victims identified them as the assailants in the June 6 shooting. McKinney and Halliburton are both locked up in the Shelby County jail on four counts of attempted murder and four counts of using a firearm in the commission of a felony. Halliburton is being held in lieu of $500,000 bond, while McKinney has a $1 million bond due to his lengthy rap sheet, which includes collars for aggravated assault, kidnapping, and domestic assault. (read more) 2021-07-08 d FEDERAL BUREAU OF INCRIMINATION FBI Seized Lego Set From [Alleged] D.C.
Riot Leader
 Man, 27, had "fully
constructed U.S. Capitol Lego set" in home
Along with a notebook containing step-by-step instructions on how to create a “hometown militia,” FBI agents seized a “fully constructed U.S. Capitol Lego set” from the Pennsylvania man indicted last month for his alleged leadership role in the January 6 insurrection, according to court records. Prosecutors charge that Robert Morss, 27, directed fellow rioters during “one of the most intense and prolonged clashes” with law enforcement officers who were seeking to prevent a violent mob from entering the Capitol through doors on the Lower West Terrace. Morss, wearing tactical gear and a “Make America Great Again” hat, allegedly ripped a riot shield from the hands of a Metropolitan Police Department officer and later organized a “shield wall” that was used to “crush officers in the rioters’ path.” As seen in a harrowing video, as rioters chanted “Heave, ho!” in unison, MPD Officer Daniel Hodges was crushed against a door jam as Donald Trump supporters like Morss sought to storm the Capitol. As Hodges screamed in pain, a rioter tore off the cop’s gas mask and took his baton (which was then used to strike the immobilized officer). Morss, who graduated from Penn State after serving as an Army Ranger, was indicted last month on nine criminal counts related to his activities on January 6. Morss, who recently worked as a substitute teacher, “came prepared for violence and then repeatedly led the violent mob attacking” law enforcement officers, according to federal prosecutors. After attempting to breach the Capitol through the Lower West Terrace entrance, Morss subsequently climbed into the building through a broken window. Morss has been locked up since his arrest and prosecutors are seeking his continued pretrial detainment, arguing that he is a threat to the community and a flight risk. In a July 2 motion, government lawyers reported that agents found a notebook in Morss’s car that contained “writings that included ‘Step by Step To Create Hometown Militia.’” The militia to-do list included steps like “Ambush” and “Battle Drills” and reminders to “Bring Assault Rifle” and “4 Magazines.” Investigators also seized clothing and other items matching those that Morss carried on January 6, including a “Don’t Tread on Me” flag, military fatigues, a black tourniquet, and a military utility bag. Morss also had “three different firearms including a handgun, a shotgun, and a rifle,” according to the detention motion. FBI agents who raided Morss’s suburban Pittsburgh residence also “recovered [recovered ???] a fully constructed U.S. Capitol Lego set.” The court filing does not indicate whether federal investigators believe that Morss used the 1032-piece Lego set in preparation for his alleged rampaging on January 6. (read more) 2021-07-08 c NOSY SCUMBAGS AGENCY (NSA) Tucker Carlson joins
Maria Bartiromo to discuss the latest
developments in his
allegations against the NSA, revealing that he was contacted by a journalist yesterday who informed him that the NSA leaked his emails to the media. pic.twitter.com/Ls7dGr4pol — The Post Millennial (@TPostMillennial) July 7, 2021 2021-07-08 b FEDERAL BUREAU OF INSTIGATION Jewish FBI Agent Infiltrates [Christian]
Bible Study Group; Then Tries to Entrap Its
Members
The family of 27-year-old Fi Duong thought they escaped government oppression when they left Vietnam. They were wrong. According to an FBI criminal complaint, Duong has been closely surveilled by the FBI for the past six months, including while he engaged in religious activity. In conversations with undercover FBI agents, Duong held that he entered the Capitol on January 6th to film the events in a journalistic capacity. The man was a member of a Virginia-based Bible study group that Jewish Joint Terrorism Task Force special agent Jason Jankovitz decided to open up a domestic terror probe into. Agents repeatedly tried and failed to snare Duong into a Molotov cocktail plot because he owned multiple empty glass bottles. They were not able to charge him for any explosives related crimes, but the New York Times and various other outlets are reporting him as a terrorist anyway. Feds At Bible Study According to Jankovitz, Duong popped up on the FBI’s radar after an undercover Metropolitan police officer made contact with him outside the Capitol on January 6th. A week later, the MPD officer introduced Duong to an undercover FBI agent, who he invited to a Bible study group he attended in Alexandria, Virginia. The suspect expressed anguish over the fact that his family fled persecution in Vietnam in hopes of obtaining freedom in the United States, only to now be subjected to similar oppression in America for his patriotic beliefs. At the house, the FBI agents participated in discussions about the Bible and the group of friends also shot firearms together. The criminal complaint also describes plans to improve their driving skills and train together in martial arts. Outside of telling group members that he had entered the Capitol to film as a journalist, description of an instance where he had infiltrated an Antifa event, and discussions of Virginia peacefully seceding from the United States, there was nothing in the group that justified federal agents spying on them. Failed Attempts At Entrapment Multiple agents began isolating members and trying to talk them into behavior that could be construed as a domestic terror plot. Judging from the affidavit, Duong was meticulously law abiding. He discussed plans to obtain a suppressor for his rifle but only after filing the proper paper work with the ATF, for example. The complaint against Duong focuses heavily on his political criticisms of Antifa, Black Lives Matter and the Democratic Party, but does not describe any activity that could be prosecuted as criminal. After noticing a box of empty glass bottles in the suspect’s home, agents began pressuring him to make Molotov Cocktails. While creating the contraption — a glass bottle filled with gasoline and ignited with a rag to make a small fire — for entertainment value does not strike most people as a serious crime, federal prosecutors on a political mission have in the past charged making Molotov cocktails as the same thing as building an actual bomb. Last June, two FBI agents pressured Duong into trying to build Molotov cocktails to test them out in West Virginia. The suspect then changed his mind last minute. He told the two undercover agents that he wanted to obtain permission from the ATF to construct the explosive device before actually doing it. The agents soon peer pressured him into another attempt, this time at an abandoned prison in Fairfax County, which the FBI could use to dump serious charges on the man. He was picked up in an undercover FBI vehicle and the men engaged in “reconnaissance.” At the site, Duong was recorded telling the agents that he liked the idea, but would seek to get formal permission from the state before testing the devices near the facility. Ultimately, the undercover agents got frustrated and decided to charge him for trespassing at the Capitol. Yet, the FBI complaint features the phrase “Molotov cocktail” over 24 times, which is an attempt to paint the suspect as a dangerous criminal when he appears before a judge. It should be noted that an FBI criminal complaint is merely a narrative constructed by the agent authoring it, and should thus be taken with a grain of salt. Even as the only information available to the public at the moment, there are already serious civil rights and freedom of religion questions, including in respects to bias and hate when it comes to a federal agent of Jewish ancestry deciding to target men of the Christian faith for surveillance while they engage in fellowship and worship. (read more) 2021-07-08 a "Show me the man and I’ll find you the
crime."
