I Feel Dread

I feel dread when I read the news.

The patterns by now are now so familiar to me.

The same lies. The same liars. The same events, washing up like dirty spume from relentless waves.

They are waves from far out.

They are shadows cast ahead by something dark and terrible.

I know how it must have felt in the years before the world wars.

One must have smelled in the salty air what the future held.

It is terrible to look back and see how in less than twenty-five years, half of one immigrant’s adult life, a nation could have changed so utterly as this country did.

Even the surface of things doesn’t look the same. Smiles are harder, eyes are emptier, words more shapeless and soiled with overuse.

I can hardly bear to read through opinion in the regular press. I have to have it sifted through congenial websites.

We were free as late as 1984 – that fabled year. We were celebrating the victory of freedom in the world only five years later.

And now, thirty years later, we…the whole world…has wandered in broad daylight into  prison and the gates have been shut.

Judaic Anti-Christian Bigotry

I am using the term Judaic instead of Jew to represent the ethnicity that is otherwise called Jewish. I’m not satisfied with the word, but it will have to do for now.

Consider that the US has sent millions – if not billions – of dollars of tax-payer money to Israel, in addition to the oceans of donations from naive Zionist Christians who think of  anti-Christian Israel as the Biblical Holy Land.

I have included examples of anti-Christian bigotry from America and Israel, because liberal Judaics mock Jesus just as much as religious extremists.

It is a cultural item bound up in Judaic identity.

It is a hatred they have been fed from their religious texts and the warped and “lachrymose” narrative by which they’ve been isolated from humanity and conditioned by the Zionists.

1. An American Judaic climbed up onto a cross, took off his clothes, defecated, and spread his feces on it to express his hatred of Christians. This took place in 2009, but was recirculated on the internet in 2013, after the official announcement of the NWO at the London Olympics.

2. The same year, 2009,  American Judaic Larry David, in an episode of the HBO TV show, “Curb Your Enthusiasm,” urinated on a picture of Jesus. It was treated as a joke by the largely Judaic-dominated media in the US, which said nothing about the religiously-mandated bigotry behind such humor.

3. Sarah Silverman, a notorious  American Judaic, who has depicted herself having sex with “Jesus,” said that she hoped the Jews had killed Christ and that she would do it again herself in an instant.

4. South Park, a Judaic comedy show, depicted Jesus defecating on George Bush, while censoring itself from depicting even an image of Muhammed. The video of the show has been removed from Youtube and elsewhere.

5. In June 2015, the Church of the Loaves and Fishes on the shores of the Sea of Galilee, an important Christian site, was damaged by an arson attack by extremist Talmudists, who left the message – “all idols will be smashed.”

6. In 2014, there were waves of attacks by “price tag” Talmudic extremists against Muslims and Christians. Christian churches were sprayed with graffiti with the message – “Jesus is garbage.” The attacks get their name from the argument by the extremists that vandalism and arson are the “price-tag” of trying to restrain the West Bank settlers from moving into Palestinian areas.

7. In an Israeli show, “Toffee and the Gorilla,” a girl in a bikini tells viewers how the goyim (Christians) are dangerous for Judaics because they try to convert them, refers to Jesus as Yeshu (a Hebrew acronym for a curse), and nails her companion, a toy gorilla, to the cross in a mock crucifixion.

8. Yeshiva students routinely spit on Greek, Armenian, and Syrian Christian priests and damage crosses.

9. A mob of 100 ultra-orthodox Talmudists attacked a group of 50 pro-Israel tourists, wearing t-shirts with Jesus’ words, “Love thy neighbor as thyself” that identified them to the mob as Christians. That was their sole provocation. Three people were injured and the police were needed to end the attack.

10. Lubavitcher and Hasidic show routine hostility toward ordinary British and American people they encounter, explicable only as religious hatred.

The Global Supra-National Climate Czar

From Catholicsm.org:

We close with a quote from Schellnhuber from his own study, published in the year 1998, and entitled “Geocybernetics: Controlling a Complex Dynamical System Under Uncertainty”; and which confirms Wippermann’s grave reservations and critical observations: “While the borders of nation states have become almost irrelevant to global economic players (for instance) after the end of the Cold War, human and natural rights are still confined and dominated by thousands of frontiers. This situation can only be overcome by giving up a good deal of national sovereignty and establishing a true regime of global governance. As a prerequisite, the rather symbolic parts and pieces of the UN system must be transformed into powerful supra-national institutions: allons corriger le futur!”

Pope’s Scientific Adviser Is Pantheist Malthusian

A fascinating article on the scientist who advises the Vatican, Hans Schellnhuber, who believes in the Gaia hypothesis (the earth as a living creature), is a climate and population alarmist, and suggests that the population of the world should be 1 billion.

Schellnbuber, a supposed atheist, talks in quite religious terms – using the Hindu deity Shiva to represent physical events that have a negative impact on the earth:

Although effects such as the glaciations may still be interpreted as over-reactions to small disturbances — a kind of cathartic geophysiological fever — the main events, resulting in accelerated maturation by shock treatment, indicate that Gaia faces a powerful antagonist. Rampino has proposed personifying this opposition as Shiva, the Hindu god of destruction.”

Of course, he does not mention that Shiva’s destruction is divine.

He also does not mention that the West has had the technology to induce massive changes in the environment for some time, and these technologies (mostly derived from weapons research) are far more culpable than anything done by ordinary people carrying on the daily business of living.

Not-so-coincidentally, Schellnbuber, a visiting professor at Oxford, advises former Stasi spy, Angela Merkel.

Worst of all, Schellnbuber is a proponent of world government to tackle climate change.

From the Catholic blog, Rorate Caeli:

Last but not the least he is an advocate of a very real form of “World Government”, also in the name of defeating the climate crisis. His ideas are laid out in “Expanding the Democracy Universe“, where among other things he discusses his dream of an Earth Constitution, a Global Council elected by the people of the whole world, and a Planetary Court with jurisdiction over the whole world and with the power to penalize violations of the “Earth Constitution”.


St. Peter Damian On Public Reproof

I was worrying whether I ought to have criticized Pope Francis.

What right have I to judge his faithfulness to Catholic doctrine, when I am not a Catholic and not a regular church-going Christian either and certainly hold a few heterodox beliefs.

But then I came across this letter by St. Peter Damian, who got a lot of criticism for his forthright denunciation of homosexual clerics in his day (1007-1072 AD).

Unlike Pope Francis who famously said, “who am I to judge,” in reference to homosexuals, St. Peter Damian says, “Who am I not to judge…”.

[Christians are not supposed to “judge” (that is, condemn or consign to damnation), but they are explicitly instructed to “judge” in the sense of reprove, when their reproof might be the only means to save someone from more self-destructive actions.]

… I would surely prefer to be thrown into the well like Joseph who informed his father of his brothers’ foul crime, than to suffer the penalty of God’s fury, like Eli, who saw the wickedness of his sons and remained silent. (Sam 2:4) … Who am I, when I see this pestilential practice flourishing in the priesthood to become the murderer of another’s soul by daring to repress my criticism in expectation of the reckoning of God’s judgement? … How, indeed, am I to love my neighbor as myself if I negligently allow the wound, of which I am sure he will brutally die, to fester in his heart?[48] “So let no man condemn me as I argue against this deadly vice, for I seek not to dishonor, but rather to promote the advantage of my brother’s well-being. “Take care not to appear partial to the delinquent while you persecute him who sets him straight. If I may be pardoned in using Moses’ words, ‘Whoever is for the Lord, let him stand with me.’ (Ezek 32:26)” [49]



Yossi Gurvitz: Eliminationism On The Rise In Israel

From Mondoweiss in 2012, more from former yeshiva student Yossi Gurvitz on why he became radicalized:

Meantime, in Israel we are seeing the Jehovahiztion of the Israeli public. Ignorant, radical Jews are turning more to symbols of Jewish superiority than actual Jewish values. It’s getting harder to be a liberal except in Tel Aviv. Everyone is thinking about a second passport.

This is a spiral that will leave Israel more fanatic, more religious, less able to communicate with the western world– and ironically more part of the extremism of the Middle East. I’ve been writing about the Jewish Brotherhood. Unlike the Muslim Brotherhood, our extremists have never had to face reality and soften. Because even when they wield power they claim that the real power is the hands of the liberal elites.

Unlike the US, we have no constitution. No Basic Law grants equality. The Israeli religious right has blocked that. The only reason we have freedom of the press is because of the Supreme Court decisions. The right is already using this as a way of attacking the Supreme Court, which is becoming more fearful, less willing to use its power.

Unless something drastic changes, and it could happen– I’m betting on the J14 movement– liberal Israel is dying, and it won’t be in existence in 5, or 10 years. Some elements will be kept as a figleaf, for the Zionist Jehovahist regime. The liberals will leave, those who can.

When that happens, the liberal part of the US will no longer be so willing to defend Israel and its policies. Then without the US, Israel will be hanging by its threat to use nuclear weapons. It will become a second North Korea.

There’s a history here. In 2004 a Maariv columnist demanded that the government nuke France. Because France is an enemy of Israel, and about to collapse into a Muslim Republic, a supporter of Iran– so we should nuke them first. The editor was fired for publishing it after the French ambassador made an official protest. The Foreign Minister [Avigdor Lieberman] suggested when he was in the opposition, that Israel nuke the Aswan dam. So there’s a reason the Egyptians won’t meet him.

[Mondoweiss: Gurvitz also suggests Israel could lose the American right.]

Four days ago a church was desecrated in Jerusalem. As part of a pricetag attack. This happens all the time. When the pricetag people run out of Muslim targets, they will concentrate more on Christian targets. When that happens, the American Christian right will realize that the Israeli right is hostile to Christianity.

Why is all this inevitable?

Zionism as a force is dead. The people who are actually speaking in the name of Zionism are speaking in religious and metaphysical and mystical truths. They are not speaking in the secular Zionist tradition. A poll two weeks ago—about 70 percent consider themselves to be the chosen people. American Jews think we as Jews are chosen to carry out tikkun olam [social justice]. Israeli Jews think something different—we are the chosen people of God, we are chosen to do anything we damn well please. To take people’s land. Take peoples lives. There is actually no mainstream force standing against the Jewish brotherhood.

This is not just the religious people, it’s a large part of the secular people buying into it. Israel’s Jews refuse to accept the legitimacy of the marriage of Jews and non-Jews. You American Jews really don’t understand us. They think we’re gutsier… American Jews… think of Zionist liberals. They’re older, they’re still thinking about the late 70s, early 80s, the golden age of Israel’s liberalism.

You have to understand what the religious right means when they say of leftists, the multitude, they are the erav rav. This means the ones who left Egypt, the mixed multitude. It is a concept in Kabbalah– the Amalekite Jew. A Jew who isn’t really a Jew. He looks like a Jew, thinks he’s a Jew, but he’s an enemy of God. It’s been used in the Knesset, the word erav rav.

If you think this Judaism is the wisdom of Israel, it’s not. This is the Judaism forced underground by the Christian regimes, censored time and again. It’s coming to the surface. Just about everyone knows this code here. What may change the picture is the J14 movement. It’s alive. It will be coming back after Passover. J14 has its faults, but it is the only movement that has put Israeli Arabs speakers out front. Many Palestinian Israelis are not quite happy with the result, but…. once Israelis realize that inequality harms everyone in Israel aside from the 1 percent, then they will begin to see the Palestinian as a partner in struggle. We’ve seen it in the north, if the movement isn’t crushed.

Liberals are dead, socialists are coming up. Most socialists are poised toward equality.

[Mondoweiss:  Tell us your story, Yossi.]

I was born in January 1970 in Petah Tikva. My parents are National Orthodox. My father is an electrical contractor who is in real estate. My mother is a housewife. I studied in the Yeshiva till I had a personal crisis and left the Yeshiva for the army in 1989. It looked like a liberation, strangely enough.

I started to do my bit for leftist ideology and got transferred to the Gaza Strip so I could stop the atrocities. That didn’t work very well. They hid them from me. I did manage to get my commander tried for slapping a Palestinian child. And one day they tried to abandon me in a refugee camp. [An officer] drove me to a refugee camp and told me to step out of the car, “your brother’s over there, go join him.” I cocked the gun, putting a bullet in the chamber. I didn’t point it at him, but he got the message, and he told me to drive back.

Everything I did was supportive of the occupation in every waking moment. I’m still doing penance. That’s the liberal trap. They say to you, You want to change the world, go there, be there. But it’s always compromising. It’s much bigger than you. You will go to prison if you don’t order the bulldozers to demolish the house.

I’m in the Meretz party. Meretz used to embody this liberal thinking. If you want to prevent atrocities, join the fighting units, serve in the territories where you can see atrocities, prevent them. That simply doesn’t happen.

I went to the university and got a degree in history. I had a personal crisis about not getting a master’s degree. I spent several years working in a chemical factory [in a clerical position]. I started blogging in 2002. I was writing on various forums in the 90s. Even before. In 2006 I stared my own blog. Friends of George. It is mainly a Hebrew blog. It quickly gathered steam. During the Second Lebanon war I started writing critically in ways that were not common. That attracted a lot of readers, also including a few death threats.

Recently I had my run in with the law. I was investigated for incitement two months ago.

Tell us about the radicalization of the left.

We see a radicalization on both sides. The leftists are becoming more radical and the right wingers, too. When I radicalized—and I did—I attracted more radicals. I’m going to the demonstrations; that’s the definition of a radical around here. Bil’in is basically a reenactment of the first intifada. Everyone is playing a part. No Palestinian is trying to throw a grenade, and generally in Bilin the soldiers don’t use lethal force….

I have really high hopes for what will happen in the next few months. I’m doing what I’m doing because I think it’s the right thing to do, but the Israeli government is using us to legitimize itself. ‘You see, we’re a democracy.’ The protests have very little influence on the general public. But they’re important because solidarity is important and it gets international coverage, which is always important.

[Mondoweiss: You say we American Jews don’t understand this Judaism. Elaborate.]

Rambam [Maimonides in the 12th century] writes, If a Jew has intercourse with a gentile child three years old and a day, the child should be executed for misleading the Jew, making him sin. Those texts are still valid. We don’t understand them, but they are valid.

These Jews …  took the elements of the religion that were nationalistic and have been slumbering for 100s of years and awakened it. They took the hatred of mankind which had persisted in Judaism for millennia and gave it voice and force. [In the former rabbinical tradition] the rabbis tried to housetrain Jewish messianism. The old way of thinking was, the messiah will lead Jews to victory. The rabbis made the messiah a supernatural being capable of talking to birds and animals. This mystical being was a dam against Jewish messianism in Ashkenazi Judaism, and the eliminationist elements against Christianity were held down by this teaching.

But once Israel was created, many Jews saw it as the end of the three oaths, the Shloshet Ha’Shvuot. Two of these oaths enjoin the Jews not to mass-emigrate to Eretz Yisrael and not to provoke the gentiles. The third orders the gentiles not to treat the Jews too badly.

Now Israel has the right to use force, and every demon that was pushed into the basement is up and has an M16.

– See more at: http://mondoweiss.net/2012/03/the-radicalization-of-yossi-gurvitz#sthash.BPCHaub9.dpuf

Pope Calls Chilean Protesters “Dumb”

The NY Times on more peculiar conduct from the Pope:

Many watched in disbelief: There he was, Pope Francis, calling people in Osorno, a city in southern Chile, “dumb” for protesting against a bishop accused of being complicit in clerical sexual abuse.

“The Osorno community is suffering because it’s dumb,” Pope Francis told a group of tourists on St. Peter’s Square, because it “has let its head be filled with what politicians say, judging a bishop without any proof.”

“Don’t be led by the nose by the leftists who orchestrated all of this,” the pope said.”

When Israel Is Mighty

Transcript of a revealing interview with Israeli writer, Yossi Gurvitz, translated by Dena Shunra. He describes how Talmudic Jews view the non- Jewish world and what Christians should expect in a world where “Israel is mighty.”

[Bolding, paragraphs, and headers are mine. Note that I use the more appropriate word Judaist, rather than Jew.]

