Video: Israeli forces executing wounded youth in Occupied Hebron. At 0:22 seconds it shows an Israeli soldier shoot Mahdi in the back from close range as he lies wounded on the ground.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kB0zV9RxH5k
30th October 2015 | International Solidarity Movement | al-Khalil, occupied Palestine
On October 29th Mahdi Mohtaseb was executed by Israeli forces at the Salaymeh (160) checkpoint, near the Ibrahimi Mosque in the old city of al-Khalil (Hebron). The 23-year-old from Jabal Johar, who was employed in a local sweets shop, was supposed to meet his fiancée later in the day.
In a statement released the 27th of October by Amnesty International, they concluded that: “Israeli forces have carried out a series of unlawful killings of Palestinians using intentional lethal force without justification”. Amnesty also stated that “wilful killings of Palestinians in the Occupied Palestinian Territories are grave breaches of the Fourth Geneva Convention, over which all states can exercise universal jurisdiction.”
In the last week in al-Khalil, seven Palestinians have been murdered. Ezzedin Nabi Sha’ban Abu Shakhdam, 17 (Gush Etzion), Shadi Nabil Dweik, 22 (Gush Etzion), Houmam Adnan Sa’id, 23, Islam Rafiq Hammad Ibeido, 23, Mahdi Mohammad Ramadan al-Muhtasib, 23, and Farouk Abdel Qader Omar Sidr, 19.
Mahdi Mohtaseb, who is survived by four brothers, four sisters, and many grieving family and loved ones, joins the daily rising death toll of mostly Palestinian youths gunned down by Israeli forces and Israeli settlers since October 1st.
A fascinating monograph documenting the rise of Zionism within the British aristocracy makes the startling claim that this political movement owes its origins to the occultic beliefs of Britain’s ruling classes as a means to maintain and expand its empire. We consider some of its claims to correlate them with positions we have staked out on the subject of Zionism.
Mark Burdman wrote his fascinating essay on the development of Zionism by tracing its evolution from the early 19th century when various British statesmen advocated the establishment of a Jewish state as a means of controlling the Middle East, to World War 2 whose chief agitators were the British aristocrats who installed Adolph Hitler in power to further the Zionist cause – not because they were philo-Semitic, but because they were covetous of ruling the world.
One of the important elements of his history of Zionism is Burdman’s documentation of the seemingly irreconcilable hatred for Jews and advancement of Zionism as statecraft. We thus see the Janus faced policy, or the Hegelian dialectic at work, of which the British imperialists of the 19th century and later were masters.
More specifically Burdman notes with many quotes the utter contempt with which those of the Round Table, such as Cecil Rhodes and James Balfour, the latter of whom issued the infamous Balfour Declaration of 1917 to Lord Rothschild, held the Jews, juxtaposing the public policy pronouncements of Zionism with the private contempt for Semitic peoples.
While some say it matters not since the ends justifies the means, and although we strongly disagree, we draw attention to the more important element of racism as the motive for this policy. Burdman documents the extensive heritage of Zionism in Britain from Lord Palmerston, Benjamin Disraeli, Lord Balfour, David Lloyd George, and Winston Churchill and others, whose ultimate hand maiden Harry Truman actually did the dirty work of recognizing the State of Israel. Each of these oligarchs was imbued with a sense of towering racial superiority as expressed in the Anglo-Saxon race.
Even though a galaxy of British politicians agitated mightily the Zionist cause, they were actually a numerical minority who worked through various cutouts to advance their aim of a Zionist state under British imperial aegis. Such cutouts included Theodore Herzl, frequently revered as the father of the Jewish state, but quite frequently identified as a British agent during his life time, and a mad one at that.
Herzl in his own right was a tawdry character who died at the young age of 44 of gonorrhea, divorced from his wife, and involved in various debaucheries such as sodomy and pederasty. Such was the ideal instrument of British policy.
Behind the Zionist impulses of the British aristocracy was the racist views of the royalty which not only saw the Anglo-Saxons as the world’s finest and fittest race, but which in combination with the Jews, who were really Khazars and gentiles, made the world safe for Anglo-Zionist predations.