— Lavrentiy Beria to Joseph Stalin 2021-07-07 h ODIOUS AND DIVISIVE CRITICAL RACE THEORY The debate over CRT is
activating White America like nothing I’ve ever
seen.
Once they even make the argument, they force people to consciously identify as White people. No matter how many conservative copes end in some variety of, “let’s just go back to being colorblind,” or repeating the MLK, “not color of skin but content of character,” mantra over and over again, once you see yourself as under attack for being White, you can’t unsee it. And there’s really no way they can walk this back. It’s happening because the America of the 1980s is truly gone, Whites as a percentage of the US population are declining rapidly, so too many people have a material interest in pushing aggressive White guilt narratives. It’s a national disintegration happening. The more Whites decline in America, the faster this disintegration will accelerate. — Warren Balogh 2021-07-07 g ODIOUS AND INSUFFERABLE HIERARCHY In the Olympiad of
Suffering, it is, basically:
Tranny privilege trumps Gay privilege. Gay privilege trumps black privilege. Black privilege trumps womyn privilege. Womyn privilege trumps Jew privilege. Jew privilege trumps Hispanic privilege. Hispanic privilege trumps white privilege. White privilege trumps Martian pri…. Oops, there are no Martians… — Bardon Kaldian 2021-07-07 f ODIOUS PARASITES, RENT-SEEKERS, BANKSTERS AND CRIMINAL POLITICIANS HAVE GONE TOO FAR America Abides
[...] I hate to tell you this, but all your freedoms are already gone. They’re not coming back unless something radical happens. That is simply the sad fact. Looking at the present and the future, we really understand just how amazing a thing it was that the Founding Fathers put together. They structured a new European (Anglo-Saxon, frankly) culture around the concept of Liberty, and this did beautifully in holding us together as a national ideal. Of course, we can no longer have a national ideal, because we no longer have a nation. You can’t replace the population and keep the nation. A lot of autistic right-wingers take the retarded nonsense from the Jew-cons – who inexplicably claim that the American idea is an “ideology” (it isn’t) and then say that any race can adopt this ideology – and claim that American culture is irrelevant and the only thing that matters is race. Making the claim that “the only thing that matters is race” is frankly just as stupid as the Ben Shapiro claim about ideology. It is taken for granted that a nation is a race – that’s what the word “nation” means: “blood” or “birth.” It’s the same root word as “natal.” So of course, when you have a nation, you have a race. From there, you form a national identity, and a national mythology. When America stopped being a British colony, it needed a new identity, in the view of the Founding Fathers. That is where the doctrine of the revolution and the core identity concepts of freedom come from. American Freedom is a cultural framework for the White American Race. That’s all. It’s not an ideology. And having a national identity and national mythology does not somehow make you “a nation of ideas” (which is not a real thing). Saying “anyone can be an American as long as they believe in freedom” is no different than saying “anyone can be Chinese as long as they believe in mercantilism and the Confucian conception of authority and filial piety” or “anyone can be an Inuit as long as they believe in the great spirit and engage in the sacred seal hunt.” Every nation has a defining cultural identity, which is designed to fit the racial nature of the people. Separating the two is stupid. The national identity can change over time without the race changing, and that’s fine. Along with being European, derived from Britain, we were de facto a Christian state. However, due to the weird nature of Protestantism at the founding of the nation, and the differences between the various sects, we did not include a specific form of Christianity at the core of our national identity, as most nations generally would and do. Our national identity was related to the protestant work ethic, independent livelihoods and independent living in general, the potential for social mobility based on merit, and the freedom to speak our minds freely. Freedom of speech was the most important freedom, as it is what was required for the entire system we built to function. You can have an authoritarian society without full freedom of speech. And that’s fine. It can work. But that’s not the kind of society America was. We had a national identity framed around freedom, as well as representative government, and it was necessary to maintain freedom of speech. We surrendered freedom of speech in 2017, when the people who claimed that the American founding principles were an ideology and not an identity and cultural framework, claimed that according to the ideology, a private company was allowed to take your freedom of speech away from you. Obviously, no one can look at the writings of Thomas Jefferson or any of the other promoters of the concept of America, and of free speech, and think that they intended there to be an exception where private companies are allowed to strip you of your rights. The assumption of the Bill of Rights is not only that the government can’t act to take those rights away, but that the federal government has a duty to preserve those rights if anyone else tries to take them away. Any honest person looking at the First Amendment in context would come to the conclusion that the government had a duty to preserve the rights of the people, and refusing to protect those rights was no different than the government taking them away. After this bizarre caveat was granted, we are now seeing that private companies are allowed to violate other rights. The [illegitimate] Biden government has announced that it is now hiring private companies to spy on people, violating your privacy rights. They are also going to use private companies to enforce the vaccine passports and restrict your freedom of movement. We are long past the point of no return. The coronavirus hoax pushed us over the edge. Freedom was for the American people. The American people who have not been replaced have been battered beyond recognition by a program of aggressive psychological warfare. In the scheme of things, people who would surrender these freedoms by which our culture was defined – especially without first