Now, we all know what the rabbis say is the origin of Judaism: Moshe passed the torah down to the elders, the elders passed the torah down to the prophets, etc…all the way down to the Talmud, and there were no changes. The central motif of the Jewish understanding of history is that there were no changes (in the religion). In other words, what the rabbis are saying now are merely minor refinements of what the rabbis had said during the time of the ‘Elders’ – the time of the Mishnah and the Talmud.
Now, first of all, the problem with this version of history is that it is completely baseless.
And second of all, that it has a few historical problems and these historical problems continue to this day, due to the fact that Judaism, as a religion, has been frozen in time for the last 1800 years.
Generally speaking, Rabbinical Judaism, as it appears in the Talmud – unlike what is generally taught in secular schools – the source of Judaism is not the Bible.
The source of Judaism is the Talmud.
The people who wrote the Talmud are the ones who decided what books would be included in the Biblical canon. What they decided wouldn’t go in – didn’t go in.
So, for example, while the Catholic Church included the Books of the Maccabees in its version of the canon, Judaism did not preserve them, and in fact only the Greek version of them was preserved.
Whether there were Hebrew or Aramaic versions of them is an interesting question, but only Christianity preserved them. The Book of Judith. The Book of Tobias. Many other books, mostly dealing with the Jews of the Diaspora didn’t make it into the Jewish Biblical canon, and were only preserved by Christianity.
Now, the Judaism that preceded Rabbinical Judaism was pretty much erased from history. In other words, there’s not enough information to know what happened then. We know there were Sadducees, there were Pharisees – the Pharisees are the rabbinical Jews – there were Essenes – we don’t know anything about them for certain, and the reason we don’t know anything about them for certain is, that when their enemies were victorious, the Pharisees established more than 10 religious holidays to celebrate their victories over the Sadducees, they simply erased them from history. So you have to eke out a fragment [of information] out of a fragment [of information], so you can say, “Maybe it was like this” or “Maybe it was like that” – its impossible to know what really happened.
What we do know is this: from very early on, Rabbinical Judaism is a Judaism that hates humans. It defines only Jews as humans – only Jews who believe in the religion as humans. Okay, lets get this exactly right: it defines only Jews who believe in the religion and are men – as full humans. And everyone else is some level of ‘other’, that must be pushed aside, or, in extreme cases, destroyed. Rabbinical Jewish law does not prohibit – okay, that’s not accurate. Rabbinical Jewish law prohibits the killing of a non-Jew, but it does not punish a person for doing so. In other words, if you kill a Jew, even a Jewish woman, even the slave of a Jew – and here it’s important to note that Orthodox Judaism has never abolished slavery – then there’s a penalty you have to pay. It could come to execution or it could be a fine. They didn’t have jails. But if you kill a non-Jew then you’re guilty, but there is no penalty. God will punish you. And that is – how shall I put it? – a bit problematic. When you say something is a crime, but there’s no punishment for committing it, then it’s not really a crime. That’s the Talmud.
When you come to the writers of later exegesis, especially the Shulhan Aruch, by that point, he is already saying that there are situations where you can kill a non-Jew with impunity. Of course, it’s written in the 16th century, after the expulsion [of all Jews] from Spain [in 1492 C.E.] so he has to write what he wants to say in coded language. So he calls them “idolaters”. But just so you know, there weren’t any [pagans] left in that part of the world [by that point] – not in Europe, and not in the Muslim world. So he calls them “idolaters” or other such terms, but everyone knows who he’s talking about [non-Jews].
The worst case, in my opinion, is the case of Maimonides, who decrees – first of all, he decrees that it is permissible to have sexual intercourse with a 3-year-old girl. That age of consent is – problematic [?!].
And second of all, he decrees that if a Jew rapes a three-year-old non-Jewish girl, then she must be executed. Her, not him – because she tempted him to sin. [See this.] And for this reason, you have to treat her like an animal that puts obstacles in a person’s way, and he quotes some verse about a bull or something like that.
And the Rabbis know that the parts of the religion that are misanthropic, that are discriminatory to non-Jews – pose a problem for them. Because if they try to implement them – there are some rules that are very unpleasant, like that 3 year-old girl we were talking about. If they try to implement them, there will be a pogrom. So to avoid that situation, the Talmud defines two different states of reality. There is one called “Darkei Shalom” (Peaceful Ways). In other words, “This is the actual religious law, this is how you are supposed to act.” “However, because it would cause a huge mess, and people will die, so due to ‘Peaceful Ways’, you don’t act that way. ”
Now, until what point does the “Peaceful Ways” rule still apply? Just as long as the other situation does not exist, which is “When Israel is Mighty.” That’s when there is a Jewish regime. It is independent, and it is merciless, it can do what it likes. Under those circumstances – its all over, you go back to the letter of the law. No more “Peaceful Ways”, no more nothing. Now, when you think of Jewish history, lots of people talked about the Hasmonean Wars, which is pretty much the only time that Jews wielded weapons, and they think about what the Hasmoneans did to the Hellenized Jews (who assimilated Greek culture) – which was to make them extinct, to destroy them. A small genocide. And I remind people of this frequently, every time Hanukah rolls around. But they didn’t stop there. They embarked on campaign of looting and conquest, and at the beginning, during their first 20 years, wherever they arrived, they would destroy the local temples. It was prohibited for a place that was under Jewish rule to have a Pagan temple. That’s what we’re talking about. They also forced the Edomites to convert to Judaism on pain of death. It was a forced conversion. Something we learn the [Spanish] Inquisition did later on. They took people and told them: ” Either you’re dead, or you’re converting to Judaism”. And things only got worse from there.
Now, when religious Zionists look at reality, they say: “We’ve got a state. We’ve got weapons. We’ve got a Jewish army. This hasn’t happened for 2000 years”. “What this means is that God wants us to bring about the Messiah, that God wants us to build the temple”. They skip over all the conditions that are imposed by the Talmud on what a Messiah must be, and they go back to Maimonides. And they go back to Maimonides. And Maimonides says, “There is no difference between our time and the time of the Messiah, other than the subordination to kingdoms.” In other words, the only difference between the time of Maimonides – he died in 1204 – and the time of the Messiah, is who is subordinate to whom. Are the Jews subordinate to “kingdoms”, to other nations? Or can they subordinate other nations? And that is how Maimonides begins his Book of Kings. He explains what the rules are for a king, what a king can do. It emerges from the belief that, yes, there can be a king. You don’t have to first have a temple. You don’t need God to come down from the sky and point at someone and say, “That’s the Messiah”. You can have a king, and if he is victorious, then he’ll also be the Messiah. And then you look at what religious Zionists are doing about this. They want a Messiah. They want him now. There must be cleansings. Religious law prohibits contact with non-Jews. Of course, the Kosher laws prohibit you from eating with them. Other laws prohibit you from treating them fairly. You are forbidden to return a lost item to a non-Jew – except in order to “keep the peace.” There is no prohibition from stealing from a non-Jew – except in order to “keep the peace.” You can’t say “hello” to them – unless there is no alternative. And so on and so forth.
There are all kinds of prohibitions that are entirely psychotic, that are based on a religion of vengeance. Religious Zionists have a serious problem with the fact that there are non-Jews here. The Land of Israel is supposed to be only for Jews. So, ironically, they would manage to get along with the Muslims, more or less, if we weren’t involved in a military conflict with them. Because according to Judaism, Muslims are not idolaters. Muslims believe in one God. They don’t have idols, they don’t have statues, they don’t have anything like that. So ironically, during the Medieval Era, Jews got along better with Muslims than with Christians. But what can you do? We conquered a territory populated mainly by Muslims, and the Muslims are fighting us – so those defenses fall away. And look, now they are starting to talk about genocide. You have the (book) Torat Hamelech (King’s Torah), which tells you that you can kill children if there is a reason to believe that one day they could cause harm. Now, if you killed someone’s entire family and left only him alive, he will indeed have a reason to cause harm. If you stole his lands, turned him into a refugee, tossed him to Jordan or Lebanon – he will indeed have a reason to cause harm. Many people have said that the book’s arguments are not sound according to religious law, and so on and so forth – but no one really tackled it head-on. And it’s no wonder that it became a best-seller. Because in general, what religious Zionists want is for the Land of Israel to be for Jews only.
Now the situation for the Christians, on the other hand, will be really bad, (according to Judaism) they are idolaters, and you will have to kill them, even if they do not resist Jewish rule. In Jerusalem, religious seminary students have a despicable habit: they urinate and defecate on Churches. If you go and talk to the Church staff, you will hear it from every Church. Spitting on clergymen in the street is something that happens every day. If the Priest has the gall to hit the person back, to slap him or something similar, then he is deported, quietly. They cancel his residence permit in the country. If you want to justify a pogrom, all you have to do is say the words “Missionary Threat”. And from that perspective, Christianity, which is the historical arch-enemy of Judaism, is going to get a serious beating once the religious Zionists are in power. The Christian Fundamentalists who send them money apparently don’t understand what they are dealing with. But you know, it’s really a case of “a pox on both your houses”.

Semitic Semantics

The word Jew is a very protean term, referring at times to race and at times to culture or religion. The correct term today should be Judaic or Judaist.

This leads to constant confusion, misdirection, and contradiction, to the advantage of the ruling class, which claims the mantle of ancient Israel.

But what we call Jews today are a mixed race people quite different from the Hebrew Israelites, who are now, retroactively and erroneously, equated with them.


Most of the people who call themselves Jews today have partial descent from converts from Khazaria, a medieval East European kingdom wedged between the Muslim and the Christian world, which chose the Hebrew faith as a way to survive.

The Khazarians intermingled with Eastern European people in the surrounding regions and later moved into Germany, becoming today’s Ashkenazy (European) Jews.

The Ashkenazim constitute much of modern Jewry, it is said.

This may or may not be true, because statistics about Jews seem to vary wildly.

The Khazarian theory of Ashkenazy origin has been vindicated, according to some people, by the research of Israeli geneticist Elhaik, but it has its detractors.

They claim it is simply an anti-Semitic canard.

Even critics of the theory, however, admit that there is ample European (maternal) and “non-Semitic” Middle-Eastern blood in the veins of modern Ashkenazy Jews.

But, shockingly, the maternal descent from Europeans means that the Ashkenazim are irrefutably not Jewish, according to Jewish law.

I repeat, the DNA evidence proves that according to Jewish law, Ashkenazim are not of Jewish (Judahite) descent, because Jewish (Judahite) law requires the mother to be Jewish.


The rest of the modern Jews, a far fewer number, are descended from the Edomites (Idumeans) who were living in Judea at the time of Jesus.

That is why they were called Jews to begin with.

Once again, Jew is simply the short form for the word, Judean or “of Judea.”

In its origin, thus, the word Judean/Jew had nothing to do with race or ethnicity.

It referred simply to people living in the region of Judea.

The Idumeans/Edomites in Judea were forcibly circumcised and incorporated into Judean culture under John Hyrcanus, in the 2nd century BC.

Their numbers included many of the Pharisees who lived in the time of Jesus, most of whom were killed in the siege of Jerusalem in 70 AD.

This was the fate of most of the male population in Jerusalem. The females were enslaved by the victorious Romans.

The Jewish men who survived the destruction lived on in the land, converting to Christianity and then Islam and eventually becoming the people we know today as Palestinians, who are also a mixed race.

These mixed Idumean-Israelites living in Judea were the people whom Jesus claimed in Revelation 3:9  were of the “synagogue of Satan” and were not really Jews.

To be clear, in saying this, Jesus was not referring to the Idumean ethnic heritage.

The Idumeans were mixed with the native Israelites around them, so that they were actually partly descended from the northern Israelite tribes that had been conquered by the Assyrians in the 8th century BC (722 BC) and then dispersed in Assyria, Babylon, and in Israel and Judea themselves.

Credit: keyway.ca

Map Of The Assyrian Empire

These dispersed tribes were the so-called Lost Tribes.

So the Idumeans too probably had some Israelite or even Judean blood in them.

But Jesus was really talking about the beliefs of the Idumean converts, not their genes.

They followed a mixture of the pure faith taught by Moses and the Prophets with the pagan beliefs of the Canaanites and Hittites, with whom the Edomites, since the days of Esau, had intermarried.

The Idumean (Edomite) converts to Israelite faith were indeed descended from Abraham, as they claimed.

But they were not – and never had been –  descendants of Judah (Judahites).

Judahite is one of the two origins of the abbreviated term, “Jew.”

The other is Judean.

The Idumeans/Edomites  did not follow Jewish customs fully but added pagan beliefs.

The semi-pagan mixed Idumean (Edomite)-Israelites in Judea, along with other Idumean-Israelites in the surrounding regions and in the diaspora in Babylon and in Egypt, supposedly emigrated all over the Middle East and Europe (Spain, Italy) in the centuries immediately after Christ.

Some claim this was because the Romans dispersed them. But such dispersal was not characteristic of the Romans, who usually left the conquered people to till the soil.

More likely, the Jews who intermarried with European women were traders and might themselves be Levantine converts, rather than original Israelites.

Most of the maternal stock of current Sephardic Jews is European, not Near Eastern, and dates back to this Jewish diaspora.

As noted earlier, Jewishness is traced through the maternal line and since these diaspora Jews became what we call Sephardic Jews, they too, by Jewish law, are not Jews.

Also, as with the Ashkenazy, but even more so, the Sephardim took with them the pagan lore of Babylon and Egypt, which contradicted the Torah teachings of the Israelites.

It was a religion replete with astrology, gnosticism, ritual practices, esoteric texts, angelology and demonology.


The Hebrew Bible of the Ashkenazy and Sephardic Jews is called TaNaKh  and it includes the Law, the Prophets, and other writings.

But these are not held in as much veneration as the interpretations of the TaNaKh by the Jewish sages (Rabbis).

The Rabbinical interpretations were codified in the centuries after 200 AD and form the written text (Talmud) of what in Jesus’ time was still oral and referred to as the Tradition of the Elders.


Jesus felt that the Elders had subverted the original faith in Yahweh with a ritualistic, formulaic legalism that killed the spirit of true faith. He severely denounced it.

But, the current crop of Ashkenazy Jews are most likely unrelated to the original Idumean-Israelite Judeans whom Jesus denounced.

So it is quite incorrect to claim that animosity by non-Jews toward the Ashkenazy leadership today (the Rothschild financial cabal) has anything whatsoever to do with the enmity between the Idumean-Israelite Judeans and Jesus.

In short, the accusation of the Gospels as the originator of current “anti-Semitism” is bogus – an anti-Christian slander.

The current Jews are not the descendants of the Israelite-Idumean mixture whom Jesus cursed.

They were destroyed in 70 AD utterly.

Moreover, the genealogical records necessary to prove genetic descent from any of the tribes of Israel, were destroyed with the Temple at the time.

Without these, any subsequent claims of descent are either tenuous or completely specious.

Thus, what Jesus said then to the Judeans and Judahites of his time does not and can not automatically attach to the Ashkenazy and Sephardim today, on the grounds of genetic descent.

Current Jews are mostly a Euro-Turko-Mongolic people, with, at most (although not certainly), some small admixture of the original Israelite blood.

This is true also of the Sephardic Jews, who have a better claim to a partial descent from the Idumean-Israelite mixture.

They too cannot be blamed for deicide, as it used to be called.

According to the Gospel, in the final destruction of Jerusalem, all of Jesus’ enemies during his ministry were judged for the blood they had shed in their own life-times.

They were judged as well for the blood-shed of all past history, from the archetypal crime of Abel’s murder onward.

That chapter in history was closed on the cross.

It is finished, as Jesus said.

Neither the current Ashkenazy Jews nor the current Sephardic Jews have anything to do with it.

But, in so far as they adopt attitudes and beliefs that resemble that of the Pharisees, they, as well as all other people of any or no faith, are culpable for their own wrong beliefs and actions.

In brief, there is very little or no genetic descent of current Jews from the ancient Idumean-Israelites who persecuted Jesus.

There is only the possibility of  spiritual descent.

And that possibility is shared equally by Jews, Christians, Muslims, Hindus and anyone else who hurls curses at Jesus Christ.

Spiritual descent is a matter of choice and belief.

It comes about when people adopt the attitudes and beliefs of the Pharisaic persecutors of Jesus.


The writings of the Elders were codified in the Talmud in 200 AD and 500 AD, and thereafter, and to them were added, in the later middle ages, texts like the Zohar and Kabbalah.

The Talmud, Zohar, and Kabbalah explicate, in sometimes mystic, sometimes racial, sometimes moral or legal terms, the TaNaKh, formulated in writing some thousand years earlier (approximately 500 BC) by the Hebrew-speaking people that constituted the ancient nation called Israel.

The Talmud, Zohar, and Kabbalah also add completely new teachings, esoterica, occult texts, and mysticism, some of which is deeply antagonistic to the austere spirit of the Torah.

Some of the Talmud’s and Kabbalah’s teachings are truly amoral and perverse.

Others are profoundly wise and could have been spoken by Jesus himself.