The racist motivations flowed from the occult in which the British royalty were heavily steeped, with such influential persons as Edward Bulwer-Lytton and Aleister Crowley among the more notorious Satanists who influenced the British royals.
watched this video on the respective home-page, „Klagemauer-TV“. I can agree to a large extend to the contents of this show, except for the claim made, “fossil oil deposits do renew by themselves, from a process inside the earth”. (maybe fossil energy depletion is a taboo for TPTB indeed) The speaker in the German version has a typical Swiss accent, one could even assume that the video would have been made by a Swiss team. Something is very strange though: we have MP Lutzi Stamm making a statement on this site, a site clearly opposed (at least on the front stage) to US-imperialism. I know for a fact, the under normal circumstances, Lutzi (and 95% of his fellow members in parliament) are not making any statements in public against US imperialism or NATO. Lutzi must have made these statements on this “compromising site” only, when he had been requested by the local representation of the US-Zionist cabal to do so.. KlagemauerTV translates to Wailing-WallTV! Very strongly assuming this is a Zionist scheme, even if the agenda is not yet clear for me.. (the scheme reminds me of the defunct “What do you believe / brianakira.worldpress.com”) Caveman
“As you know, the modern world, especially the Western world, is highly monopolised and many Western countries – whether they want to hear this or not – have voluntarily given up a considerable part of their sovereignty. To some extent, this is a result of the politics of blocs. Sometimes we find it very difficult to come to terms with them on geopolitical issues. It is hard to reach an agreement with people who whisper even at home for fear of being overheard by the Americans. This is not a joke or a figure of speech.” (Vladimir Putin)
(1) EU migrants are clearly a Nato operation: Migrants were pushed out of Nato-overseen camps in Nato state Turkey, where many jihadis for Nato-backed Syria war-making were recruited ... Turkey where all major movements in or out are under 24 / 7 Nato surveillance
Here's a shocking summary of migrant criminality & damage to European life, Germany already advising its women to dress with more skin covered, avoid going alone to train stations etc
(2) Tho migrant horrors are most prominently now in Germany, other Europeans tend to feel little sympathy for Germans, after watching 5 years of German cruelty to other EU nations above all Greece, as Germans profited hundreds of billions from euro currency exploitation ... And it was clear this was not just German elites but much of Germany's public enjoying seeing harsh abuse of Europe's vulnerable
So Angela Merkel, agent of cruel elites, now gives Germans themselves the 'Greek treatment' ... what can Germans say after dishing out cruelty to others for half a decade?
(3) Europe's alleged 'Left' is collapsing as 'leftist' leaders support migrants, indulge migrant crime, pretend Saudi-backed Islamic fundamentalists are 'normal', plus indulge banking debt-slavery crushing pensions & jobs & lives ... the farther right in Europe is increasingly perceived as the only credible set of voices protecting workers, much more 'socialist' even than alleged leftist parties -
Is this part of the plan, to pre-stage widespread far right victory across Europe by 2017-18?.
(4) Australia's former Prime Minister Tony Abbott says that Oz basically 'solved' its similar migrant problem - akin to Italy's with hundreds of thousands landing in Oz by boat. He speaks of how Australia almost entirely shut down previous flows of hundreds of thousands of migrants, simply by stopping boats, putting migrants briefly in camps, & sending most of them back, given they were not really 'refugees', as with the gangs invading Europe now.
Today, it seems, few migrants even try to approach Australia - though there are very credible allegations of Aussie cruelty & illegality in stopping the migrant flows, e.g., bribing boat captains to land their passengers in much poorer Indonesia
I'm leftist but I'm definitely against mass immigration, or too much immigration. When traditional societies, or rather local communities, get too much immigration too quickly it's hard on the local residents.
To be a liberal, or a lefty means you are certainly not racist, and you will hate all racism, but this puts liberals in an awkward position when immigration is getting too much. I hope more of them become brave enough, like me, to so no.
There's a little bit of racism in everyone, say's my black Jehovah Witness friend, who's the only intellectual there where I work. If my high street quickly became Moroccan I wouldn't be happy. I would feel that I have lost my home, and that it was now someone else's home. Liberals are making a grave mistake. Fortunately, with the few West Indian people I have been brave enough to mention this to agree with me. The eyes lit up of one black guy who is a colleague of mine and he said, 'but we can only say this in closed rooms without anyone knowing.' We were in total agreement.
Is this part of the plan, to pre-stage widespread far right victory across Europe by 2017-18?.
I'm not a conspiracy theorist but that makes sense. Some childhood friends recently caught up with me on Facebook. I now read their posts and read their Facebook page, and I'm shocked how many of these once gentle people are now raging right wingers and UKIP supporters. I dislike how they hate immigrants getting homes, medical care, and benefits, which I don't agree with them on, but do I agree with them about too much immigration. So it seems that the far right could easily sweep across the UK and become significant in elections.