losing a war – didn’t deserve them in the first place. Obviously, I deserved them, and you readers deserved them, because we were willing to stand up and fight for them. But the masses of people were not. America Abides Another autistic and moronic thing that sometimes gets pushed in various idiot right-wing circles is that if the American government falls, somehow America stops existing. America is not the American government. All kinds of nations change governments, and they don’t magically stop existing. Russia went through nearly a century of communism, and yet the Russian people never stopped existing. Their race and language, their culture and religion, their national symbols, still abide. Independence Day and the cultural identity of Americans continues to mean something, regardless of what happens. No matter what happens to the government, Americans remain Americans. We remain American by blood, and we remain infused with the American culture, as the kind of software of our biological hardware. We are not in any way whatsoever defined by the state. If you associate your national identity with the state, you must have some kind of mental illness. Even authoritarian states like China frame the state as the custodian of the people and their values and cultural identity. If the custodian of a people fails, the people do not stop existing. As the New York Times pointed out last week, the people running our government openly despise our flag – specifically because that flag represents us, the American people, and not the American Empire or Jewish-run American government. Today, flying the
American flag from the back of a pickup truck or
over a lawn
is increasingly seen as a clue, albeit an imperfect one, to a person’s political affiliation in a deeply divided nation. https://t.co/TODmHEmPsO — The New York Times (@nytimes) July 3, 2021 These are ideas I’ve been over and over for years on end, because so many cancerous personalities have tried to inject the idea that it is both possible and desirable for an American – in fact, many Americans – to stop being American. Even if it were desirable to abandon the identity you were raised with, it certainly is not possible. You will carry the shape of being American with you until death, and moreover, you will imprint it on your children. America is now a failed state. There is no denying that. The US government will eventually collapse. But when it does, we will be the same people we were the day before it collapsed, just as was the case with Russians before and after the fall of the USSR. So, if I were to try to communicate an uplifting message on this day, I would say: always remember when we talk about “the fall of the American Empire,” we are not talking about the end of the American people. With or without a state, we will continue to exist. We will have our flag, we will have our religion, we will have our language, we will have our stories, we will have our guns, we will have our ingenuity, and we will have as much of the American territory as we are able to hold. We will rebuild our statues. Maybe if you live in New York City or California, you don’t understand what “blood and soil” means in the first place. But everyone else in this country understands perfectly well what I’m saying. Blood and soil do not need the permission of a government in order to be blood and soil. (read more) 2021-07-07 e ODIOUS MEDICAL-PHARMACEUTICAL-DEMOCRAT-MEDIA COMPLEX DOESN'T WANT YOU TO KNOW THIS A Guide to Home-Based
COVID Treatment
Step-By-Step Doctors’ Plan That Could Save Your Life (read more) 2021-07-07 d GENESIS OF HATE & HATE SPEECH RESTRICTIONS On the True Meaning of Hate
Speech
‘Hate’ is such an ugly word. And such a juvenile word. It calls to mind the stereotypical eight-year-old girl who screams “I hate you!” to her mother when she is not allowed to join the local sleep-over. The word is most often used half-jokingly—“I hate the Yankees!”, “I hate broccoli!”, etc.—or to describe some detested task (“I hate cleaning the bathroom”). Or it can be used for rhetorical effect. But the use of the term in the context of ‘hate speech’ is silly, juvenile, and formally meaningless. We may dislike someone or some group, or be repulsed by them, or wish to dissociate from them. But to hate them? Seriously—what mature individual today is willing to openly and earnestly say “I hate you” to anyone? Only a highly insecure or severely distressed person would do such a thing. It’s a sign of weakness. And yet today, hate seems to be the ethos of the moment. More specifically, we seem to be surrounded by talk of ‘hate speech’ in the mass media. To judge by various headlines and liberal pundits, hate speech would appear to be among the greatest dangers of modern existence—on par with racism and “White supremacy,” and greater than political corruption, international terrorism, global pandemics, financial instability, environmental decline, overpopulation, or uncontrollable industrial technology. Most European countries have legal prohibitions against various forms of hate speech, however ill-defined, as do Canada and Australia. Even in the US there is increasing pressure to create legal sanction for some such concept, the First Amendment notwithstanding. I take this whole topic very personally. It’s no secret that I’ve written harshly against Jews and other minorities. It’s no secret that I prefer living in a White community and a White nation. I have no need to apologize for any of this. And yet, for these very reasons, some people find it appropriate to call me a ‘hater’: “Dalton hates the Jews”; “he hates Blacks,” “he hates Latinos,” etc., etc. But I state here, for the record, that nothing is further from the truth. I hate no one. I may dislike certain people, I may find them malevolent and malicious, I may want them punished, and I may want to separate myself from them; but this does not mean that I hate them. In this era of “hate crimes” and “hate speech laws,” this requires some explanation. As usual, we should start by knowing what we are talking about. What, exactly, is it to ‘hate’? The word has ancient origins, deriving from the Indo-European kədes and Greek kedos. Originally, and surprisingly, it meant simply ‘strong feelings’ in a neutral sense, rather than something negative. In fact, the Old Irish word caiss includes both love and hate. But the negative connotation emerged with the Germanic khatis (later, hass), the Dutch haat, and eventually became ingrained in the English ‘hate.’ The standard dictionary definition typically runs something like this: “intense or extreme dislike, aversion, or hostility” toward someone or something. As such, the word is fairly innocuous; I can hate my job, hate asparagus, and even hate my boss. But this is not at issue. We are more concerned about hate as a mindset, and specifically as oriented toward classes of people, or increasingly, toward certain privileged ideologies. But we immediately confront a major problem here: Hate is a feeling, and feelings are indelibly subjective. And anything that is completely subjective cannot be quantified in objective terms. No one can say with certainty that “Dalton hates X.” Only I can say, “I hate X,” precisely because it is my own feeling. If there is one thing that I insist upon, it is complete sovereignty over my own feelings. No one else will ever dictate how I feel about anything. And even if I say “I hate X,” how does anyone else know that I really feel the hatred? They don’t. Maybe I’m being sarcastic. Maybe I’m joking. Maybe I’m just trying to cause a stir. No one will ever know my actual feelings except me—precisely because they are my own. No one will ever know if I am expressing “real” hatred, or just pretending. (Does that even matter?) The point here is that hatred, because it vanishes into a subjective void that is utterly inaccessible to others, can never be quantified or objectified, and thus can never be the basis for legal enforcement—at least, not in any rational sense. Therefore, the corresponding concept of ‘hate speech,’ viewed as the expression of hatred, likewise melts into thin air. It is, technically, an incoherent concept when put forth as a basis for law. This fact, of course, does not stop corrupt lawmakers around the globe from trying to enforce it, though for very different reasons, as I will explain. So, let’s take a look at how some attempt to define the indefinable. Here is one interesting definition from the Cambridge Dictionary: hate speech is
This is a hugely problematic definition, on several grounds. First, how public is ‘public’? If I tell my neighbor, is that public? If I publish something in a private chat room, is that public? What if I mumble something aloud to a friend while in a shopping mall? Am I responsible if a private email to a colleague gets reposted online? And so on. Second: it involves the “expression of hate,” or “encouragement of violence.” These are two vastly different things. ‘Expression of hate’ is, as I said, functionally meaningless. What, exactly, does it take for something to qualify as an “expression of hate”? Presumably if I say “I hate X,” that counts. But what else? Does “I really, really, really dislike X” count? Does “I’d like to see X die” count? What about “I’d like to see X get very ill”? Does “X is a total scumbag” count? We can see the problems. Incitement to violence is somewhat less ambiguous, but still problematic. Who, for example, is to judge ‘encouragement’? This is another highly subjective term. And how much violence is necessary to qualify? Is a good shove violent? A pie in the face? Tripping someone? Is ‘emotional distress’ violence? What about financial loss? Third, we notice that it’s not violence per se, but rather violence “based on something such as race, religion, sex, or sexual orientation.” This is very odd. What does the phrase “something such as” mean here? The qualifiers mentioned are usually assumed to be intrinsic to the person or group (race, gender)—except that religion, and even sexual orientation, can be changed at the drop of a hat. Therefore, the qualities need not be intrinsic. So what, exactly, is this mysterious criteria, this “something such as,” that is so crucial for the whole concept? The point here is that the whole notion of ‘hate speech,’ like hate itself, dissolves into a subjective void. In objective terms, it is virtually meaningless. How, then, can be it be subject to the force of law? The UN Takes a Shot As if they don’t have enough on their plate already, the United Nations is now highly distressed by the spread of hate speech around the world. Recently, in May 2019, they issued a short statement called “Strategy and plan of action on hate speech.” It included this observation:
The key phrases here: “controversial and disputed” (obviously), “any kind of communication” (very broad), “pejorative or discriminatory language” (highly subjective and undefined), and “on the basis of who they are” (mostly intrinsic factors, except for nationality and religion, and possibly “other identity factors”). And then we read the subsequent explanatory paragraph:
So, hate speech per se is not to be prohibited, but rather only a special kind of hate speech—“inciteful (to violence) hate speech.” In other words, only the worst of the worst, apparently. Clarification and elaboration would soon follow. Also, the Foreword to the statement reveals something of the deeper motives at work here. We find, in the opening paragraph, references to “anti-Semitism,” “neo-Nazis,” and the dreaded “White supremacy.” Strange how we inevitably find such terms in any discussion of hate speech; more on this below. Evidently dissatisfied with this short statement, the UN issued a 52-page “detailed guidance” report, under the same name, in September 2020. Here they establish three levels of hate speech: 1) the worst kind: “direct and public incitement to violence” (including to genocide), 2) a grey zone of hate speech to be prohibited based on “legitimate aims” and only as “necessary and proportionate”, and 3) an unrestricted and lawful form that may still be “offensive, shocking, or disturbing.” Level One (“Incitement”) hate speech in turn is based on, and determined by, six conditions:
Level One Hate must satisfy all six criteria, meaning (presumably): a sensitive time or social context, an influential or important speaker, bad intent, provocative style, widely disseminated, and with reasonable probability of harm. Again, all six are required, for Level One status. Levels Two and Three may meet some, or none, of these. The six criteria are elaborated on pages 17 and 18 of the report. Later in the document we find an interesting admission: “The terms ‘hatred’ and ‘hostility’ should be understood to refer to intense and irrational emotions of opprobrium, enmity, and detestation towards the target group” (p. 13). This is actually quite a relief; any opposition to Jews or other minorities, if rational and non-emotional (e.g., fact-based) cannot count as hate speech! Therefore, writings by scholars, academics, or other serious researchers, who build a case based on facts, history, and plausible inference, are under no circumstances engaging in hate speech. This is a huge loophole that somehow slipped past the ideological censors, one which we should be able to use to our advantage. We (some of us, at least) get further relief on the following page, where we read that Level Three (allowable) Hate includes not only “expression that is offensive, shocking, or disturbing” but also covers “denial of historical events, including crimes of genocide or crimes against humanity.” As the UN sees it, so-called Holocaust denial is permissible, or at least non-punishable, hate speech.[2]For the record, I am no denier. I believe that there was a Holocaust of the mid-20th century: it was called World War Two, and some 60 million people died as a result of Jewish-instigated actions both here and in Europe. Jewish fatalities seem to have numbered around 500,000, according to the major revisionists. For more on these issues, see my books The Jewish Hand in the World Wars (2019) and Debating the Holocaust (4th ed, 2020). And in Figure 4 they go further still, stating that Level Three hate “must be PROTECTED” as a form of free expression. This is a remarkable concession. Ah, but there’s a catch: “unless such forms of expression also constitute incitement to hostility, discrimination, or violence under article 20 (2) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.” This document, written in 1966 and made effective in 1976, includes these words under article 20: “Any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence shall be prohibited by law.” So it would seem that, for example, Holocaust “denial” (whatever that means) is not prohibited as long as it avoids any connection to “incitement” of any kind. Presumably discussing it as a historical subject is fine; just don’t implicate anyone today who promotes, exploits, or profits from the conventional Holocaust story. “It’s always about the Jews!” So, let’s get down to the rub. I have a tentative hypothesis that I am willing to put forward: Hate speech is by, for, and about Jews. (Oops—is that hate speech?) That is, that hate speech laws have been invented and promoted by Jews, primarily for their benefit. I further hold that Jews are the master-class haters in world history, and that they understand the power of hatred better than any other people. They have furthermore learned how to project their hatred onto others in service of their own ends, including by trickery and deception. Let me marshal whatever evidence I can, mostly implicit, to build a case for this hypothesis. Start with a little history of Jews and hatred. Perhaps the first explicit connection came way back in 300 BC, in a short writing by Hecateus of Abdera titled “On the Jews.” Only two fragments remain, one of which is relevant: As a result of the Exodus, “Moses introduced a way of life which was, to a certain extent, misanthropic (apanthropon) and hostile to foreigners”.[3]Eternal Strangers (2020; T. Dalton, ed), p. 16. It is striking that, even at that early date, the Jews had a reputation for misanthropy—a hatred of humanity. The same theme recurs in 134 BC, when King Antiochus VII was advised “to destroy the Jews, for they alone among all peoples refused all relations with other races, and saw everyone as their enemy.” The king’s counselor cited “the Jews’ hatred of all mankind, sanctioned by their very laws.”[4]Emilio Gabba, “The growth of anti-Judaism,” in The Cambridge History of Judaism (vol. 2, 1984; Cambridge University Press), p. 645. Not only was their hatred notable, so too was the fact that it was “they alone, among all peoples”; the Jews were exceptional haters, it seems. It is worth further expanding on the idea that Jewish hatred is “sanctioned by their very laws”—by which they mean, the Old Testament. We know, of course, that the Jews viewed themselves as “chosen” by the creator of the universe: “For you are a people holy to the Lord your God. The Lord your God has chosen you to be a people for his own possession, out of all the peoples that are on the face of the earth” (Deut 7:6). Clearly, then, everyone else is second-best. We also know that God supposedly gave the Jews a kind of dominion over the other nations of the Earth. The Book of Exodus states, “we [Jews] are distinct…from all other people that are upon the face of the earth” (33:16). Similarly, the Hebrew tribe is “a people dwelling alone, and not reckoning itself among the nations” (Num 23:9). In Deuteronomy (15:6), Moses tells the Jews “you shall rule over many nations”; “they shall be afraid of you” (28:10). There is Genesis: “Let peoples serve you, and nations bow down to you” (27:29); or Deuteronomy, where God promises Jews “houses full of all good things, which [they] did not fill, and cisterns hewn out, which [they] did not hew, and vineyards and olive trees, which [they] did not plant” (6:11). And outside the Pentateuch, we can read in Isaiah: “Foreigners shall build up your walls, and their kings shall minister to you…that men may bring you the wealth of the nations” (60:10–11); or again, “aliens shall stand and feed your flocks, foreigners shall be your plowmen and vinedressers…you shall eat the wealth of the nations” (61:5–6). What is this but explicit misanthropy, sanctioned by God, and sustained “by their very laws”? Around 50 BC, Diodorus Siculus wrote Historical Library where, in the course of discussing the Exodus, he observes that “the nation of Jews had made their hatred of mankind into a tradition” (34,1). A few decades later, Lysimachus remarked that the Hebrew tribe was instructed by Moses “to show good will to no man” and to offer only “the worse advice” to others. And in the early years of the Christian era, the writer Apion commented on the Jewish tendency “to show no goodwill to a single alien, above all to Greeks.”