The ancients Israelites included the Judeans (Israelite tribes living in Judea – descended from Judah and Benjamin) and the northern tribes.

The twelve tribes included descendants of Judah (Judahites) as well as descendants of the other eleven sons of Israel/Jacob – Reuben, Naphtali, Dan, Manasseh etc.

Is any of this Hebrew stock to be found among contemporary Jews?

Surely there could be some genetic ties, or at least similarities, between both groups.

But, equally surely, these genetic markings are mingled with the genetic markers of many other groups, because of centuries of intermarriage.

Race-mixing was always in the history of the Israelites.


Esau, the brother of Jacob in Genesis, who is the forefather of the nation of Israel, intermarried with the pagan Hittites.

But, so did Jacob’s own descendants, the Israelites.

So did the sons of Judah or Judahites (Jews, in short form).

Ruth, the ancestress of  Jesus, belonged to the tribe of Moabites, one of the deadliest enemies of the Israelites and Judahites.


Given this history, how can anyone claim that Israelite or Judahite is a term for a pure genetic stock?

Yet they do.

Many naive Jewish people today – and Christian dupes –  consider modern Jews both a pure ethnicity and a unique religion.

A people set apart and a culture set apart.

The Bible states otherwise.

Abraham and Isaac were counted as righteous, long before Jacob was called Israel and long before Judah sired Judahites and before Israelites ever set foot in Judea.

Righteousness preceded both Israel and Judea, both Judah and the Judahites.

The seed of Abraham in whom the whole world was blessed was not any supposed Master Race of Israelites/Jews, with genetic superiority to the rest of mankind.

This is a toxic carnal and ethnocentric revision of the Hebrew scriptures.

The blessed seed (singular) of Abraham was not a people, but a person – a unique prophet, like Moses; the uniquely begotten and uniquely sacrificed “son” of God, like Isaac.

The blessed seed was Jesus, to whom all nations were to be gathered, according to the divine covenant with Abraham.

As a matter of record, people of all nations have been gathered into belief in Jesus.

The moral reign of Jesus Christ is visible all around us, despite all the blood-shed and mayhem wrought by those who would erase God from the history of man.

The Good Shepherd who gave his life for his flock is a figure beloved all over the world. 

Christ’s moral reign does not offend anyone but reprobates, no matter what their religion.

Muslims and Hindus accept Jesus as a divine messenger.

Righteous Jews have seen through the calumnies of the Rabbinate and accepted Christ’s moral status.

But there is no people in the world that would accept without a fight the divine right of a Master Race of Jews to rule as overlords of the earth.





Suckers For Israel: The Pentecostal Bonanza

Blogger Charles Sullivan describes how Israel is reaping financial support from the massive growth of the world-wide (and, in Orthodox Christianity’s eye, heretical) Pentecostal movement:

Many people do not realize that Pentecostalism is the fastest growing Christian religion in the world with an estimated 497 million followers world-wide and expected to top 1 billion by 2025(1) This is a sharp contrast to the 13 million people who call themselves fundamentalists.

It hasn’t gone unnoticed in Israel, who have wanted their share of this Pentecostal growth in their country. They see it as a serious economic contributor and a powerful political alliance.

Pentecostalists have inherited and modernized the fundamentalist end-time system that believes the end of the world will come with the establishment of Israel as a geographical entity, with borders very similar to what was outlined in the Bible, the return of the Jews from exile, and Armageddon — a final war between Israel and all its enemies.

Persons of Jewish heritage that support the formation and expansion of Israel on religious grounds are standardly called Zionists. Most media outlets define Christians who align with the Zionist movement as Christian Zionists. The greater Evangelical community, Pentecostals in particular, do not use the term themselves. The majority, if asked directly if they are Christian Zionists, would not even know what the speaker is talking about and would categorically say no, though the overwhelming majority do fit within the definition. Some Pentecostals may even feel insulted with them being identified this way. Most would simply think they are following what the Bible tells them to do.

Pentecostalism has a major doctrinal difference over fundamentalism that is important to understand: it promotes personal involvement rather than being a third party observer.

This may seem trivial, but it has serious ramifications.

The Fundamentalists who previously monopolized the Evangelical perspective on Israel do not believe Christians can personally intervene in the events and circumstances that will ultimately unfold into the end of the world. Their support is done en-masse with visible spokespersons such as Hal Lindsey, Bob Jones or John Walvoord.

Pentecostals understand the future events from a prophetic perspective. Prophetic can mean God speaking directly to a person to complete an objective. The cause does not necessarily need to be rational, predictable or major.

This could be a financial commitment, planting trees, political involvement, volunteering, helping in immigration, all night prayer vigils, fasting, raising specialized cattle, evangelism, etc.

For example, some have heard God call them to help Jews return to the Holy Land. One of the better known Christian organizations, Ebenezer Emergency Fund’s Operation Exodus, was started by a prophetic vision to the South African Steve Lightle.(2)

Dreams facilitate some to unusual acts. Like Bruce Balfour, a Canadian affiliated with the pentecostal based Maranatha Evangelistic Association. He believed he was called of God in dreams to plant trees in Lebanon.(3)

Others feel called to expedite God’s plan for the end. Clyde Lott, a cattle rancher and an ordained National Pentecostal Assemblies of Jesus Christ Minister in the United States, had an epiphany from God to raise red heifers according to Old Testament requirements for the new Temple.(4)

It can be financial giving. Maoz Israel Ministries — a messianic Jewish ministry in Israel relates on their website about a 9 year old boy, Christian, who believed God had called him to send his $10.00 of birthday money for Israel.(5) This may not seem like much, but this is a grassroots event that Christians are doing all over the world. One Jewish fundraiser, Yechiel Eckstein, has raised over $250 million dollars from roughly 400,000 Christian donors(6) alone. This market is seen as a veritable gold mine by the Israeli Government.

Some may feel inspired to accelerate armageddon. In 1969, Dennis Michael Rohan, an Australian sheep shearer and Pentecostalist, “acting upon divine instructions”(7) attempted to and almost succeeded in burning down the Al-Aksa Mosque situated on the Temple Mount.(8)

The call to prayer for Israel is big with Pentecostals. Robert Stearns, who grew up in an Assemblies of God Church, the world’s largest pentecostal denomination, helped organize the annual Day of Prayer for the Peace of Jerusalem, “instituted with the endorsement of hundreds of Christian leaders from around the world, representing tens of millions of Christians”.(9) It is arguably the biggest annual protestant rite held in the world.”

Now all we need to know is how these Pentecostal groups were actually conceived and if Zionists were instrumental in their birthing, just as they were with the Jehovah’s Witnesses.


“Conservative” Catholic Papers Fire Pope Critics

First Things,” a conservative Catholic paper, has fired Maureen Mullarkey for criticizing Pope Francis, going to the extent of publicly ridiculing her conservative views.

Other supposedly conservative Catholic papers have also fired Pope Francis detractors:

Adam Shaw, a Fox news website editor, was fired from a Catholic News Service gig.

The National Catholic Register has fired Patrick Archbold, using liberal talking-points to make its case.

Why are all these “conservative” Catholics suddenly so eager to echo the Liberal party-line?

Were they ever real conservatives?

Are they under pressure from bigger bosses?

Are we only now finding out the extent of the subversion and infiltration of conservative Catholic circles at the behest of the ruling cabal?

As a non-Catholic, I can only feel intensely sorry for traditionalists of that faith.

And more than ever I am thankful that I have never  put all my faith “in princes nor in the son of man,” no, not even (or, maybe, especially) when they claim to speak infallibly.


I really do not have a major problem with the content of most of what Pope Francis has said publicly (from urging people to care about the poor, to supporting refugees, to asking us to care about the environment).

What I don’t like is the overwhelming priority he has given to these social issues over reaffirming the Church’s teachings on the family and on sexuality….a reaffirmation that is much more needed than the repetition of concerns voiced often enough by political groups.

Even Francis’ social teaching is marred by his ignorance of economic science and his partisanship on man-made global warming.

And all of his exhortations ring hollow when you realize how closely they follow the globalist agenda that is pushed by the intelligence agencies.


Homosexuality At Center Of Upcoming Synod

A homosexual priest grabs the lime-light just before an important Roman Catholic synod, led by Pope Francis, focusing on how divorced and remarried people, people living together without marriage, and homosexuals, should be treated in the Church:

 Pope Francis is celebrating Mass at St Peter’s Basilica in the Vatican, at the start of a synod of Roman Catholic bishops focusing on family issues.

The run-up was dominated by a row over a Vatican priest who on Saturday announced he was in a gay relationship.

Poland-born Krzysztof Charamsa said he wanted to challenge the Church’s “backward” attitude to homosexuality.

He was later dismissed from his post at the Vatican’s office in charge of guarding Roman Catholic doctrine.

A Vatican spokesman said Monsignor Charamsa’s decision to give interviews on the eve of the synod was “grave and irresponsible” and would put Pope Francis under “undue media pressure”

In an interview with the Corriere Della Sera newspaper, the 43-year-old priest said: “It’s time the Church opened its eyes and realised that offering gay believers total abstinence from a life of love is inhuman.”

The controversy has set the scene for what some fear could be a fractious three weeks, says BBC religious affairs correspondent Caroline Wyatt.”

What is so bizarre about Msgr. Charasma’s claim about “inhumanity” is that millions of heterosexual people have accepted the Church’s teaching on the subject without difficulty.

Millions of single women and men who weren’t able to find a spouse have led celibate lives contentedly.

What’s more, millions of couples, who do not have sex  either because of illness or choice, have led abstinent lives, without complaining about  “inhumanity.”

Christianity doesn’t forbid anyone from loving anyone else.

David loved Jonathan very deeply.

Same sex devotion is not only not condemned, it occupies  plenty of space in the Bible.

There’s  Ruth’s love for her mother-in-law, Naomi. There’s Jesus’ love for John. 

But devotion and sexual desire are two different things.

The Bible doesn’t object to same-sex love; it objects to same sex…sex.

It also objects to many other kinds of sex – between unmarried men and women; between men and women married to other people; between people who have divorced other people; between parents and their children of any age; between brothers and sisters of any age; between adults and minors; between minors; between the living and the dead; between human beings and animals; between groups of human beings; between people consecrated to abstinence….

All these millions of people have managed to refrain from sex in all these forbidden situations,  for centuries, without suffering inhumanly…or even making it an issue.

They’ve also managed to fill their lives with love.

Love is not sex and conflating the two produces the propaganda of the homosexual activists.

Thus, perhaps, it is not sex, but instruction in semantics, that Monsignor truly needs.

4000 Year Old Vishnu Demolishes Aryan Invasion Theory

From IndiaDivine.org:

A recent news report from Vietnam features an exquisite and very ancient sculpture of Lord Vishnu. According to a press release from the Communist Party of Vietnam’s Central Committee (CPVCC) the Vishnu sculpture is described as “Vishnu stone head from Oc Eo culture, dated back 4,000-3,500 years.” Recently the Government of Vietnam, despite its official Communist doctrine, has developed many programs and projects highlighting Vietnam’s ancient religious heritage. Its scholarly and archeological research and investigations are legitimate and its conclusions are authoritative. This discovery of a 4,000 to 3,500 year old Vishnu sculpture is truly historic and it sheds new light upon our understanding of the history of not only Hinduism but of the entire world.


The fact is there are no other ‘officially’ recognized Vedic artifacts that have been dated back to such an early date. This would make Vietnam home to the world’s most ancient Vedic artifact. While there are indeed many other ancient artifacts that represent the same Deity, they are not presented in the ‘Indic’ tradition and cannot be directly recognized as the Vishnu of the Indic Vaishnava tradition……..

The significance of this discovery cannot be overestimated. The entire history of Hinduism and Vedic culture, as taught is the academic institutions of the world, has been built upon a false construct. According to mainstream academia Vedic ‘religion’ or Hinduism did not exist until the alleged ‘Aryans’ invaded India circa 1500 BC. An even later date is given to Vaishnavism which is speculated to have been derived from animist Sun worship. Yet here we have a highly evolved art form depicting Lord Vishnu in the Far South East region of Asia dated to somewhere between 2000 BC to 1500 BC.

[Vaishnavism, with its repeatedly incarnating “savior” Chrish-na thus predates Christianity by some 2000 years and is older than the date of the writing of the Old Testament. ]

This completely undermines the entire historic timeline developed by mainstream academia in regards to the development of both Vedic/Hindu civilization and Indian history.

The region of modern India has always been the epicenter of High Vedic/Hindu Civilization and culture. No one anywhere has ever suggested the region of modern Vietnam to be the origin of Hindu civilization yet it is in Vietnam that we now have the world’s most ancient example of Indic style Vedic Vaishnava art. Thus it stands to reason that if Vedic Vaishnava art, culture and religion flourished 4000 years ago in prehistoric Vietnam it was undoubtedly flourishing in ancient India as well.

Once again science and archeology have confirmed the Vedic conclusion. As the Vedic literature states 5000 years ago India was home to a highly evolved and advanced civilization. This civilization was centered on its sacred traditions. The worship of the Supreme Lord Vishnu, Lord Shiva, Lakshmi and Durga was widespread and in fact spanned the entire globe.

These traditions presented themselves in diverse manners, as seen in modern India, yet among this diversity was a commonality based upon the authority of the Vedic scriptures and traditions. The recognizably Indic forms of the Vedic traditions spanned the globe from the Philippines to the Middle East and Siberia to Australia. Yet the same Divinities were worshiped and the same traditions were practiced throughout the world.

The many recent Vedic discoveries from Vietnam are providing a new and sensational view into the authentic history of the world. Not only this, it presents a challenge to Modern India and its leadership. India is home to many startling and amazing artifacts yet they sit ignored and crumbling. In many cases looters and vandals have destroyed many priceless examples of India’s ancient heritage. India’s leading academics and governing bodies are silent and if they do speak of India’s ancient Hindu heritage it is only to cast doubts and disparage India’s indigenous Vedic culture and Hindu traditions.”

Catholic “Spirit Of Francis” Is Treacle, Not Manna

An excellent piece by Rod Dreher, explaining why he left the Roman Catholic Church and joined the Orthodox:

In 2002, when the clerical-sex-abuse scandal broke nationwide, the full extent of the rot within the church became manifest. All that post-Vatican II happy talk and non-judgmentalism had been a facade concealing what then Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger — later Pope Benedict XVI — would call the “filth” in the church. Many American bishops deployed the priceless Christian language of love and forgiveness in an effort to cover their own foul nakedness in a cloak of cheap grace.

During that excruciating period a decade ago, rage at what I and other journalists uncovered about the church’s corruption pried my ability to believe in Catholic Christianity out of me, like torturers ripping fingernails out with pliers. It wasn’t the crimes that did it as much as the bishops’ unwillingness to repent and the Vatican’s disinterest in holding them to account. If the church’s hierarchy cannot commit itself credibly to justice and mercy to the victims of its own clergy and bishops, I thought, do they really believe in the doctrines they teach?

All this put the moral unseriousness of the American church in a certain light. As the scandal raged, one Ash Wednesday, I attended Mass at my comfortable suburban parish and heard the priest deliver a sermon describing Lent as a time when we should all come to love ourselves more.

If I had to pinpoint a single moment at which I ceased to be a Roman Catholic, it would have been that one. I fought for two more years to hold on, thinking that having the syllogisms from my catechism straight in my head would help me stand firm. But it was useless. By then I was a father, and I did not want to raise my children in a church where sentimentality and self-satisfaction were the point of the Christian life. It wasn’t safe to raise my children in this church, I thought — not because they would be at risk of predators but because the entire ethos of the American church, like the ethos of the decadent post-Christian society in which it lives, is not that we should die to ourselves so that we can live in Christ, as the New Testament demands, but that we should learn to love ourselves more.

Flannery O’Connor, one of my Catholic heroes, famously said, “Push back against the age as hard as it pushes against you. What people don’t realize is how much religion costs. They think faith is a big electric blanket, when of course it is the cross.” American Catholicism was not pushing back against the hostile age at all. Rather, it had become a pushover. God is love was not a proclamation that liberated us captives from our sin and despair but rather a bromide and a platitude that allowed us to believe that and to behave as if our lust, greed, malice and so forth — sins that I struggled with every day — weren’t to be despised and cast out but rather shellacked by a river of treacle.