Aangirfan will probably know more details about this. But there was once a so called 'far right' party in a Scandinavian country and their leader got assassinated by Muslim extremists. All the newspapers still today call it a 'far right party, except that it supported the welfare state and feared that too much immigration would ruin it, and its second in command was a west Indian. It may have not been a far right party at all, it was just an anti mass immigration party.
There has been a fear in Holland for some time now that the Muslims will outnumber them sometime soon and the country will change from being a post Christian liberal country to one that has a majority of Muslims with political control. That can't be right.
London has a very multicultural society which has integrated well giving an interesting vibrant mix which has remained largely 'liberal' in culture. But I think that anymore immigration will be too much, and has been to much over the neoliberal period.
I suspected that the American Chronical site that I got that excellent anti Zionist, anti Anglo Saxon ruling elite article from was libertarian so I wrote comment underneath it. Although I have edited and improved it for here.
Anonymous said...
A very good article but libertarianism is BS. It is the ruling elite's replacement after fascism failed to end democracy. The people of the US wanted something more progressive and this worried the ruling elite, so they invented libertarianism to could keep democracy at bay, or even do away with it. libertarians have been conned and there is nothing progressive in taking away ordinary people's right to vote and be able have a say in how their country is run. You've been had. Taking for a ride.
After the industrial revolution the ruling elite wanted more say in how their country was run to improve their businesses and so they wrestled some of the power away from the king. They liked democracy when only very rich men could vote, i.e., the Anglo Saxon ruling elite you mention above, but hated it when everyone else got a vote. So they used propaganda to defuse democracy and obscure the truth, as well as fund libertarian groups to fight against democracy for them.
A very good article but libertarianism is BS. It is the ruling elite's replacement after fascism failed to end democracy.
Hey ho, we're back to your largely 'straw' opinions again. Do you really think there is one orthodox version of libertarianism ?
The elite like democracy. You could consider two wolves and a sheep deciding what's for lunch; or you could look up Mencken.
The people of the US wanted something more progressive and this worried the ruling elite, so they invented libertarianism to could keep democracy at bay, or even do away with it.
Tish.
libertarians have been conned and there is nothing progressive in taking away ordinary people's right to vote and be able have a say in how their country is run. You've been had. Taking for a ride.
You do know the difference between an unsupported opinion, facts, logic, etc. ? And what constitutes a strawman, yes ?
After the industrial revolution the ruling elite wanted more say in how their country was run to improve their businesses and so they wrestled some of the power away from the king. They liked democracy when only very rich men could vote, i.e., the Anglo Saxon ruling elite you mention above, but hated it when everyone else got a vote. So they used propaganda to defuse democracy and obscure the truth, as well as fund libertarian groups to fight against democracy for them.
Before anyone corrects me, the very rich probably started demanding more political control during the merchant period where they made their fortunes importing exotic goods and foods from outside Europe. They also made their fortune out of the 500 year slave trade. I have an interesting post to write about this when an opportunity turns up.
All libertarianism has mainly one route, and without the Koch brother's funding libertarianism would be dead in the water. Like the Tea Party movement, it is not a grassroots movement at all, but came from the top down. The ruling class made it. And the ruling elite did something like what some Christians when put a New Testament in every hotel room in the US, they bought millions of copies of Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged and distributed them for free in the US universities.
Mark Ames, who is a liberal like me, has done a lot of research on the routes of libertarianism, and the historian Eric Zeusse, who is one of today's bravest journalist for exposing the crimes of the ruling elite, wrote the book Feudalism, Fascism, Libertarianism and Economics which shows what Austrian economics is really about, propaganda for the ruling elite, after all, they paid for it.
Today, some libertarians are very progressive indeed, and the left has largely gone belly up and is not progressive anymore. Communism was shit, and the Soviet Union was a horrible, dreadful failure. With the relentless propaganda from the Right - because they have enormous amounts of money they have to spend on it - the left became discredited. And with the CIA and MI6 infiltrating left wing groups, and the unions, to paint them in a bad light - even though most of the left were never communists, they were just anti the ruling elite - most of the left eventually gave up.
But Noam Chomsky was someone who didn't. Now I know the Anti Semites will say that he never criticizes Israel, but no one is perfect, and his track record for exposing the crimes of the Right is still very impressive.