[5]Eternal Strangers, pp. 19, 21, and 25, respectively. Again, repeated observations of Jewish hatred toward Gentile humanity. The most insightful ancient critique, though, comes from Roman historian Tacitus. His works Histories (100 AD) and Annals (115 AD) both record highly damning observations on the Hebrew tribe. In the former, the Jews are described as “a race of men hateful to the gods” (genus hominum invisium deis, V.3). Somewhat later, he remarks that “the Jews are extremely loyal toward one another, and always ready to show compassion, but toward every other people they feel only hate and enmity” (hostile odium, V.5). But his most famous line comes from his later work, Annals. There he examines the Great Fire of Rome in 64 AD, and Nero’s reaction to it. Nero, says Tacitus, pinned the blame in part on the Christians and Jews—“a class of men loathed for their vices.” The Jews “were convicted, not so much on the count of arson as for hatred of the human race” (odio humani generis, XV.44). Clearly this was the decisive factor, certainly in Tacitus’ eyes and perhaps in all of Rome: that the Jewish odio humani generis, hatred of humanity, was a sufficient crime to banish and even slay them. I could go on, but the message is clear: The ancient world viewed the Jews as exceptional haters. I could also cite, for example, Philostratus circa 230 AD (“The Jews have long been in revolt not only against the Romans, but against all humanity”) or Porphyry circa 280 AD (The Jews are “the impious enemies of all nations”)—but the point is made. Importantly, this impression carried on for centuries in Europe, into the Renaissance, the Reformation, and even through to the present day. Martin Luther’s monumental work On the Jews and Their Lies (1543) includes this passage: “Now you can see what fine children of Abraham the Jews really are, how well they take after their father [the Devil], yes, what a fine people of God they are. They boast before God of their physical birth and of the noble blood inherited from their fathers, despising all other people.”[6]On the Jews and Their Lies (2020, T. Dalton, ed; Clemens & Blair), p. 53. Two centuries later, circa 1745, Jean-Baptiste de Mirabaud wrote that “The Jews…were hated because they were known to hate other men.”[7]Eternal Strangers, p. 68. And then we have Voltaire’s entry on “Jews” in his famous Philosophical Dictionary, which reads as follows:
British historian Edward Gibbon stated the following in his classic work of 1788, The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire:
A similar observation came from the pen of German philosopher Johann Fichte in 1793:
Who, then, are the master haters in all of history? Particularly striking are the words of Nietzsche. A long series of negative comments on the Jews began in 1881 with his book Daybreak, where he observes in passing (sec. 377) that “The command ‘love your enemies’ had to be invented by the Jews, the best haters there have ever been.” So it would seem that the Jews are truly best at something after all: hatred. Then in The Gay Science (1882), Nietzsche sarcastically notes that the Jews are indeed ‘chosen’ people, precisely because “they had a more profound contempt for the human being in themselves than any other people” (sec. 136). But the most stunning discourse appears in Nietzsche’s work of 1887, On the Genealogy of Morals, where he offers a detailed analysis of hatred from the Judeo-Christian perspective. In short, Jewish hatred is manifested most visibly in their rabbis, religious men, and their priests. Sanctioned by God, priestly hate is the deepest and most profound; it is the hatred of those without tangible power. Jewish hatred then metastasized in Christianity, taking form as its nominal opposite, namely, love. The First Essay is a masterpiece of literature and philosophy; I quote it at length:
On this view, Christian ‘love’ grows out of Jewish ‘hate,’ like the crown of the tree from its roots. The Jews (and Paul specifically), the master haters, purveyors of the “deepest and most sublime hatred” that has ever existed, created the idea of a saviour who loves everyone. They did so as cover for their hatred of humanity, and as an enticement into their Jewish-inspired worldview—one of a Jewish man-god (Jesus), of Jehovah the Almighty, of heaven and hell. These destructive and nihilistic “values and innovations” could only be foisted upon a humanity that was detested. Christianity was thus the greatest manifestation of Jewish hatred ever conceived. Nietzsche summarizes his thesis concisely in section 16:
The nihilistic Christian values—based on a mythical God and an unknowable and perhaps nonexistent future life—managed to undermine and ultimately displace the superior Greco-Roman values that had flourished for 800 years and created the foundation of all of Western civilization. Only an overthrow of Judeo-Christianity and a return to classic, aristocratic values can save humanity at this point. The quoted passage refers, of course, to Tacitus. We can’t leave the Genealogy without brief mention of a fascinating and humorous allegory on hatred that Nietzsche offers in section 13. There he compares the situation between lowly (Judeo-Christian) haters and the strong and noble (Roman) aristocrats to the opposition that might exist between baby lambs and some nasty predator (Raubvogel), like an eagle. The lambs are innocently and peacefully munching grass in a field, but live in constant fear of a predator who may, at any time, swoop in and snatch them up. The weak lambs are haters; they hate those birds of prey. But the noble eagles don’t hate at all. Nietzsche explains:
The noble don’t hate; they rule and dominate. Only the weak hate. The weak haters furthermore seek to portray the strong and noble in the harshest possible terms: “evil,” “killers,” “sinners.” But this is ludicrous, of course. The strong are just doing what is appropriate to their nature. The haters might then try to confuse the strong, to guilt them into changing their behavior, to get them to become ‘weak’ and ‘good’ like the haters themselves. But this would be the death of them, just as a life of munching grass—so pleasant for a lamb—would mean death for an eagle. Nietzsche emphasizes this very point:
Today, weak and lowly haters—Jews, Jewish-inspired Christians, and Jewish lackeys in the media—have been working hard to convince the strong and noble that they are bad, evil, bigoted, racist, and supremacist. And to the extent that they have succeeded, it has been the death of noble humanity. We must resist this tendency with all our might. Hate Speech in the Twentieth Century With growing wealth and financial clout, and with a 2,000-year history of skill in hatred under their belts, organized Jewry began to press the case for legal sanctions against their opponents. With the flood of Jewish immigrants around the turn of the century, it is perhaps not surprising that Jewish legal advocacy took hold in the US. In the first two decades, a number of major pro-Jewish groups emerged, including the American Jewish Committee (1906), the Anti-Defamation League (1913), the American Jewish Congress (1918), and the American Civil Liberties Union (1920). All these groups were de facto anti-hate speech advocates, even if the federal legal apparatus did not really exist at that point. Their focus was on so-called “group libel,” a novel legal concept that was formulated specifically to benefit Jewish interests. Meanwhile, across the ocean, Jews were making better legal progress in the proto-Soviet Union. The rise of Jewish Bolsheviks from around 1900, including Leon Trotsky and the quarter-Jewish Vladimir Lenin, brought a new concern with anti-Semitism to the Russian Empire. When they took power in the February Revolution of 1917, they immediately set to work to make life better for Russian Jews. Pinkus (1990) explains that these Bolsheviks “issued a decree annulling all legal restrictions on Jews” in March 1917.[11]Benjamin Pinkus, The Jews of the Soviet Union (1990; Cambridge University Press), p. 84. He adds that, unsurprisingly, “Even before the October [1917] Revolution, Lenin and the Bolshevik Party were hostile to anti-Semitism. Lenin castigated it in the strongest terms on a number of occasions.” As soon as July 1918, the Soviet Council issued a decree (though without legal enforcement) stating that “the anti-Semitic movement and the anti-Jewish pogroms are a deadly menace to the Revolution”; all Soviet workers are called upon “to fight this plague with all possible means”.[12]In Pinkus, p. 85. Lenin himself continued to press his pro-Jewish propaganda; in one short but notable speech of March 1919, he said:
As (non-Jew) Joseph Stalin rose to power in the 1920s, he found it expedient to continue working with the Soviet Jews and generally defended their status. Consequently, that decade became a sort of ‘golden age’ for Jews; it saw the emergence of the likes of Lazar Kaganovich, Yakov Sverdlov, Lev Kamenev, Karl Radek, Leonid Krasin, Filipp Goloshchekin, and Yakov Agranov—all high-ranking Jews in the Soviet hierarchy.[13]The parallels to the Biden regime are striking; see my recent piece “Confronting the Judeocracy.” Partly because of this governmental dominance, anti-Semitism among the Russian masses continued to percolate. Eventually, “in 1927, a decision was reached to take drastic steps to repress anti-Semitism.”[14]Pinkus, p. 86. Various forms of propaganda were employed, including books, pamphlets, plays, and films; the process culminated in harsh legal action against anti-Jewish hate, up to and including the death penalty. Stalin confirmed this in writing in 1931:
The Jewish Golden Age in the Soviet Union lasted until the late 1930s, when Stalin inaugurated a retrenchment of Jewish power, apparently in response to the National Socialist stance.[15]Postwar, Stalin’s purging of high-ranking Jews accelerated, resulting in a decade-long period of virtual state-sponsored anti-Semitism, ending only with Stalin’s death in 1953. But the Soviet (and Bolshevik) philo-Semitic policies of the 1920s and 1930s were not lost on Hitler. He and Goebbels were relentless, and justified, in their critiques of “Jewish Bolshevism” as a dominant threat to Germany and Europe. Goebbels in particular noted the growing push for ‘hate speech’ and ‘hate crime’ laws in defense of Jews in both the USSR and the UK; for him, this was proof of (a) a deep-seated and imminent mass uprising against the Jews, and (b) an over-playing of their legal authority. Anti-hate laws are a sign of desperation; they indicate that the end-game is near. In a revealing diary entry of 19 April 1943, Goebbels writes:
The following month, in his published essay “The War and the Jews,” Goebbels commented on the legal situation in the USSR—the very law that Stalin described above, and that was still in force some 13 years later:
The status of anti-Semitic hate speech laws was of importance to Goebbels right to the very end. In his last major essay, “Creators of the World’s Misfortunes” (1945), he reiterated the significance of the Soviet law:
Even at the bitter end, this theme still impressed Goebbels. In one of his final diary entries, he wrote:
And indeed, they have succeeded, at least in part. The postwar German Volksverhetzung and the Austrian Verbotsgesetz both stand as among the most embarrassing legal capitulations to Jewish interests in the Western world. Thus we clearly see the origins of hate speech legislation in the twentieth century: it was first constructed by Jews and their sycophants (like Stalin), both in the US and in the Soviet Union, to quell any looming opposition to their power structure. So intent were they on stifling objection to Jewish rule that they were willing to kill those who opposed them. To the Present Day With the growing dominance of Jewish influence in American government over the past five decades, and ongoing influence in Europe, calls to restrict and punish any anti-Jewish commentary via hate speech laws have become ever more strident. The U.S. government—or at least the Republicans—have so far mostly resisted such efforts, but social media has come around to the philosemitic stance. Facebook and Facebook-owned Instagram, Twitter, and Google-owned YouTube, have all taken it upon themselves to censor hate speech, especially of the anti-Semitic variety. Google has altered its search algorithms to de-rank offensive and “hate” sites. All this is perfectly understandable, given the huge Jewish presence atop Big Tech; we need only mention Mark Zuckerberg, Sergei Brin, Larry Page, Larry Ellison, Michael Dell, Sheryl Sandberg, Safra Katz, Susan Wojcicki, Steve Ballmer, Brian Roberts, Marc Benioff, Craig Newmark, and Jeff Weiner, for starters. Parallel to Big Tech censorship, Jewish advocacy groups like the SPLC and the ADL continue to press civil cases against those ‘haters’ who they believe have violated the rights or reputation of some aggrieved party. The SPLC has a section of its website dedicated to “anti-Semitism and hate speech,” and the ADL—well, that’s their raison d’etre. Third-party lawsuits and tech censorship serve the purpose of implementing de facto pro-Jewish hate speech policies, at least within the