I finally broke. Losing my Catholic faith was the most painful thing that ever happened to me. Today, as much as I admire Pope Francis and understand the enthusiasm among Catholics for him, his interview makes me realize that the good, if incomplete, work that John Paul II and Benedict XVI did to restore the church after the violence of the revolution stands to be undone. Though I agree with nearly everything the Pope said last week in his interview and cheer inwardly when he chastises rigorist knotheads who would deny the healing medicine of the church to anyone, I fear his merciful words will be received not as love but license. The “spirit of Pope Francis” will replace the “spirit of Vatican II” as the rationalization people will use to ignore the difficult teachings of the faith. If so, this Pope will turn out to be like his predecessor John XXIII: a dear man, but a tragic figure……

There is, of course, no such thing as the perfect church, but in Orthodoxy, which radically resists the moralistic therapeutic deism that characterizes so much American Christianity, I found a soul-healing balance. In my Russian Orthodox country mission parish this past Sunday, the priest preached about love, joy, repentance and forgiveness — in all its dimensions. Addressing parents in the congregation, he exhorted us to be merciful, kind and forgiving toward our children. But he also warned against thinking of love as giving our children what they want as opposed to what they need.“Giving them what they want may make it easier for us,” he said, “but we must love our children enough to teach them the hard lessons and compel them toward the good.”

Martyrdom At Jacob’s Well

The martyrdom in 1979 of Father Philoumenos at the monastery of Jacob’s Well near ancient Samaria:

What a good shepherd he was, more worthy than some of the episcopate! Yet the policies and needs of the patriarchate saw Father Philoumenos assigned to other positions. Whenever Palestinian faithful were scandalized by some unworthy priest, whenever Orthodox neglect or European money drove the faithful to wonder whether they would not receive better pastoral care from Uniates, it was Father Philoumenos that the Patriarch of Jerusalem sent as the true defender of the Faith, a man of more than blameless life, a man from whom no one could even imagine any immodest or improper word, a man whose faith and integrity were a model for all………

Three things were most remarkable about the blessed martyr. The first might have been partly from nature, but assuredly aided by Grace: this was his soft sweet voice, which I can still hear today. The second was a meticulous fidelity to small things, but specifically to the Divine Service. He never omitted one word of any day’s service. When we were alone in some remote monastery, particularly for Matins, he slowly and carefully chanted each word of every psalm and canon. Not even at the Monastery of St. Sabba was the reading done so well. But when there were pilgrims for the Divine Liturgy and vespers, he made the usual abridgements lest the service be too long and some be tempted to leave. Later on, privately, he would read every word that had not been chanted in the church. Those who stayed with him for some time saw the copies of the menaion, horologion, synaxarion, etc. and noticed that the markers were always in place and the volumes never dusty, which earned the Divine Promise, Well done thou good and faithful servant, because thou hast been faithful over little things, I will set thee over great things Enter thou into the joy of the Lord (Matt. 25:21).

Third, and as unobtrusive, almost secret, was his humility. What a perfect patriarch he would have made, and were the election by the Palestinian faith fill he might well have been. Instead, God gave him an eternal crown and throne among the elders who offer incense before the throne of the Lamb (Rev. 5:8)……..

The glorious martyrdom of this servant of God came to pass in November,1979. The week before, a group of fanatical Zionists came to the monastery at Jacob’s Well, claiming it as a Jewish holy place and demanding that all crosses and icons be removed. Of course, our father pointed out that the floor upon which they were standing had been built by Emperor Constantine before 331 A.D. and had served as an Orthodox Christian holy place for sixteen centuries before the Israeli State was created, and had been in Samaritan hands eight centuries before that, (The rest of the original church had been destroyed by the invasion of the Shah Khosran Parvis in the seventh century, at which time the Jews had massacred all the Christians of Jerusalem.) The group left with threats, insults and obscenities of the kind which local Christians suffer regularly. After a few days, on November 16/29, during a torrential downpour, a group broke into the monastery; the saint had already put on his epitrachelion for Vespers. The piecemeal chopping of the three fingers with which he made the Sign of the Cross showed that he was tortured in an attempt to make him deny his Orthodox Christian Faith. His face was cloven in the form of the Cross. The church and holy things were all defiled. No one was ever arrested.

His body was buried on Mt. Zion, and when it was exhumed after four years, as is customary, It was found to be substantially incorrupt…”

Correction: The Israeli government did finally arrest a mentally disturbed Jewish man, who was not a settler, for this and other crimes. However, nothing was done about the dozens of other people who’d called and made violent threats for weeks to the Archimandrite, before his murder.

Orthodox View Of Catholic Dogmas

A list of the main doctrinal differences between the Orthodox Church and the Roman Catholic are given in a piece cautioning against unwise one-world ecumenism:

1. The Eastern Orthodox reject the Roman Catholic notion of purgatory (Ware, T. The Orthodox Church. Penguin Books, London, 1997, p.p. 255 and Aghiorgoussis, Maximos. The Dogmatic Tradition of the Orthodox Church. Copyright:  © 1990-1996. http://www.goarch.org/en/ourfaith/articles/article8038.asp 08/18/07).

2. The Eastern Orthodox number the ten commandments as they originally were (Mastrantonis, G. The Ten Commandments. Copyright:  © 1990-1996 Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America. http://www.goarch.org/en/ourfaith/articles/article7115.asp 05/14/07) and not as the Roman Catholics number them.  Those of Rome combine the first two, even though that is not what those such as Clement of Alexander (2nd century) did (Clement of Alexandria. Stromata, Book VI).

3. The Eastern Orthodox believe in baptism by immersion (Ware, p. 278). The Roman Catholics usually employ sprinkling.

4. Most of the Eastern Orthodox (presuming no abortive devices are used), as do most others, believe in “the responsible use of contraception within marriage” (Ware, p.296 and Harakis S. The Stand of the Orthodox Church on Controversial Issues. http://www.goarch.org/en/ourfaith/articles/article7101.asp 8/20/05). The Roman Catholic position seems to be much more limited.

5. The Eastern Orthodox reject “the dogma of the immaculate conception of the Virgin” (Clendenin D.B. ed. Eastern Orthodox Theology, 2nd ed. Baker Academic, 2003, p.67).  That is a Roman Catholic dogma (Ott L.  Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma.  Translated into English by James Bastible. Nihil Obstat: Jeremiah J. O’Sullivan.  Imprimatur + Cornelius, 7 October 1954.  Reprint TAN Books, Rockford (IL), 1974, pp. 199-202).

6. The Eastern Orthodox teach that presbyters (which they call “priests,” but we in the Church of God) tend to call “ministers” or “elders”) can be married (Damaskinos Papandreou, Orthodox Metropolitan of Switzerland. The Orthodox Churches and Priestly Celibacy. http://www.orthodoxresearchinstitute.org/articles/misc/damaskinos_celibacy.htm viewed 02/04/08). The Roman Church requires celibacy for all presbyters, even though that was not its original position (Fortesque A. Transcribed by Marie Jutras. Eastern Monasticism. The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume X. Copyright © 1911 by Robert Appleton Company. Online Edition Copyright © 2003 by K. Knight. Nihil Obstat, October 1, 1911. Remy Lafort, S.T.D., Censor. Imprimatur. +John Cardinal Farley, Archbishop of New York).

7. The Eastern Orthodox, similar to the Church of God, teach that, “Christians must always be ‘People of the Book’ “ (Ware, p.199). Yet, throughout history, the Church of Rome has tended to place more emphasis on the Living Magisterium and non-biblical sources for much of its doctrines.

8. The Eastern Orthodox do not observe Ash Wednesday.  The Church of Rome admits that it added this observance in the Middle Ages (Thurston, Herbert. “Ash Wednesday.” The Catholic Encyclopedia. Vol. 1. Nihil Obstat. March 1, 1907. Remy Lafort, S.T.D., Censor. Imprimatur. +John Cardinal Farley, Archbishop of New York. New York: Robert Appleton Company, 1907. 4 May 2009 ).

9. The Orthodox do not believe in the concept of “papal infallibility.” That concept became a dogma for the Church of Rome in the 19th century (at Vatican I) (McBrien, Richard P. Lives of the Popes: The Pontiffs from St. Peter to Benedict XVI. Harper, San Francisco, 2005 updated ed., pp. 20-22).

10. Many (though not all) of the Eastern Orthodox, like the Church of God, believe that God has a plan of salvation that can occur at the time of the final judgment. (Ware, p.255).  The Roman Church rejects the idea that salvation can be available after the first death and this has been clearly stated by Pope Benedict (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1021. Imprimi Potest + Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger. Doubleday, New York, 1994, p. 153).

11. The Roman Catholic view of eternal torment is rejected by the The Eastern Orthodox (Ware, p. 262).

12. Neither the Orthodox nor Protestants believe that the jurisdiction of Rome has any real bearing on apostolic succession.

It perhaps should be pointed out that the Orthodox, who generally make less pronouncements than the Vatican tends to, condemned the papacy as a major heresy in 1848:

” 2. Hence have arisen manifold and monstrous heresies which the Catholic Church, even from her infancy, has been forced to combat with the panoply of God, and ‘ the sword of the Spirit, which is the Word of God,’ and has triumphed over all unto this day, and will triumph to the end, ever shining forth brighter and stronger after the struggle.

” 3. Of these heresies some have altogether perished, some are in their decline, but others nourish more or less, until the time of their overthrow, when, being struck with the lightning of the anathema of of the seven (Ecumenical Synods, they become extinct, even though they last for a thousand years; for the orthodoxy of the Catholic Apostolic Church, as inspired by the living Word of God, alone endures for ever, according to the infallible promise of our Lord…—Matt, xviii. 18.

” 4. Of these heresies widely-diffused was formerly Arianism, and now is the Papacy, which, though still flourishing, shall, like the former, pass away and be cast down, and a great voice from Heaven shall cry, ‘ It is cast down.’—Rev. xii. 10…

” 10. Every one of our brethren and children in Christ clearly perceives that the words of the present Bishop of Rome, like those of his anti-synodical predecessors, are not words of peace and compassion, as he says, but of deceit and quibbling, tending to self-aggrandisement; but the orthodox will not be beguiled therewith, for the Word of the Lord is sure—’ A stranger will they not follow, but will flee from him, for they know not the voice of strangers.’

(Encyclical Letter of the Eastern Orthodox, 1848. As cited in The Benares magazine, No. 31, 1851. W.H. Haycock, 1851. Original from Oxford University Digitized, Nov 24, 2006, pp. 370-371,373)

Perhaps it should be mentioned that “Rev. xii. 10” teaches about the “accuser of the brethren” (a reference to Satan in verse 9) being cast down. Thus the Orthodox officially seem to have condemned the papacy as Satan the devil.

Not only does the Orthodox Church consider the institution of the Papacy and the doctrine of Papal infallibility heretical, it considers many – not all – of the instances of stigmata and visions exhibited by Catholic saints to be evidence not of sanctity but of  delusion and vainglory, especially when they are sought out deliberately.

Although I wouldn’t go so far as to call such displays Satanic, I agree that more than a few are the results of a misguided effort of will, very similar to the efforts of some yogis and ascetics in Hinduism and similarly lacking in moral content, while sometimes providing grave opportunities for moral depravity.

Asceticism (what is called tapas in India) and mental focus can lead to psychosomatic symptoms (markings on the skin, sensations) as well as psychic abilities – siddhis -(levitation, bilocation) of all kinds, but whether this is always a saintly thing, or even good, is the question.

In many cases (not all), the Orthodox answer, “no,” is the correct one.

The heart, as the Bible points out, is endlessly self-deceiving.



Is Pope Francis Practicing Talmudism Covertly?

Why did Pope Francis mention Moses and not Jesus in his addresses to the White House and the UN?

Is it because he wanted to cite a figure that would not “offend”?

But Muslims venerate Jesus, even if they do not regard him as the Son of God. They would not be offended.

It follows that Francis avoided Jesus, to avoid giving offense to religious Jews.

Historically, many – but not all – Jews have regarded Jesus as a blasphemer and apostate.

But, if interfaith peace is the goal, why not mention Abraham, who is the fountain-head of all three faiths?

Why Moses?

The answer lies in looking at Jewish texts.

Moses is held up as the greatest of the prophets by Maimonides, one of the most authoritative of Jewish rabbis and the codifier of the Shloshah Asar Ikkarim (“Thirteen Fundamental Principles”), a distillation of the Taryag mitzvoth (613 regulations) binding on orthodox Jews.

From Chabad.org:

1. Belief in the existence of the Creator, who is perfect in every manner of existence and is the Primary Cause of all that exists.

2. The belief in G-d‘s absolute and unparalleled unity.

This would conflict with the doctrine of the Trinity in orthodox Christianity – that is why Francis praises Chagall’s White Crucifixion – because it effaces the divine Jesus and substitutes the human Jewish rabbi, thereby erasing the core of Christianity.]

3. The belief in G-d’s non-corporeality, nor that He will be affected by any physical occurrences, such as movement, or rest, or dwelling.

[Again, this conflicts with the doctrine of the Incarnation most fundamentally.]

4. The belief in G-d’s eternity.

5. The imperative to worship G-d exclusively and no foreign false gods.

[Maimonides and many great Rabbis saw Jesus as a heretic, sorcerer, and blasphemer.]

6. The belief that G-d communicates with man through prophecy.

The belief in the primacy of the prophecy of Moses our teacher

[This diminishes Jesus, who is superior to all the prophets, according to Christian teaching.]

8. The belief in the divine origin of the Torah.

9. The belief in the immutability of the Torah.

[Jesus taught that the Mosaic law was given because of the degradation of the people and that it did not fully reflect God’s law, as his perfection of it did.]

10. The belief in G-d’s omniscience and providence.

11. The belief in divine reward and retribution.

12. The belief in the arrival of the Messiah and the messianic era.

[Christians believe that the Messiah has already arrived. As for the Messianic era, some Christians regard this as heresy and others as true.]

13. The belief in the resurrection of the dead.


Pope Francis: Public Heresy

Paragraph 247 Pope Francis’ exhortation Evangelii Gaudium:

[I have underlined the passages containing explicit heresies.]

247. We hold the Jewish people in special regard because their covenant with God has never been revoked, for “the gifts and the call of God are irrevocable” (Rom 11:29).

The Church, which shares with Jews an important part of the sacred Scriptures, looks upon the people of the covenant and their faith as one of the sacred roots of her own Christian identity (cf. Rom 11:16-18).

As Christians, we cannot consider Judaism as a foreign religion; nor do we include the Jews among those called to turn from idols and to serve the true God (cf. 1 Thes 1:9).”

Is This Blog Anti-Semitic?

By the standards of the ADL (the Anti-Defamation League), yes, of course.

I think I subscribe to at least half of the beliefs they state qualify one as anti-Semitic:

I think that Jews are disproportionately represented in the media and government; that they wield too much unaccountable power for their numbers and that this fact is dangerous for the rest of society….

[…But I also believe that Jews are generally a productive and capable people.]

I believe – from the evidence – that Jews tend to be loyal before anything else to the Jewish ethno-state, even when they might not be pro-Israel.

[However, I also understand why that is so – trauma-conditioning orchestrated by the powers-that-be.]

As a Christian, I try not to hate any group of people.

But “loving your enemies” is not an instruction to acquire certain sentiments against your will.

It has nothing to do with superficial sentiment.

It is an instruction to treat others mercifully and not merely justly, as you would wish to be treated..

It is an instruction not to be vengeful and descend to the level of your enemies.

In that spirit, I do not denigrate nor regard as demonic or Satanic, Jewish religious faith, even if Jews do not return the favor.

[I do abhor certain practices and beliefs in Judaism, as I also do certain practices in other religions, including certain Christian heresies.]

However, I don’t see any instruction in the Gospel to laugh away behaviors that are detestable or to call one’s open enemies “one’s friends” or to claim that black is white and up is down.

If a Jew were accused unjustly, I would stand up for him, even though I knew the favor might not be returned.

If a Jew were being attacked physically, I would help him, even though I might not be able to count on the same help in return.

On this blog I have defended several neoconservative Jews like Donald Sterling, whose beliefs are anathema to me.

That is how I interpret “love your enemies.”

Would I go out of my way to befriend Jews personally?

Honestly, no.

I don’t know many Jews as friends and those I’ve known and liked were singularly unlike the majority of their co-ethnics, being artists or otherwise exceptional individuals.

Even so, there was a silent area of potential conflict that prevented me from getting too close.

That area was Christianity..or, rather, Jesus Christ.

The Psalms asks us not to sit in the seat of the scornful.

The Gospel repeats that message.

What about conservative Jews who are not disrespectful of Christianity?

Certainly, there are many of those. But they are respectful only of Zionist Christianity – that is, of Christianity that puts ethnic Jews and their tribalism at the center of the faith.