So, libertarianism has many strands but they all share one common ideal, and that is very little government, which means that the ruling elite can do as they please, and Austrian pure free market economics, to reverse the gains of the middleclass made this century and make them poorer and mega rich richer.
Not all sections of the ruling elite want to do away with government, the war machine is too handy for them, but neither do Koch brothers, really, they just want it discredited and ineffective so they can get the tax on them to near zero, and so they can pollute as they like without anyone being to do anything to stop it.
Many libertarian groups, like Storm Clouds Gathering, have taken on a life of their own which I suspect the Koch brothers probably never really envisaged and are probably alarmed by it. But if libertarianism were ever to become more popular you can expect the Right will destroy it because they have the enormous vast financial resources to do so. Indeed, many countries like Vietnam, Indonesia, Laos, and Cambodia, have hardly any real Left today, and the crimes that the US committed have largely been forgotten. These countries are now vassals for US corporations.
This is the power of the Right, the Western ruling class, who, even in countries that the US had committed the most heinous atrocities in, and on a diabolical scale, were able to so successfully whitewash the memory of it out. And so too many libertarians today, who might have otherwise made very good left progressives, have been so successfully brainwashed by the ruling establishment.
"The True History of Libertarianism in America: A Phony Ideology to Promote a Corporate Agenda.'
"Before Milton Friedman was earning plaudits as an economic genius, he was a shill for the real estate industry and an early pioneer for big business propaganda known as libertarianism,' Mark Ames.
Crikey, there's actually a book on it. Weapons of Mass Migration: Forced Displacement, Coercion, and Foreign Policy, by Kelly M. Greenhill
That's terrible, we just about have it nice here in Europe. The ruling class tore up the Middle East and used Islamic extremists as dirty weapons to cause mass terror and suffering to ensure there would be no liberal democracies there, and now they are trying to do the same thing here to wreck our social democracies.
They ruling class want fascism and ultra Right wing parties to spread across Europe, and that includes the pseudo fascism libertarianism. All democracies lead to liberal and very moderate left societies in the end. And so the ruling class have spent a lot of money trying to discredit liberal democracy, and hence the reason why they have pushed Ayn Rand so much in the US.
Significant sections of ruling class are pure evil, but not all of them are so bad. Jamie Johnson is heir to the fortune of one of the richest families in the world. He's a sensitive, considerate, and lovely natured guy. This is a superb documentary.
The One Percent:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HmlX3fLQrEc
This 80-minute documentary focuses on the growing "wealth gap" in America, as seen through the eyes of filmmaker Jamie Johnson, a 27-year-old heir to the Johnson & Johnson pharmaceutical fortune. Johnson, who cut his film teeth at NYU and made the Emmy®-nominated 2003 HBO documentary Born Rich, here sets his sights on exploring the political, moral and emotional rationale that enables a tiny percentage of Americans - the one percent - to control nearly half the wealth of the entire United States. The film Includes interviews with Nicole Buffett, Bill Gates Sr., Adnan Khashoggi, Milton Friedman, Robert Reich, Ralph Nader and other luminaries.
Weapons of mass migration: forced displacement, coercion and foreign policy. Listen to the 7 May seminar by Professor Kelly M Greenhill (Tufts University).
There's a good part at the beginning where President Carter was pushing the Chinese government on human rights and said to them about allowing the Chinese people to emigrate if they wanted. The Chinese government then said to him, 'sure, and how many do you want, one millions, ten million, 30 million?'. Of course the US wanted none of them.
Video: Israeli forces executing wounded youth in Occupied Hebron. At 0:22 seconds it shows an Israeli soldier shoot Mahdi in the back from close range as he lies wounded on the ground.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kB0zV9RxH5k
30th October 2015 | International Solidarity Movement | al-Khalil, occupied Palestine
On October 29th Mahdi Mohtaseb was executed by Israeli forces at the Salaymeh (160) checkpoint, near the Ibrahimi Mosque in the old city of al-Khalil (Hebron). The 23-year-old from Jabal Johar, who was employed in a local sweets shop, was supposed to meet his fiancée later in the day.
In a statement released the 27th of October by Amnesty International, they concluded that: “Israeli forces have carried out a series of unlawful killings of Palestinians using intentional lethal force without justification”. Amnesty also stated that “wilful killings of Palestinians in the Occupied Palestinian Territories are grave breaches of the Fourth Geneva Convention, over which all states can exercise universal jurisdiction.”