U.S. Conclusion But to come full circle: I began this piece with a discussion about the logical vagueness and incoherence of the concept of hate speech. Clearly, though, many powerful, Jewish-inspired corporations and politicians find the concept useful. For them, in the most basic and practical terms, it becomes quite simple: Hate speech is any speech that Jews hate. Yes, they may claim to hate anti-Muslim speech or anti-Black speech, but this is so only because it is a necessary corollary to anti-Jewish hate speech. The Jews are not so stupid today as to push for uniquely Jewish, “anti-anti-Semitism” laws; those are a thing of the past. Today, such laws require cover language that, at least in theory, includes other “oppressed” groups. Jews and their defenders must appear universal and fair—when in reality most seem to have utter contempt for virtually all non-Jewish groups (there’s that “hatred of humanity” again). Hate speech is any speech that Jews hate. Consider:
If you hate what I say, who’s the hater? It’s you,
not me. The fact that you may not like what I’m
saying does not make me a hater. It makes you
the hater. And if you happen to be a champion,
master-class, world-historical hater, well
then—it’s all hate to you. (read
more) 2021-07-07 c ALL HELL WILL BREAK LOOSE IN AUSTIN SCHOOLS - BLACK AND BROWN DELINQUENTS WON'T BE DISCIPLINED (Loving parents must remove their children from Austin, Texas schools before the fall Hunger Games and Lord of the Flies term begins.) Austin ISD to scale back
discipline on students to eliminate racial
disparities [disregarding that lower-class melanin
minority students are the primary troublemakers]
AUSTIN (KXAN) — Beginning in the fall, the Austin Independent School District will be significantly scaling back the way it disciplines children who act up. The goal is to reduce racial disparities, which show Black and brown students are being disproportionately punished compared to their white classmates. According to data compiled by the district, Black children at AISD were nearly five times more likely than their white peers to receive disciplinary action, include suspensions, being placed at a disciplinary campus or being expelled. (read more) 2021-07-07 b DEMOCRAT & R.I.N.O. HUBRIS + DEEP STATE CONNIVANCE + BIG CITY CORRUPTION = FRAUDULENT ELECTION (Electoral college votes from Arizona, Georgia and Pennsylvania will give Trump (belatedly) the victory.) 🚨
BREAKING: PA initiates Full Forensic Audit. Requests
info from several — Audit War Room (@AuditWarRoom) July 7, 2021 2021-07-07 a NEOCON HUBRIS + PENTAGON INCOMPETENCE + CORRUPT AFGHANS = U.S. LOST IN AFGHANISTAN It’s Saigon in Afghanistan
The end of the 20-year US war on Afghanistan was predictable: no one has conquered Afghanistan, and Washington was as foolish as Moscow in the 1970s for trying. Now, US troops are rushing out of the country as fast as they can, having just evacuated the symbol of the US occupation of Afghanistan, Bagram Air Base. While perhaps not as dramatic as the “Fall of Saigon” in 1975, where US military helicopters scrambled to evacuate personnel from the roof of the US Embassy, the lesson remains the same and remains unlearned: attempting to occupy, control, and remake a foreign country into Washington’s image of the United States will never work. This is true no matter how much money is spent and how many lives are snuffed out. In Afghanistan, no sooner are US troops vacating an area than Taliban fighters swoop in and take over. The Afghan army seems to be more or less melting away. This weekend the Taliban took control of a key district in the Kandahar Province, as Afghan soldiers disappeared after some fighting. The US is estimated to have spent nearly 100 billion dollars training the Afghan army and police force. The real number is likely several times higher. For all that money and 20 years of training, the Afghan army cannot do its job. That’s either quite a statement about the quality of the training, the quality of the Afghan army, or some combination of the two. Whatever the case, I am sure I am not the only American wondering whether we can get a refund. The product is clearly faulty. Speaking of money wasted, in April, Brown University’s Cost of War Project calculated the total cost of the Afghanistan war at more than two trillion dollars. That means millions of Americans have been made poorer for a predictably failed project. It also means that thousands of the well-connected contractors and companies that lurk around the US Capitol Beltway pushing war have become much, much richer. That’s US foreign policy in a nutshell: taking money from middle-class Americans and transferring it to the elites of the US military and foreign policy establishment. It’s welfare for the rich. Meanwhile, the Costs of War Project also estimated that the war took more than a quarter of a million lives. The Biden Administration may believe it is saving face by installing a military command of nearly 1,000 troops inside the US Embassy in Kabul, but this is foolish and dangerous. Such a move establishes the US Embassy as a legitimate military target rather than a diplomatic outpost. Has anyone at the Pentagon or the State Department thought this through? Plans to occupy the airport in Kabul are also unlikely to work. Does anyone think that, having come this far, an emboldened and victorious Taliban are going to sit by as US or allied military occupy the Kabul airport? Trillions of dollars wasted and millions either killed or displaced from their homes. For nothing. The lessons of Afghanistan are simple: bring all US troops home, defend the United States as necessary, and leave the rest of the world to its own business. We’ve tried it the other way and it clearly doesn’t work. — Ron Paul, M.D. ______________________ Permission is hereby granted to any and all to copy and paste any entry on this page and convey it electronically along with its URL, http://www.usaapay.com/comm.html ______________________ 2021 ARCHIVE
2020 ARCHIVE
-0-
|
...
News and facts for
those sick and tired of the National Propaganda Radio
version of reality.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
| THE ARCHIVE PAGE |
| If
you let them redefine words, they will control
language. If you let them control language, they will control thoughts. If you let them control thoughts, they will control you. They will own you. |
| © 2020 - 2021 - thenotimes.com - All Rights Reserved |