In the case of liberal Jews, their lack of  exceptional hostility to Christianity is only part of their general disbelief in all religion.

Of real Christianity, they are just as uncomprehending as the openly hostile Kabbalists, and, worse, by their incomprehension, they allow themselves to be used as tools by the powerful Kabbalists.

In fact, in my view, the hostile religious Jews, are to be preferred.

They have at least understood that man as he is, natural man, doesn’t cut it.

Blow hot or blow cold, says the Gospel.

There is no hope for the luke-warm.

My problem with Jews [as they are called today, a Euro-Turco-Mongolic people] is that they are not enough Jews [in the sense of Torah followers or Yahwists].


Some Thoughts On Anti-Christian Speech

Thinking about the power elite’s incessant anti-Christian imagery and rhetoric, both covert and explicit, I had some thoughts about how Christians should react to it.

And my thoughts were these:

Anti-Christian speech should make Christians realize how powerful and destructive words can be.

And it should make us recall the powerful and destructive ways in which Christianity itself was used to destroy other people’s beliefs and gods.

Sometimes, this was to the good – when the targets were temple prostitution and child-sacrifice, for instance.

But sometimes, the destructiveness was unwarranted- as when Muslim or Hindu or Jewish prayer is denounced by some Christians as inherently demonic.

So how should Christians react to anti-Christian speech?

Well, Jesus said that all manner of blasphemies by men against the Son of Man (Jesus) would be forgiven them.

But blasphemies against the Holy Spirit would not.

For many powerful Jews and Jewish sympathizers, it seems to be cathartic to denigrate Jesus.

So be it.

Jesus was not injured by such insults then..and he is not injured now. And Christians need not be more offended than Jesus.

But it is a different thing when what is good in the Church is inverted. 

Cursing Jesus Christ is one thing.

Calling what is good evil is quite another.





Pope Francis Praises Blasphemous Painting


Added: I want to correct the last paragraph of this post.

I now read that Chagall grew up in a religious Hasidic family, so he must have understood exactly what he was doing.

As for Francis, I should add that there is the possibility that he is being manipulated by more powerful people behind him….the crony-capitalist Jewish elites that use redistributionist rhetoric to con the gullible public. The support for the “climate-control” agenda suggests that Francis is not so much a leftist as an opportunistic “liberal” of the sort that has the backing of George Soros and the CIA.

That would account for the enormous media coverage that he gets.


The essence of Christianity is but the negation of the right of Judaism to exist…. The figure of Jesus is the figure of the universal enemy of Judaism, the eliminator and destructor of Jewish law [torat yisrael]. Thus, this figure was abhorred and despised in the eyes of many Jews with Jewish consciousness throughout the generations, and I share this despise and abomination”

—  Yeshayahu Leibowitz

[Lila: Of course, I do not accept that Christianity is the negation of Judaism…by which I mean Biblical Yahwism.

The Gospel, said Jesus, was the fulfillment of the Law (of Yahweh).

Yahweh of the Old Testament is the same merciful but righteous God as the one in the New Testament, although the OT scriptures have many misinterpretations, additions, alterations and corruptions that obscure that fact.]

Pope Francis’s fondness for the paintings of Marc Chagall has caught the attention of the media.


In interviews with Francesca Ambrogetti and Sergio Rubin for the 2010 biography “ El Jesuita ,” Pope Francis identified “White Crucifixion,” which depicts a Jewish Jesus, wearing a tallit instead of a loincloth, as his favorite work of art. “He likes us, he really does,” Tweeted Miriam Shaviv , a columnist for Britain’s Jewish Chronicle, about the pope.

But there’s more to the painting than “owning” Jesus as a Jew.

[Lila: Jesus was an Israelite, but not a Jew in the modern sense, obviously.

In the classical sense, there is no “Jew,” as such. That is a propagandist coinage invented to conflate the post-Temple (Talmudic) beliefs of a contemporary mixed-race people of Middle-Eastern and European descent with the Torah faith (Yahwism) of a Semitic people of thousands of years ago.

In Biblical times, there was only the Judean (a resident of Judea) and the Judahite (descendant of Judah).

Now, Jesus was not a descendant of Judah on his mother’s side (despite the genealogies in Matthew and Luke) and since he was only grafted on to Joseph, he could not have descended genetically from him either.

Finally, he was a resident of Galilee, not Judea, although he did teach in Judea. He was an Israelite, a Galilean, and, most likely, a Levite, descended from Aaron.

Israelite is not the same thing as Israeli. The latter word is often inserted into modern Bibles to conflate the two in the minds of unsuspecting readers, in order to further Zionist goals.]

Surrounding Jesus, we see a synagogue, a Torah scroll and a shtetl burning, as armed men march carrying red flags. And in the bottom-right corner, the Wandering Jew, donning a blue cap and a green coat, lugs a sack as he trudges past the smoking Torah.

That the chief executive of the Catholic Church has an affinity for a painting that was created by a Russian Jewish artist and also includes the symbol of the eternal wanderer, who was punished for abusing Jesus and became the pretext for centuries of anti-Semitism, is drawing a range of reactions.”

Forward is a Jewish paper.
The creator of White Crucifixion is the famous Russian Jewish painter, Marc Chagall.
For insight into what is really going on in Francis’ public admiration of  White Crucifixion, take a closer look at the painting.
It is not problematic that Jesus’s suffering on the cross is identified with the suffering of Jews.
[Lila: I want to reiterate this. Innocent suffering can be rightfully identified with the suffering of Jesus.  There is nothing inherently blasphemous about that.]
It is problematic for Christians that Jesus’ atonement is displaced by collective Jewish suffering.
The displacement is pure Kabbalistic teaching:
Determined to obscure the aptness of the prophesies of the Messiah in the Old Testament to the life of Jesus, the medieval Rabbi Shlomo Yitzchaki (Rashi) came up with the notion that the “suffering servant” the Scriptures describe in Isaiah 53 was not a man at all.
The suffering servant was the Jewish people as a nation.
This Kabbalistic notion has become a mainstream Jewish notion.
Now look at the Chagall  painting close up:
The inscription above Jesus is the word, Yeshu, a variant of  Jesus’ name, used in the Jewish scriptures, the Talmud.
In the Babylonian Talmud (the more authoritative Talmud), Yeshu is mentioned as the one who led Israel into apostasy and was rightfully hanged on the Passover.
He is said to have had five disciples and to have performed sorceries.
Contemporary scholars claim that this and other references to Yeshu are descriptions of someone else, but there is ample historical and other testimony that Yeshu is none other than Jesus.
The name expresses the hostility of post-Temple (post 70 AD) rabbinate to Jesus.
Yeshu is an acronym for Yima  (YE) + Shemo (SH) +  Wezikhro (W)  meaning, May his name and memory be stricken out.
How to reconcile this curse with the depiction of Jesus with tallit and with the turban, characteristic of ancient Jewish rabbis?
The Polish Hasidic tradition, for instance, embraced the notion of a tzaddik (compare with Sanskrit sadhaka) or holy man,  whose being in this world was so close to the divine as to resemble that of incarnate deity.
And it is this rabid anti-Christian, incarnational Hasidism that permeates the painting.
Whether Chagall fully knew what he was doing is debatable, but Francis surely does.

Francis’ public embrace of  this anti- Christian art cannot be accidental.

He is too well-educated and, as we can see from his wildly popular sound-bytes, too well-versed in public relations.


Female Privilege: The Facts

From Debunker.com:

Yet the notion of the American woman as a powerless “victim” is one of the most absurd notions ever foisted upon anyone. American women live, on average, seven years longer than men. They control 86 % of all personal wealth [PARADE Magazine, May 27, 1990], and make up 55% of current college graduates. Women cast 54% of the votes in Presidential elections, so they can hardly claim to be left out of the political decision-making process! They win almost automatically in child custody disputes. Women suffer only 6% of the work-related fatalities (the other 94% are suffered by men). Women are the victim of only about 35% of violent crimes, and only about 25% of all murders, yet because of our society’s exaggerated concern and respect for them, special legislation has been passed to punish “violence against women” as if it were a more heinous crime than “violence against men”. (Feminists claim to want “equality”, and this is an example of what “equality” means to them, i.e., preferential treatment to address their concerns). Two out of every three dollars spent on health care is spent on women, and even if you don’t count pregnancy-related care, women still receive more medical care than men – yet feminists still holler that womens health is being “neglected”, and far too many of us credulously believe them. Of the 25 worst jobs, as ranked by the Jobs Related Almanac based on a combination of salary, stress, security, and physical demands, 24 of them are predominantly, if not almost entirely, male, which might explain why men commit over 80% of all suicides. (Most of these statistics come from The Myth of Male Power by Warren Farrell.)

Now, if it were really the case, as feminists claim, that men have selfishly arranged everything to be wonderful for themselves, absolutely ignoring womens’ legitimate concerns and needs, would the above be true? Of course not. It is much more realistic to suggest that women have cleverly seized the upper hand by pretending to be helplessly trapped below! Looking at the full picture, and not the tiny, distorted one that feminists and those they have duped present, we see a very different picture: The American woman emerges as perhaps the most privileged large group in history, enjoying a never-before- seen level of affluence, power, leisure, and health, supported by the work, discipline, and self-effacing, life-destroying exertions of a group they have bamboozled – their men – into believing their cries of “victimization”. The links below will help you to start finding your way out of the familiar maze of feminist lies.

Click here to read my article, Feminism, The Noble Lie

Take Back the Campus: refuting the Ten Most Common Feminist Myths (which are more accurately termed “lies,” because feminists just keep on promoting them with reckless disregard for truth, no matter how many times the falsehood of these claims is pointed out to them.).

Read my article Bill Clinton and the Gender Gap, in the August, 1996 issue of The Backlash Magazine.

Read Steven Goldberg’sarticle, Feminism Against Science

Pope Mentions Moses, Forgets Jesus

In speeches before the Congress and the UN, the Pope managed to mention Moses, but missed Jesus.

In his address to Congress (Sept. 24) he also managed to call for the global abolition of the death penalty.

This is part of the “seamless garment” approach that ties the contemporary church’s position on capital punishment to its position on abortion.

It was not always so and I’m glad to see that I’m on the same side as Thomas Aquinas on the difference between supporting capital punishment (which I do) and rejecting abortion (which I have done for some time now).

The notion that “respect for life” should compel one to reject both is erroneous.

The taking of life is only a wrong when it is done with intent and in violation of moral (natural) law.

You can kill justly in self-defense, if it will stop someone else killing you or a third-party.

In this too (Anti-) Pope Francis is wrong:

Some say that Bergoglio made a “subtle” reference to abortion when he urged lawmakers to “defend life.” Well, he was not so subtle about the death penalty, was he? …..

…To equate the obligation to defend the life of the innocent preborn with opposition to the death penalty is reprehensible, but is also part and parcel of the late Joseph “Cardinal” Bernardin’s “consistent ethic of life” (the seamless garment) that has long been a bedrock of apostasy among the conciliar “bishops” of the United States of America. Karol Wojtya/John Paul II expressed his own opposition to the imposition of the death penalty in Evangelium Vitae, March 25, 1995, in favor of a false concept of “mercy.”

Nevertheless, the just use of the death penalty, imposed upon malefactors adjudged guilty of heinous crimes after the administration of due process of law, is part of the Natural Law. The Angelic Doctor himself put the matter this way in the Summa Theologica:

I answer that, As stated above (Article 1), it is lawful to kill dumb animals, in so far as they are naturally directed to man’s use, as the imperfect is directed to the perfect. Now every part is directed to the whole, as imperfect to perfect, wherefore every part is naturally for the sake of the whole. For this reason we observe that if the health of the whole body demands the excision of a member, through its being decayed or infectious to the other members, it will be both praiseworthy and advantageous to have it cut away. Now every individual person is compared to the whole community, as part to whole. Therefore if a man be dangerous and infectious to the community, on account of some sin, it is praiseworthy and advantageous that he be killed in order to safeguard the common good, since “a little leaven corrupteth the whole lump” (1 Corinthians 5:6).”


Howard Zinn: Card-Carrying Communist

The Other McCain:

One of the things you can learn from M. Stanton Evans’ recent book on Joe McCarthy’s investigations, Blacklisted by History, is how deeply the FBI had penetrated CPUSA. One reason that McCarthy’s was sometimes unable to publicly substantiate his accusations was that he relied on secret information passed along by the FBI. McCarthy couldn’t identity the source of his information without compromising the FBI’s investigations, so when his critics tried to make it appear that McCarthy’s suspicions were without merit, McCarthy couldn’t simply say, “Here is the FBI file.”

As we see from this file, the FBI had access to the CPUSA mailing list, which is not the same as a membership list, but is certainly strong evidence when combined — as in Zinn’s case — with admitted high-level involvement in a slew of front-group activities.

UPDATE III: Even if all the other FBI files proved nothing, this 1957 memorandum based on information from a former CPUSA member would seem rather conclusive:

So, according to the informant, Zinn appeared to have been a member of the Brooklyn section of CPUSA before the informant joined that section in 1949 — tending to corroborate information previously developed by the FBI.

Here is something very interesting: George Kirschner is named as co-author of Zinn’s A People’s History of the United States: The Wall Charts. Whether this is the same person as the George Kirshner who reportedly hosted CPUSA meetings in Brooklyn in 1952 might be a subject worth researching.

At any rate, the fact that “Informant T-1” was “brought up on charges of ‘white chauvinism’ by the CP” is also very interesting. This was the kind of “thought-crime” inquisition to which CPUSA members were sometimes subjected. Certainly an avid Communist like the informant, who had been a Party member since 1948, could not have been an outright racist, so we don’t know why he would have faced such an accusation. But it should be kept in mind that Stalin purged and executed many of the original Bolsheviks on fabricated pretexts of “deviationism,” and a similar Stalinist impulse might have made “T-1” a scapegoat.

This would seem to be the clincher: “T-1” is reported to have taken a photo of Zinn teaching a class on Communist doctrine in 1951, and to have provided the photo to the FBI in 1956. Zinn reportedly “took the position [in the 1951 class] that the basic teachings of Marx and Lenin were sound and should be adhered to.”

In May 1955, the FBI had de-activated its “Security Index” card on Zinn, who at that time was working on his Ph.D. at Columbia University and teaching at Upsala College in East Orange, N.J. Zinn’s file was re-opened by the FBI’s Atlanta office in 1957, after Zinn joined the faculty of Spellman College in Atlanta. A few years later, during the Kennedy administration, Zinn wrote an article in the Sunday edition of the Daily Worker disparaging Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy and the FBI for their supposed failure to protect civil rights  — without ever acknowledging that Zinn himself had been interviewed a decade earlier by the FBI for his own Communist activities.

UPDATE IV: A little more Googling turns up George Kirschner’s December 2008 obituary in the New York Times, with commenters memorializing his association with Zinn:

KIRSCHNER–George. Beloved grandfather and greatgrandfather, father, husband, teacher and friend will be remembered for his contagious smile and energy, unwavering principles, profound sense of justice, unequivocal commitment to activism, and open and welcoming heart. Born in New York City, George served in the US Coast Guard during WWII. He began as a brewer, later went to college, and found his professional love as a teacher of history at the Walden School in New York City.

His age and biography as a longtime New Yorker would lend credence to the suspicion Kirschner was the same as the “Kirshner” listed in the FBI files as hosting Brooklyn CPUSA section meetings. So we may therefore presume that Kirschner is, like Zinn, now the only kind of good Communist.

UPDATE V: FBI files from the 1960s connect Zinn to a Who’s Who of the New Left anti-war radicalism:

In 1966, the main publication of the Socialist Workers Party, the Militant, reported Zinn joining with then-SDS president Carl Oglesby on a committee to defend a South African activist. After the SDS split in 1969 that led to the formation of the Weather Underground, Oglesby subsequently became a JFK assassination conspiracy theorist.

Zinn participated in a 1967 anti-war “teach-in” at Harvard, sponsored by SDS in cooperation with the American Institute for Marxist Studies, an organization founded by historian Herb Aptheker, chief theoretician of CPUSA.

At an MIT teach-in, Zinn was joined by Noam Chomsky.

In one of Zinn’s most infamous exploits, he traveled to Hanoi in 1968 with the radical priest Daniel Berrigan, an event hailed at press conference involving Tom Hayden (SDS co-founder and principal author of the “Port Huron Statement”) and socialist/pacifist Dave Dellinger, subsequently of “Chicago 7” notoriety.

What we see in all this, then, is how Zinn’s career forms a major thread in a rope that connects ’60s radicalism back to the Stalinism of the 1940s and ’50s. Zinn was a consistent advocate of Marxist-Leninist doctrine throughout his career, and it is amazing that his teachings — his anti-American history — are so popular nearly two decades after the collapse of the Soviet Union.

America won the Cold War, but the Communists won the campuses.”

Did America win the Cold War? Or was that victory simply a propaganda coup?


And This Is How You Get To Contribute To The Weekly Standard

….you grovel to the right people.

P. J. O’Rourke, usually a funny guy, is distinctly unfunny, foul, and flatulent in this grotesque demonstration of ethnic self-flagellation masquerading as an explanation of why Ann Coulter committed pure evil by asking how many “effing” J’s there were anyway in the US .

Coulter was being no more incendiary than she usually is, only this time, the targets were the ruling class, which sent out one of its lap-dogs to do its bidding.




Evangelical Poverty: Not For Everyone

From Tradition in Action, a conservative Catholic blog:

The Church must have differentiated states of perfection:

“There is need in the Church, which is the body of Christ, for the members to be differentiated by various duties, states and grades” (II, II, q.183, a.2, ad 2).

Lila: This is very similar to the Hindu notion of stages of life necessary for most people to go through – Brahmacharya (celibate youth/studentship), Grahastha (married house-holder’s life), Vanaprastha (retirement from active life to the forest) and Sanyasin (renunciation in search of spiritual goals).

In another place he stresses: “Our Lord in proposing the evangelical counsels, always mentions of man’s fitness for observing them. For in giving the counsel of poverty He begins with these words: ‘If thou wilt to be perfect …’” (I, II, q. 108, a. 4, ad 1).

Therefore, the state of perfection is not for everyone, but only to the elite who received such vocation. These counsels must inspire all, but be practiced only by a few, a proportionally small number, just as the head or the heart are small members compared to the whole body.

Hence, these counsels should not be transformed into laws applicable to the whole of society. This is understandable in principle, because given original sin, in a Catholic society only a few seek perfection, while the majority of persons are satisfied to lead an upright life. In practice, moreover, this becomes even clearer, because if one tries to apply the counsels of perfection to everyone, society would be destroyed. Let me demonstrate this point with regard to each of the three counsels.

The easiest to understand is the vow of chastity. As everyone knows chastity, as an evangelical counsel, is to abstain from sexual relations. If you apply chastity to the whole of society, it is doomed to live just for the period of one generation. Since no one would have children, society would disappear.

Some heresies of the past, such as that of the Albigensians, tried to apply chastity to the whole of society. The medieval world would have been defeated by nature if the Church had not condemned their doctrines and stopped their march.

Obedience, as an obligation to do always the will of another under penalty of sin, if applied to the entire society, would create the most radical despotism. It would destroy the natural liberty that the common man possesses in his actions, and would consequently create a whole society of slaves.

In some ways the ephemeral communist republic of Savonarola in Florence was an example of this.

Poverty, understood as a complete abandonment of temporal goods and living from a common burse according to one’s needs, if applied to the whole society destroys any encouragement for progress, levels the competent and the incompetent, and smashes the natural differences of personalities, creating a society of penury.

It appears that some heresies of the past, such as the Fraticelli, attempted to realize this utopia and faced complete failure and the condemnation of the Church.

I believe that this demonstrates that the practice of the evangelical counsels is for a few, not for everyone in society. As a general rule, the various members of society should marry, have property, and enjoy a proportional natural freedom. At the same time, for society to have balance, the example of those who practice the evangelical counsels is indispensable:

For couples to be faithful to one another in their matrimonial duties, for youth to be chaste until marriage, for persons to look to the pleasures of Heaven instead of earth, it is indispensable to know that some men and women live in a state of perfect chastity out of love for God and Heaven.

For subjects to properly accept the orders of their civil superiors, for citizens to not revolt against just laws, for society to respect the highest classes, it is indispensable to know that a few who chose the state of perfection obliged themselves to live in a state of perpetual obedience.

For superiors of all kinds, be they ecclesiastic or temporal, to know that some of their neighbors chose to renounce all earthly power in order to follow Our Lord Jesus Christ, gives a good example that helps them moderate their use of power and be clement with their subjects.

For all members of society to know that some of its members renounced their legitimate properties to live in complete poverty, helps them limit and balance the use they make of their own properties and money.

The conclusion is simple and clear. The practice of the evangelical counsels is an extraordinary call to a few members of society. They are not the rule for all, they are the exception. Being an exception, they balance the life of the entire society. However, if someone tries to apply these counsels to all of society, he goes against natural order, he creates a monster, and he is destined to fail.

It seems to me that Fr. Vincent McNabb missed his target. As long as he struggles for evangelical poverty to be applied to all of society, he promotes a utopia. He is proposing something that is impossible and sooner or later alienates his more sensible followers.

To promote such an error as we are seeing Distributists do in the U.S. is just another attempt to mislead traditionalist Catholics toward the long, winding and sinister river of Socialism.”

NWO Shill Says Forget NWO

One Jake Anderson of Anti-Media says forget about the New World Order  – it’s sophomoric. Deep thinkers, such as Anderson, use sophisticated terms like Deep State….


And I thought people used that term to distract attention from the people behind the Deep State.

And to make sure that readers stick with Julian Assange, Edward Snowden, Peter Dale Scott (all name-checked in the piece), and the rest of the Anglo-American mouth-pieces making sure that the eyes of 7 billion people world-wide watch only what those activists tell them to watch, repeat what those activists repeat, and listen to them.

Seven billion.

All those interests and voices must be screened out for a dozen or so over-exposed Westerners.

Can propaganda be any more transparent? Is this the best intelligence can come up with?


Dorothy Day: Catholic Saint?

Pope Francis recently paid his respects to four “great Americans.”

They were Abraham Lincoln, Martin Luther King,  Dorothy Day, and Thomas Merton.

I was disappointed but not surprised, as this pope seems to be very much in step with the spirit of the times, something one neither wants…nor expects…from the leader of a two thousand-year-old religious tradition that claims eternal validity.

The pope’s picks are all very political ones.

ARE there no “great Americans” among the millions who lead lives in the private sector, uninterested in politics?

Lincoln was a president; King was a political activist; Day was very political, indeed, a former communist; Merton was the conscience, so it is said, of the non-violent civil rights movement of the 1960s.

I find it disquieting that the Pope could not find at least one great contemplative or visionary or healer or scientist or businessman or scholar or artist outside the realm of politics, among the tens of thousands of Americans born since the inception of the republic.

People like

George Washington Carver,

Herman Melville,

Clara Barton

and Walt Disney.

I fell under the influence of Hegel and (for about 6 weeks) Marx when I was around 12. Then I went to a cartoon festival. The Russian cartoons, if they can be called that, were a revelation.

What kind of a system killed man’s sense of humor so thoroughly?

I was converted to “free markets” by  Tom & Jerry, Mickey Mouse, Beep-Beep, Sylvester & Tweetie bird.

At the very least, Pope Francis shows questionable judgment.

It is poor judgment for someone in such a profoundly influential position to pick political sides and make the Catholic church, which he represents, a partisan actor.

I read that Dorothy Day is being considered for canonization.

Perhaps she deserves it. I don’t know.

But there are some things that need to be considered first:

Day might have converted to Catholicism, but she openly admired the most blood-thirsty communists.

She praised Marx not merely as a theoretician, but as a human being. She considered the murderous Lenin admirable.

I don’t know how representative these statements are.

It’s something to think about though.

Given Pope Francis’ economic and political activism, it is a good guess that there is more to Dorothy Day than meets the eye.




Lebanese Minister: 2-3% Of Refugees Are ISIS

A Lebanese minister that ISIS fighters constitute 2-3% of the numbers at refugee camps in Lebanon, as well as of those entering Europe:

The Mirror:

At least 20,000 bloodthirsty jihadis have infiltrated Syrian refugee camps and are plotting to enter Europe, a senior official warned tonight.

Lebanese Education Minister Elias Bou Saab said he fears Islamic State radicals make up at least 2% of the 1.1million Syrians living in camps across his country.

And he warned of a covert jihadi “operation” to get across the Med and into Europe. His warning came as David Cameron made a whistle-stop tour of refugee camps in Lebanon and Jordan yesterday to try to win back public support on the Syria crisis.

“My gut feeling is they (IS) are facilitating such an operation. To go to Europe and other places… From Turkey to Greece,” Mr Bou Saab said.

“You may have, let’s say, 2% that could be radicals. That is more than enough. We have had that also with our camps here – you find 2-3% of them.”

What makes this claim plausible is the number of accounts of  rapes being reported among  the migrants, for instance, in Germany. These rapes are not only migrant-on-migrant, but are migrant-on-native.

Some people are even calling it a rape epidemic. I haven’t looked into it enough to know if that claim is hype, propaganda, or cold fact.

Whatever it is, it is added evidence that the migrants are not solely refugees.

Is ISIS behind the rape? Or are there Muslim gangs infiltrating the refugees? Are they mercenaries? Is this Operation Gladio all over?



Did Medieval Rabbi Forecast Future Of Jerusalem?

The internet is circulating a prediction about Israel, supposedly made by Judah Ben Samuel, a 12th century rabbi:

Ben Samuel was often called “Light of Israel.” Even bishops came to him for advice. If anyone asked him where his wisdom came from he would answer, “The prophet Elijah, who will precede the Messiah, appeared to me and revealed many things to me and emphasized that the precondition for answered prayer is that it is fueled by enthusiasm and joy for the greatness and holiness of God.”

But to recap the astonishing predictions: In AD 1217 this scholarly and pious rabbi prophesied that the Ottoman Turks would rule over the holy city of Jerusalem for eight Jubilees. Now, keep in mind, he made this prediction 300 years before the Ottoman Turks seized control of Jerusalem in 1517. If indeed 1217 and 1517 were jubilee years as Judah Ben Samuel believed, then his prophecy was exactly right, because exactly 400 years after the Turks took control of Jerusalem they were driven out of the city and the holy land in 1917 by the Allied forces under the command of General George Allenby – on Hanukkah, by the way.

But it gets more interesting still.

The rabbi also prophesied that during the ninth Jubilee Jerusalem would be a “no-man’s land.” This is exactly what happened from 1917 to 1967, due to the fact that the Holy Land was placed under British Mandate in 1917 by the League of Nations and literally “belonged” to no nation.

Even after Israel’s war of independence in 1948-49, Jerusalem was still divided by a strip of land running right through the heart of the city, with Jordan controlling the eastern part of the city and Israel controlling the western part of the city. That strip of land was considered and even called “no-man’s land” by both the Israelis and the Jordanians.

It was not until the Six Day War in 1967 when the entire West Bank of the Holy Land was conquered by the Israeli army that the whole city of Jerusalem passed back into the possession of Israel. So once again the prophecy made by the rabbi 750 years previously was fulfilled to the letter.

It certainly would be significant if both 1917 and 1967 were Jubilee years, considering the significance of what happened in Jerusalem on those years. But it gets even more interesting, because Judah Ben Samuel also prophesied that during the 10th Jubilee Jerusalem would be under the control of the Jews and the Messianic “end times” would begin. If he’s right, the 10th Jubilee began in 1967 and will be concluded in 2017.”

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2012/11/12th-century-rabbi-predicted-israels-future/#3FaZmsvhvW9GtlOy.99

Trying to figure out where and when this “ancient prophecy” emerged as yet another spin-off from Jubilee year prognostications, I came across this skeptical analysis by another end-timer:

Since Jack Van Impe has broadcast this “prophecy”, and has also put his own ending on the “prophecy” for all the world to believe, I thought a little more balance was needed on the Internet about this “prophecy”. Otherwise, the next crop of turnips may just sell the farm and rot on a hilltop waiting for the Rapture.

I am not going to just repeat everything said in the “prophecy” like everyone else. Read the Israel Today article that I linked to if you want to read the original source. Basically, the “prophecy” is based on Jubilees and the land of Israel. The claim of those referring to this “prophecy” is that two prophecies were already fulfilled as written, so the third prophecy falling on 2017 AD would also take place.

The last Jubilee fulfilled is said to be 1967 and the next Jubilee in the prophecy would take place in 2017. We know what happened in 1967, it is when Jerusalem was returned to the Jews. Ludwig Schneider, actually only said in his article, that it is possible that 2017 or 2018 could be a decisive year for Israel. Joseph Farah said he would leave what would happen in 2017 to our imagination. F. M. Riley thought it meant that Jesus would return in 2017 and the tribulation would start in 2010 (apparently we are missing it). Jack Van Impe thinks it means the 70th week of Daniel and tribulation start in 2017. However,  no where in the Israel Today article is the speculation of Riley or Van Impe even suggested.

I have come up with six criticisms of the prophecy and what Van Impe suggests. (I think the criticisms made in the article that I linked to above are better researched and are better than the criticisms that I list, so you might read that article.)

1.  Other than what Schneider wrote, I have no reason to believe that Rabbi Judah Ben Samuel ever even gave such a prophecy. Should I just believe that this Pentecostal pastor even saw and could even translate such a document from the 13th century? Where is the document and any peer review of such a significant fulfilled prophecy?

I would not even be able to translate English properly from 800 years ago, so how does this pastor translate whatever language this was written into modern English with any accuracy? There are over 5000 ancient manuscripts of the Bible, most dating from near the same era and they do not totally agree with each other, but I should just believe that one document from one Rabbi of the 13th century was recorded and has been translated without error?

Why do I have the sneaky feeling that pastor Riley constructed his thesis in hindsight to make whatever it is that he may have read to come out the way he thought it should be? This Pentecostal pastor may have just thought that he had divine help that makes his translation and backdating inerrant. We can’t be sure what was said by Rabbi Judah Ben Samuel, without the documentation, and pastor Riley offers none in his article. I am surprised that Israel Today even published something that could not be documented.

2. We really do not even know that a Jubilee is 50 years. Many scholars believe the Jubilee cycle is 49 years because they believe the 50th year is also the first year of the next Jubilee cycle. If a Jubilee cycle is 49 years all the claims of fulfillment would be false.

3. Why would God reveal to someone who rejects Jesus as the Messiah the prophetic timing of the end? For what purpose? What good will this 13th century “prophecy” do for the Jews living in the past or for the Jews existing just prior to the last seven years? If the “prophecy is for the Church to know the timing of the end, than why use an unbeliever to give revelation to the Church?  It simply is not logical that God would reveal the future to an unbeliever blinded by Satan. And as I implied before, Satan does not know the timings set by God.

4. In one of my searches, I read that Rabbi Judah Ben Samuel claimed to have talked directly with Elijah and he claimed to have received his information from Elijah. I do not know if that is actually documented somewhere or not as coming from Rabbi Ben Samuel, but if Ben Samuel talked to Elijah you would think that this Rabbi would have converted to Christianity. Instead, there is a claim that this Rabbi afterward prevented a child from being baptized into Christianity and that this has been documented by the Roman Catholic Church.

5.  The “prophecy” says that 2017 is a Jubilee. Jack Van Impe says he believes this Jubilee year will start the tribulation. It seems to me that the second coming and the thousand-year reign starts with a Jubilee. Therefore, there cannot be a 2017 Jubilee and just seven years later a 2024 Jubilee as well. The concept of a God determined Jubilee starting the tribulation does not even make sense. Some Jubilee!

6. If Jesus announced a Jubilee year around 26 to 30 AD, with the start of His ministry when he announced the acceptable year of the Lord in the Temple (Lk 4 19-21), how can the dates mentioned in this “prophecy” be Jubilee years? For example, forty Jubilees that are fifty years each from about 26 to 30 AD would be fulfilled about 2026 to 2030 AD, not 2017. Likewise, the prior dates in this “prophecy” also would not fit.

Different Strokes

This past year, I’ve been trying to go to church again.

I used to go to church fairly often in my childhood. Then almost regularly when I was an undergraduate.

Then not at all for a few years.

Later, I went on occasion – at Christmas, Lent and Easter. No more.

Of late, I’ve felt a real desire to go more often.

In the last couple of months, I’ve gone three times. For me, that’s a lot.

One was a Byzantine Rite Catholic church.

Another was Lutheran, which is my family background.

The last was a radical, leftist church.

The leftists had the best music – gospel-type singing and lots of clapping, spontaneous outbursts, and terrific piano-playing. The preacher (pastor?) was funny and referred to his gay partner casually. A woman gave communion. It wasn’t my thing, but it was genuinely infectious and welcoming. No harsh words. The crowd was about 65% gay, a number of black people, some seniors.

The Lutheran church was definitely much more bourgeois and more formal. The priest was stout and cheerful, I remember. The hymns were the old ones and the liturgy was traditional, but not in any way boring. The crowd was mostly white, middle and upper- middle class folk. They went out of their way to talk to me and ask me to come back.

Culturally, they were closest to me.

The Byzantine Rite Catholic church was mostly Eastern European. I understood the service only intermittently by reading the translation. The music was unaccompanied chant and there was a lot of standing and kneeling. My knees hurt. A young man crawled on his stomach the full length from the door to the iconostasis. The women were carefully dressed and their heads were covered. They lifted up the little children so they could kiss the Bible and the crucifix. From every corner,  red candles flickered and the somber faces of ancient saints and angels looked down on the congregation.


There was no quick good feeling to be had. No infectious singing.  The chants were spare and medieval.

Yet it was here I was most at home.

Each church offered something.

For those who scoff at foot-thumping, head-nodding services, I say, remember King David.

He danced and sang in exaltation in his worship. He even took off his robes while he sang. Some people pointed the finger and scorned him for it.

For those who mock the stuffy middle-class, remember that Jesus never did. He was at home in the houses of tax-collectors and publicans, drank at their marriage feasts and played with their children.

He didn’t deride their conventions, even when he flouted them. Instead, he kept traditional feasts in the traditional manner.

Media Using Trump To Bash Evangelicals

While the media claims that evangelicals are a large part of Trump’s massive popularity, the statistics show otherwise.

The numbers show that Trump is actually much more popular with over-sixty unchurched voters, many of whom fall into the category of working-class.

That would explain why Trump’s distinctly secular and hedonistic attitudes have not put a dent in his support. Most of his supporters are not conservative/evangelical Christians at all.

They are disenfranchised older male working-class stiffs.

The Federalist.com:

Evangelical populists, the bloc once labeled the Religious Right, are frustrated by a GOP establishment that has frittered away this summer’s anti-Planned Parenthood moment. They are frustrated that party bigwigs spent much of the past few years calling for the party to “rebrand” and downplay social issues. They are frustrated by a Supreme Court that redefines marriage, lets Obamacare survive, and reigned by Justice Kennedy’s Humpty Dumpty jurisprudence. Evangelical populists are not just animated by social issues, but by generalized frustration with the ever-expanding, unconstitutional reach of big government. In Pew’s Political Typology, evangelical populists are “Steadfast Conservatives.”


Trumpian populists, in contrast, are frustrated by China “killing us in trade,” by hedge-fund managers who “pay no tax,” and, of course, by the bipartisan collusion of the Washington elite on immigration. In many ways, these sorts of complaints traditionally resonated with the white, working-class voters of the Democrat Party. Many of the same themes animate Bernie Sanders’ insurgent candidacy. Per Pew, Trumpian populists are “Hard-Pressed Skeptics.”

But while evangelical and Trumpian populism are distinct, there is obviously the potential for some overlap. For instance, despite Russell Moore’s efforts, I think a majority of evangelical populists are immigration hawks. Still, the overall thrust and tenor of these two groups differs widely.


So if evangelicals do not form the backbone of Trump’s support and are instead the religious subgroup least excited about him, how can we explain the media’s behavior over the past two weeks?

Many of these pundits are merely looking for any way to bash the evangelical piñata.

Some of it is the fault of our reliance on polls that don’t differentiate between evangelicals who go to church and “evangelicals” who never go to church. It’s a garbage in, garbage out process when pundits premise their analysis on fundamentally defective statistics. Public Policy Polling’s latest national poll found that 53 percent of GOP primary voters were evangelical Christians. That’s a pretty dramatic overstatement.

But I think there’s something more systematic going on. Many of these pundits are merely looking for any way to bash the evangelical piñata, and associating this disfavored demographic with the Donald’s degeneracy is simply too tempting to pass up.

For one journalist, supporting the twice-divorced Trump might prove the rank hypocrisy of evangelical voters. Frank Bruni’s column laid this charge on particularly thick:

If I want the admiration and blessings of the most flamboyant, judgmental Christians in America, I should marry three times, do a queasy-making amount of sexual boasting, verbally degrade women, talk trash about pretty much everyone else while I’m at it, encourage gamblers to hemorrhage their savings in casinos bearing my name and crow incessantly about how much money I’ve amassed?

Seems to work for Donald Trump… proving, yet again, how selective and incoherent the religiosity of many in the party’s God squad is.”

It’s all about bashing a(ny) religion that demands standards of behavior with which the thought-leaders of today no longer want to comply.

UK, France, On Verge Of Kafkaesque Police State

The Guardian sounds a warning about the acceleration of surveillance in the UK and France:

Two British MPs, Tom Watson and David Davis, crossed the party divide and with campaigning organisation Liberty, won a legal challenge against the rushed, undemocratic Data Retention and Investigatory Powers Act (Dripa), passed in July 2014.

The High Court found that Dripa was unlawful because it did not adequately ensure that access to, and use of, communications data (though not its collection) was limited to what was necessary, appropriate and proportionate for preventing and detecting serious crime.

The decision has been welcomed for, finally, recognising in the UK what a number of other countries and a slew of independent examiners have demanded: proper judicial oversight of a “general retention regime on a potentially massive scale”. Where it falls down, as do many of those reports, is in accepting, implicitly or explicitly, the euphemistic re-characterisation of mass surveillance as “bulk interception” or “bulk collection”, thus endorsing an incursion into our private lives, papers, thoughts and communications that has no precedent in the law of the land.

Disappointingly, however, the Dripa victory is likely short-lived. Immediately, the Home Office declared its disagreement with the High Court’s decision, pledging to appeal. And of course, the Conservative government has already made abundantly clear its intention to enact a single, comprehensive law – the so-called “snooper’s charter” – which many fear would unleash a tidal wave of surveillance at political and executive discretion.

This is where the other side of the channel comes in. Late on Thursday 23 July, in France’s highest constitutional body, the last safeguard of the rule of law fell, approving what is, by all measures, an intrusive, comprehensive, virtually-unchecked surveillance law.

A pipe-dream for two years, the French law gathered momentum in March this year in the wake of the Charlie Hebdo attack, and was put together in the French parliament under emergency procedures, drastically reducing discussion time and preventing any meaningful debate. The law was overwhelmingly approved by parliament in June and immediately referred to the constitutional council by nearly everyone who could do so, including François Hollande – the first time the president has deferred a law voted by parliament in the Fifth Republic.
France approves ‘Big Brother’ surveillance powers despite UN concern

The case also attracted an unheard of number of amicus briefs, many of which were made public, and most of which involved an impassioned cry about the unprecedented incursion on civil liberties that the law mandates.

And yet, despite this, the French council approved, with very few exceptions, a law that allows intelligence agencies to monitor phone calls and emails without prior judicial authorisation; to require internet service providers to install “black boxes” that filter all internet traffic, combing everyone’s metadata in order to identify deviant behaviours based on unknown parameters and provide access to the agencies; and to bug cars, homes and keyboards for images, sound and data.

All of this, of course, is discussed as being targeted at “suspected terrorists”. But all of it, equally and more significantly, touches us all; anyone and everyone who traverses the internet. The law’s goal is to improve the agencies’ tools for a large variety of vaguely stated purposes: terrorism, but also political surveillance, competitive intelligence for France’s major economic, industrial and scientific interests, the fight against organised crime, and goodness knows what else to come.”

EU Forces Migrant Burden-Sharing On Europe

The EU, which seemed to have fallen apart over the migrant crisis only last week, has rebounded, writes Nigel Farage at Breitbart:

The European Parliament Martin Schulz appeared on German national television, ZDF. And during an interview about the migrant crisis and the lack of EU solidarity, Schulz said: “We will eventually have to use force and fight to push ahead” that in the end the countries would have to be forced to do the right thing. This led to some slightly hysterical online reaction with some Poles believing that the tanks were revving up to cross the border. 

For my part, I simply couldn’t understand what he was saying. As the week then developed, the Schengen system appeared to be disintegrating with fences and borders going up, not just to countries like Serbia, outside the EU, but effectively even between EU member states. Many eurosceptics across the continent were happily predicting the demise of the whole project.

The European Parliament met this week for a one day plenary session on Wednesday. On Tuesday afternoon I heard that a special request had been made to extend the sitting to include Thursday going to be an important vote.

The EU Commission were proposing legislation to enforce burden-sharing amongst EU countries with the provision for any states that refused of a fining procedure. Never in my sixteen years in the European Parliament have I seen a piece of legislation so rapidly produced and without any warning beforehand.

I now understood what Schulz had been saying. The fact that the European Council had refused meant that the Commission in Parliament would legislate. 

No surprise to say that the European Parliament passed this law with an overwhelming majority. I could see a deep sense of self-satisfaction on many people’s faces. I think some of them truly believe that they are doing the right thing. 

This law now has to go back to the same European Council that last week rejected the very concept of burden-sharing. So you may think they will simply refuse it again. To think such things is to gravely underestimate the fantasism and chicanery that lie deep at the heart of the EU project. They will be able if they choose to push this measure through under a system known as qualified majority voting which effectively means that the big countries can outvote the smaller Eastern European states. 

It is a paradox with the modern EU that the more each of its grand designs such as the Euro and the current migrant crisis fail, the greater is the ability of Brussels to gain more powers and more centralisation. 

In nearly every case, from Tsipras’ election victory in Greece to the current crisis, nothing stops the juggernaut. Every objection is overruled. The European Council meets again next week. One day, this whole thing will blow apart though I suspect not just yet. For now, Mr. Juncker can enjoy his fine lunches.”

John Paul II Was Jewish, Says Jewish Historian

This becomes more and more fascinating. Is there any major voice in public life that is not Jewish?

From The Catholic Knight blog:

A MANCHESTER historian has claimed that Pope John Paul II was Jewish.

Yaakov Wise says his study into the the maternal ancestry of Karol Josez Wojtyla (John Paul II’s real name) has revealed startling conclusions.

Mr Wise, a researcher in orthodox Jewish history and philosophy, said the late Pope’s mother, grandmother and great-grandmother were all probably Jewish and came from a small town not far from Krakow.

The Pope was a priest and cardinal archbishop in the Polish city before his election to the papacy.

Mr Wise said: “According to orthodox Judaism, a person’s Jewish identity is passed down through the maternal line. I saw a photograph of the Pope’s mother and I showed it to people who didn’t know who she was…

read full story here

THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: Somehow I’m not surprised by this. It is now common knowledge that Karol Wojtyla fell in love with a Jewish woman prior to enrolling in the seminary. Had she not been taken away by the Nazis, it is very probable that Wojtyla would have married and had children with her. Sadly, she was taken away, and Wojtyla’s sadness over this eventually led him to the priesthood, where he would find comfort in serving God. This makes a lot of sense to me. The man’s mother was Jewish (which officially makes him Jewish), and she died when he was very young. Then he fell in love with a woman just like his mom. I find it interesting that Pope John Paul II (Wojtyla), during his 27 year papacy, fostered within the Church a revived devotion to Mary — a Jewish mother.

Jewish popes are nothing new to the Catholic Church. We know the first ten popes were Jewish (especially St. Peter), and it is speculated that many more popes were Jewish as well…

  • Pope Zephyrin (199-217)
  • Pope Siricus (384-399)
  • Pope Hormidas (514-523)
  • Pope Analdet II (1130-1138)
  • Pope Callistus III (1455-1458)
  • Pope Alexander VI (1492-1503)
  • Pope Pius III (1503)
  • Pope Leo X (1513-1521)
  • Pope Clement VII (1523-1534)
  • Pope Paul III (1534-1549)
  • Pope St. Pius V (1566-1572)
  • Pope Gregory XIII (1572-1585)
  • Pope Pius XI (1922-1939)
  • Pope Pius XII (1939-1958)
  • Pope John XXIII (1958-1963)
  • Pope Paul VI (1963-1978)
  • Pope John Paul II (1978-2005)

Brazil Denounces Christophobic Cultural Subversion

Brazilians have reacted strongly against extreme anti-Christian bigotry on display in Gay Pride Parades in the country:

– In the wake of numerous homosexual “pride” parades laced with anti-Christian profanities that have sparked outrage in Brazil, legislators are advancing a new law that will make “Christophobia” a felony.

Photos of the desecration of Christian images at the parades – an activity which is common in homosexual “pride” events throughout the world – have circulated widely in the Brazilian media and social networking sites this year. The offensive image that is receiving the most attention is that of the male to female transsexual Viviany Beleboni in this year’s Sao Paulo parade, who was portrayed as crucified on a cross seminude with a sign reading “Enough of Homophobia.”

Other images reportedly taken from the parades and displayed on the Facebook page of one Brazilian congressman show additional cases of desecration of Christian symbols. One photo shows two naked lesbians on a cross kissing on the lips. Another shows two people who appear to be a man and a woman sitting naked on top of piles of crucifixes, with sacred images covering their genitals.

Other images show nude men smashing sacred images on the ground, and a transsexual stripping naked in a lewd dance in front of a church.

Rogério Rosso, representing the nation’s federal district in the House of Deputies, has responded by proposing a new law prohibiting such displays and imposing a fine, and up to eight years in prison, for perpetrators. Such legislation would reverse the penalties sought by homosexuals against Christians who express their rejection of sodomy, applying them to homosexuals and others who desecrate the sacred images of a religion.

“The intention of the bill is to protect the beliefs and objects used in religious rituals by Brazilian citizens, because what has been happening in recent years during demonstrations, particularly those of LGBTs, is what we can call ‘Christophobia,’ with the practice of obscene and degrading acts which show prejudice against Catholics and Evangelicals,” Rosso states in the text of the bill.

Senator Magno Malta denounced the government-funded parades for going “outside the boundaries” of proper discourse, sowing “intolerance and disrespect for religious liberty.” He has asked federal prosecutors to begin a criminal investigation of the behavior.

This country is Christian, and now, here, I speak in the name of millions of Brazilian Christians, Catholic Christians, spiritualists, Evangelicals from throughout the country, taking a position in their name. There is a general revulsion with this nefarious, unscrupulous and abominable attitude. You have passed the limit,” Malta said on the Senate floor following the June 7 marches.”

Tell me again why Hispanics/Latins entering the US is a bad thing from the perspective of the culture wars?



Jonathan Cahn “Fake Shemitah” Update

Jonathan Cahn, the hugely popular Messianic Rabbi, whose best-selling books have been preaching a “Shemitah” judgment on the US,  has admitted that he blew the date.

Sept. 13th came and went without a terrorist attack, financial collapse, or a meteor hit, but Cahn now says his window is bigger – any time between September 2015 and September 2016.

That of course makes nonsense of Shemitah timing, but who’s counting…

[When I call it “fake Shemitah” I don’t mean that the Shemitah cycle is fake. I am saying Cahn’s misappropriation of it is false and that if anything disastrous were to happen at the time, it would be because the masonic New World Order elite has contrived it, playing on the credulity of many Christians]

Right-Wing Watch.org:

After predicting for the entire last year that “The Shemitah” on Sunday, September 13, would usher in some cataclysmic event in America — possibly an economic crash, inclement weather, war or terrorist attacks — messianic rabbi Jonathan Cahn appeared on “The 700 Club” today to save face (and sell more books) after September 13 came and went without anything out of the ordinary happening.

When host Pat Robertson asked him if anything noteworthy happened on the 13th, Cahn first tried to avoid the question but eventually told the televangelist that “you can’t put God in a box or He’ll get out of it,” saying that God doesn’t work in exact dates.

Of course, Cahn himself declared that this potential disaster would occur on an “exact date … in accordance with the ancient mystery” of the Shemitah, a day when the land is left fallow and debts are forgiven. “The coming Shemitah will end September 2015. Its final climatic day, Elul 29, the Day of Remission, will fall on Sunday, September 13,” he wrote in “The Harbinger.”

WorldNetDaily repeatedlyreported on Cahn’s September 13 prophecy, with messages like “Mark This Date For Potential Disaster,” “Get Ready: Biblical Shemitah’ Begins This Week,” and “Countdown To Disaster.” WND is even making a movie about Cahn’s prophetic message.

Cahn, however, said that the stock market selloff that occurred on August 18 of this year came close enough to the September 13 date to count as a fulfillment of his prophecy. “It started in the summer,” he said. He also pointed to Sunday’s relatively minor earthquake off the Gulf of California, which is actually located in Mexico and doesn’t even touch the U.S. As if Cahn couldn’t get any more vague, he also said that the Shemitah period marked America’s decline from the world’s leading economic power.

Moving the goalposts even further, Cahn went on to claim that his prophecy would be proven correct as long as something bad happens anytime between now and September 2016: “That’s the period.”

So once something, anything, bad happens within the year, Cahn will take credit for predicting it!

The preacher went on to allege that the construction of a new skyscraper at Ground Zero, the Supreme Court’s decision on marriage equality and the White House’s rainbow light display celebrating LGBT Pride Month are all bringing God’s wrath upon America.

Cahn then presented the most conclusive proof of all: He once spoke to a man who said he had a dream before the 9/11 attacks of an angel telling him that the Twin Towers would collapse, but he didn’t tell anybody, and now this unnamed prophet who failed to warn everyone about 9/11 is having similar dreams of something bad happening in the future!

– See more at: http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/jonathan-cahn-blows-september-13-doomsday-prophecy-finds-convenient-explanation#sthash.WWkBxSu9.dpuf

The Racist Vision Behind Pan-Europa

The current “migrant crisis” has been planned to hasten the demise of any vestige of Christian culture in Europe and impose on it a totalitarian anti-Christian system.

That much a careful parsing of the actors and ideologies involved tells us.

Israel’s Messiah must come…. and Edom/Esau must submit before he comes, according to the vision of eminent Rabbis.

But there is another element in this story.

The Pan-Europa vision is not simply of Fortress Europe commanded from a distance by Talmudic sages.

It is a vision of a racially mixed multitude that will be under an aristocracy of Jews and European nobility.

The promulgator of this vision  was Richard Coudenhove-Kalergi, an aristocrat of ancient lineage and great wealth. He was of mixed Flemish, Greek, and Japanese descent, with an admixture of several other European ethnicities.

In his book Praktischer Idealismus (Practical Idealism), 1925, he wrote:

The man of the future will be of mixed race. Today’s races and classes will gradually disappear owing to the vanishing of space, time, and prejudice. The EurasianNegroid race of the future, similar in its appearance to the Ancient Egyptians, will replace the diversity of peoples with a diversity of individuals.

Instead of destroying European Jewry, Europe, against its own will, refined and educated this people into a future leader-nation through this artificial selection process. No wonder that this people, that escaped Ghetto-Prison, developed into a spiritual nobility of Europe. Therefore a gracious Providence provided Europe with a new race of nobility by the Grace of Spirit. This happened at the moment when Europe’s feudal aristocracy became dilapidated, and thanks to Jewish emancipation.”


Charlie Hebdo Mocks Europe, Christianity, Orban

The cartoonist-provocateurs at Charlie Hebdo are back in the lime-light for a cartoon of the drowned Syrian refugee child, supposedly intended to mock European Christians for their refusal to admit Muslim migrants into the country, using Hungarian PM Viktor Orban, as the example.

But, as I’ve noted, Viktor Orban is an ethnic Jew whose Christianity is fairly nominal and intended only for political purposes. He  is a corrupt, crony-capitalist opportunist, heavily indebted to Jewish power-brokers, including the former chief Ashkenazy rabbi of Israel.

Furthermore, Hebdo is a leading neo-conservative and pro-Israel instigator for war against Islam that earlier published scurrilous pictures of Mohammed and Jesus, provoking global outrage.

The inflammatory cartoon is more proof that the “migrant crisis” was created by the powers-that-be to incite Muslims against Christians and immigrants against Europeans.

At the same time, the ruling cabal funds virulently racist, anti-Muslim, and anti-immigrant rhetoric, to which Hebdo itself has contributed.

From the NY Times:

And in a scathing editorial introducing the issue, Mr. Sourisseau made it clear that his intended target was what he called the hypocritical response to the crisis by European leaders and the public. After comparing indifference to the plight of the migrants in France to attitudes toward Jews in 1941, the cartoonist mocked statements by the Hungarian prime minister, Viktor Orban, who suggested that an influx of Muslims from the Middle East threatened efforts to “keep Europe Christian.” Mr. Sourisseau argued that this vision of Europe seemed to be based on a version of Christianity from which the ideal of Christian charity had been removed.

  1. One of his cartoons, showing the young boy drowning alongside Jesus walking on water, illustrated this idea. “The Proof That Europe Is Christian,” the cartoon was headlined. “Christians walk on water,” the text read, “Muslim children sink.”

“ISIS-Loving” Danish Teen, Refugee Friend, Murder Mother

A murder trial from last year reveals an ISIS-inspired plot:

Lisa Borch, 15, planned to join ISIS in Syria with her Iraqi boyfriend after the killing

A Danish teenage girl has been sentenced to nine years in jail for murdering her mother in what appears to be an ISIS-inspired killing.

[“appears,” “ISIS-inspired”….]

The Independent reports that just minutes before the fatal assault occurred in October of last year, 15-year-old Lisa Borch had spent hours watching ISIS videos of the decapitations of the two British hostages, David Haines and Alan Henning.

A Danish court heard that the teen planned to join ISIS in Syria with her Iraqi boyfriend, Bakhtiar Mohammed Abdulla, 29. His fingerprints were also found at the scene of the crime and he has been sentenced to 13 years.

Borch originally met Abdulla at a refugee center near her home, the Independent says.

“This murder was cold-blooded, ice cold and committed in a bestial manner,” the prosecution told the court.

The court could not determine which of the pair delivered the fatal stab wounds, and both were found guilty of the murder.”


However, what is not mentioned in this account and in many other accounts is that it was Lisa who called the police after the killing and said,

‘I heard my mother scream and I looked out the window and saw a white man running away. Please come here, there is blood everywhere.’

This could just have been a clumsy cover story that the pair concocted, but it is certainly worth investigating, since we know that there are many people who stand to profit from war/confrontation in Europe.

He claimed to have only arrived to ‘help Lisa’ after the teenager had already killed her mother. But Borch said Abdulla had actually been the knifeman.

The muddled version of events meant the court heard several stories about what actually happened.

Although Abdulla was no longer at the property when police arrived, investigators found his fingerprints in the victim’s bedroom.

Although it couldn’t be established who’d actually delivered the blows that killed Mrs Holtegaard, both of the accused were found guilty of murder.”

4-Star General: US Dissidents Should Be Interned

From earlier this summer, comes a report that General Wesley Clark, a former NATO commander, has publicly demanded concentration camps for those Americans who are sufficiently disloyal:

The statements made by retired four-star general and former NATO commander Wesley Clark to MSNBC News last Friday in support of placing “radicalized” and “disloyal” Americans in World War II-style internment camps must be taken as an urgent warning by the working class.

Clark, America’s most prominent political general, was speaking not just for himself, but for powerful layers within the US military/intelligence apparatus and ruling oligarchy who fear the growth of social opposition and are preparing to defend their interests, no matter what the cost.

The event that prompted Clark’s televised remarks was the recent killing of four Marines and one sailor at an armed forces recruiting center in Chattanooga, Tennessee. Clark’s proposal for mass internment was advanced as a response to the so-called “self radicalized,” “lone wolf” phenomenon—labels that have been applied to a handful of terrorist incidents over the course of more than a decade. The vast majority of such “lone wolf” incidents have involved hapless and, in some cases, mentally disturbed individuals who were set up by FBI and police agent provocateurs.

If Clark’s proposal were implemented, such “sting” operations and subsequent frame-up trials could be dispensed with, as the “self-radicalized” were identified by their thoughts, statements or Internet postings and summarily thrown into concentration camps.

The scale of his proposed response is so disproportionate to the actual threat—which has claimed far fewer victims than mass shootings carried out by individuals who have shown no sign of being “radicalized”—that it is impossible not to conclude that there are deeper and hidden motives and processes at work.

If one takes Clark’s statements at their face value, the term “Orwellian” does not do them justice. “We have got to identify people who are most likely to be radicalized,” he said in his television interview. “We’ve got to cut this off at the beginning.” In other words, the massive and ongoing surveillance of the American population must be intensified to identify potential radicals and jail them based on their alleged thoughts or expressions.

“In World War II, if someone supported Nazi Germany at the expense of the United States, we didn’t say that was freedom of speech, we put him in a camp, they were prisoners of war,” he added.

Making the implications of his reasoning unmistakable, Clark continued: “If these people are radicalized and they don’t support the United States and they are disloyal to the United States, as a matter of principle, fine. It’s their right, and it’s our right and obligation to segregate them from the normal communityfor the duration of the conflict.”

And for how long would that be, General Clark?

Tom Sowell: We Need Thought-Control

Thomas Sowell is often a smart guy. But not always.

You shouldn’t discuss inequality, he says.

[Added: I know that title might not have been written by him and I know that he doesn’t tell you in so many words not to discuss inequality in outcomes, but that is the tendency of this piece and several others on the subject he’s written. All inequalities of outcome are not the result of inequalities of opportunity, he says. Fine. Then he cites basketball-playing and university entrance tests. Well, those are specific areas where native abilities can be shown to play a dominating role. However, what Sowell – and many libertarians – then do is to broaden this argument to a generalization that all unequal outcomes must then be the result of differing capacities, and not of other, sometimes malign, factors.
If you read LRC consistently and see when they trot out Tom Sowell , it’s invariably on race-related issues, when the fact that he is a black man gives the argument more weight.

Sowell would prefer people NOT to look at diversities of outcome but to focus on equality of opportunity. But, if malign social factors come into play, attention to opportunity equality is beside the point and Sowell’s argument becomes diversionary and tool used to keep people looking away from what is indeed often (not always) a very powerful indicator of something amiss.

Well, a philosophy of radical egalitarianism is one thing. Discussing inequalities is another.

Apparently Sowell cannot see the difference between natural distributions of wealth and power and unnatural distributions.

And he doesn’t want you to talk about either of them.

Now,there are people who grow taller than others, because of genes.

And then there are others who are wearing 10 inch high boots.

And still others are actually standing on the second floor of the house.

Sowell thinks that differentiating between these people is counter-productive to wealth creation.

Oh really?

How much wealth has Thomas Sowell created, as a think-tank book-writer?



Goldmanite PM Takes Over In Australia

Just saw this (h/t to LRC via Zerohedge):

Malcolm Turnbull has confirmed he is sticking with the [Australian] Government’s policies on climate change and gay marriage during his first Question Time as Prime Minister.”

Malcolm Turnbull used to be a Goldman Sachs partner. That makes this a Goldman coup.

Allegedly [he claims it is not certain] Turnbull is Jewish, on his mother’s side.

Climate-Change is the pretext for complete control of economic life.

Gay Marriage is the pretext for complete control of social life.

Edom vs. Israel = Athens vs. Jerusalem

A Rabbi lets the Kabbalistic cat out of the bag in the piece below.

Unfortunately, Patrick Buchanan and other “third-world armageddon” pontificators don’t seem to get the message.

Or maybe it’s just much easier to kick at another set of victims than to address themselves to the real Masters of the Universe…yes, the guys who pull Goldman’s strings.

“Chanukah is an eight-day annual Jewish holiday. But it also lays claim as the start of western civilization. Not Jewish civilization, which was already old at the time of the first Chanukah in the second century before the common era, and not Hellenic (ancient Greek) civilization, which was also ancient. But the encounter of the West with Judaism, of reason with revelation, of Athens with Jerusalem: that began on Chanukah.

“Man,” said an ancient Greek philosopher, “is the measure of all things.” The Bible disagrees: “the fear of the Lord,” it says, “is the beginning of wisdom.” Who is right? A great debate about G?d and man lies at the heart of the West. From Sinai to Babylon, from the lions to the Crusaders, from the Wars of Religion to the Age of Reason–and of Revolution, from Stalin to John Paul II, from eugenics to a belief that life is sacred, and from globalism to a respect for individual states – even Israel! — it remains the central question. Athens and Jerusalem still are what they always were, the struggling twins of the West.

[ Lila: That would be Esau/Edom versus Israel. Jesus/Christianity is Esau, Paganism is Edom.]

Chanukah commemorates a miraculous victory in a war in 167 B.C.E. A Greco-Macedonian kingdom, centered in what is today Syria, had tried to outlaw the Jewish religion in its homeland in Judea and to replace it with Hellenic culture. Many Jews, in fact, supported that goal. But that is no surprise, because Hellenism had enormous appeal.

Hellenism seemed to have everything going for it. It was up-to-date, sophisticated, and intellectually satisfying. It offered wealth, health, art, and glamour. It represented the entrance ticket to an imperial civilization. Hellenism offered the opportunity to think big.

Judaism sat at the opposite end of the scale. It was old, small, and poor. It had no empire. It had nothing to offer except faith, trust, love, and strength. But those things, it turns out, are items that the human heart cannot do without.

So the miraculous happened. A small band, burning with faith, went on to defeat an empire.

There is, of course, a rational explanation; there always is. “The Syrian-Greek state had passed its prime.” “The Jews had short lines of communication.” “They mastered guerrilla tactics.” “The Greeks overplayed their hand.” “Judea wasn’t worth the bones of a Macedonian grenadier anyhow.” If rational explanations are enough for you, then take your pick.

But if you think that “the heart has its reasons that reason knows not of,” if you think that there is more to life than shifting particles, if you respect science without worshipping it – in short, if you doubt that man is G?d, then wonder at the light of a miracle burning in the dark days of winter.”

Of course, this is an insightful and rich statement taken in simply literary terms. But it is, like Cahn’s Shemitah prophecy, both superficial and misleading.

And, taken literally (as too many in the Rabbinate do), it is the very essence  of what it condemns: It is a masterpiece of hubris.

And that, dear Rabbi, is a Greek pagan word that translates very roughly to “the beginning of wisdom is the fear of the gods.”

Hey,Hey, Ho, Ho, Western Civ Has Got To Go!

Remember that famous chant Jesse Jackson led on campus, “Hey,hey, ho, ho, Western Civ has got to go”?

It was directed against the centrality of Western classics in the University curriculum. They were to be replaced by more multicultural texts.

Ever since then, the mud people of the third-world, on whose behalf the meddlesome Jackson claimed to be speaking albeit uninvited, have been blamed for the death of Europe.

No one considered that there was a higher power that had a more malevolent and deep-rooted agenda than a mere revamp of the college canon.

From Jewish Answers:

Whether or not a particular person or nation is a biological descendant of Esau is obviously impossible to determine and not really important; what is essential to understand is that the World view of Esau has been passed down as a cultural inheritance throughout history from Edom, to the Roman Empire, to the Catholic Church, to Modern Europe and most recently to the United States and its ‘empire’ – in other words, Western Civilization as a whole. This World view has obviously been in a constant state of evolution throughout the generations – America, the land founded on tolerance has been a most fertile land for the Jews – Europe, on the other hand, was a nightmare; this dichotomy in Esau’s personality is brought out by our Sages in these two seemingly contradictory sources; on the one hand the Medrash states:

The name Esau has the same numerical value as Shalom (Peace)” (Kalla Rabati,3)

On the other hand, the Talmud analyses a verse in psalms:
‘Do not remove his bit…’(Psalms 140:9) – said Jacob to the Holy One: Master of the Universe – do not allow Esau his hearts desire…this refers to Germany of Edom, for if they were to be allowed loose, they would destroy the world! (Talmud Megilla, 6a-6b)


Rabbi: Europe Must Die Before Messiah Comes

Some Rabbis equate Europe, as Christian (at least, in heritage), with Edom, the sworn enemy of Israel in the Old Testament.

This equation is applied especially to Italy and Germany.

Before the Jewish Messiah can arrive, Edom must be destroyed.

The migrant/refugee crisis is the tool to destroy Edom so that the Messiah can establish himself.

Now, one can understand Jade Helm….



Rabbi Admits Shemitah Prophecy Was False

Yet another scam artist, Jonathan Cahn, bites the dust.

For all Christians, Jesus being Messiah, is the central key issue for the faith. This is also true for the Hebrew Roots Movement who use The Hebrew Calendar as the central foundation  for setting prophetic Jubilee and Sabbatical years (Shemitah). This became a major problem when Messianic Rabbi, Jonathan Cahn was confronted on one TV program, when one of his major promoters discovered that his date-setting predictions (of supposed coming calamities on America) ended up denying Jesus as the Messiah had him admit he based his book using calculations based on his own privately concocted new Hebrew Calendar, which never even existed.

Read the whole story of how Cahn’s Prophecy of a “Shemitah” judgment (7 year Biblical cycle of judgment on Israel) fell apart under a little serious questioning from another Hebrew Roots evangelist.

And yes, I know Shoebat never points out the Zionist hand in world affairs. Instead, as a converted Islamicist, he pushes the “Islamic Antichrist” line.

Oh dear.

Anti-Christs popping up everywhere…