In the last week in al-Khalil, seven Palestinians have been murdered. Ezzedin Nabi Sha’ban Abu Shakhdam, 17 (Gush Etzion), Shadi Nabil Dweik, 22 (Gush Etzion), Houmam Adnan Sa’id, 23, Islam Rafiq Hammad Ibeido, 23, Mahdi Mohammad Ramadan al-Muhtasib, 23, and Farouk Abdel Qader Omar Sidr, 19.
Mahdi Mohtaseb, who is survived by four brothers, four sisters, and many grieving family and loved ones, joins the daily rising death toll of mostly Palestinian youths gunned down by Israeli forces and Israeli settlers since October 1st.
http://palsolidarity.org/2015/10/video-israeli-forces-executing-wounded-youth-in-occupied-hebron/
An excellent article below, but I can only fit part of it in the box. First the link:
ReplyDeletehttp://theamericanchronicle.blogspot.co.uk/2014/09/zionism-and-nazism-two-sides-of-same.html
Zionism and Nazism, Two Sides of the Same Coin:
A fascinating monograph documenting the rise of Zionism within the British aristocracy makes the startling claim that this political movement owes its origins to the occultic beliefs of Britain’s ruling classes as a means to maintain and expand its empire. We consider some of its claims to correlate them with positions we have staked out on the subject of Zionism.
Mark Burdman wrote his fascinating essay on the development of Zionism by tracing its evolution from the early 19th century when various British statesmen advocated the establishment of a Jewish state as a means of controlling the Middle East, to World War 2 whose chief agitators were the British aristocrats who installed Adolph Hitler in power to further the Zionist cause – not because they were philo-Semitic, but because they were covetous of ruling the world.
One of the important elements of his history of Zionism is Burdman’s documentation of the seemingly irreconcilable hatred for Jews and advancement of Zionism as statecraft. We thus see the Janus faced policy, or the Hegelian dialectic at work, of which the British imperialists of the 19th century and later were masters.
More specifically Burdman notes with many quotes the utter contempt with which those of the Round Table, such as Cecil Rhodes and James Balfour, the latter of whom issued the infamous Balfour Declaration of 1917 to Lord Rothschild, held the Jews, juxtaposing the public policy pronouncements of Zionism with the private contempt for Semitic peoples.
While some say it matters not since the ends justifies the means, and although we strongly disagree, we draw attention to the more important element of racism as the motive for this policy. Burdman documents the extensive heritage of Zionism in Britain from Lord Palmerston, Benjamin Disraeli, Lord Balfour, David Lloyd George, and Winston Churchill and others, whose ultimate hand maiden Harry Truman actually did the dirty work of recognizing the State of Israel. Each of these oligarchs was imbued with a sense of towering racial superiority as expressed in the Anglo-Saxon race.
Even though a galaxy of British politicians agitated mightily the Zionist cause, they were actually a numerical minority who worked through various cutouts to advance their aim of a Zionist state under British imperial aegis. Such cutouts included Theodore Herzl, frequently revered as the father of the Jewish state, but quite frequently identified as a British agent during his life time, and a mad one at that.
Herzl in his own right was a tawdry character who died at the young age of 44 of gonorrhea, divorced from his wife, and involved in various debaucheries such as sodomy and pederasty. Such was the ideal instrument of British policy.
Behind the Zionist impulses of the British aristocracy was the racist views of the royalty which not only saw the Anglo-Saxons as the world’s finest and fittest race, but which in combination with the Jews, who were really Khazars and gentiles, made the world safe for Anglo-Zionist predations.
The racist motivations flowed from the occult in which the British royalty were heavily steeped, with such influential persons as Edward Bulwer-Lytton and Aleister Crowley among the more notorious Satanists who influenced the British royals.
watched this video on the respective home-page, „Klagemauer-TV“. I can agree to a large extend to the contents of this show, except for the claim made, “fossil oil deposits do renew by themselves, from a process inside the earth”. (maybe fossil energy depletion is a taboo for TPTB indeed)
ReplyDeleteThe speaker in the German version has a typical Swiss accent, one could even assume that the video would have been made by a Swiss team.
Something is very strange though: we have MP Lutzi Stamm making a statement on this site, a site clearly opposed (at least on the front stage) to US-imperialism.
I know for a fact, the under normal circumstances, Lutzi (and 95% of his fellow members in parliament) are not making any statements in public against US imperialism or NATO. Lutzi must have made these statements on this “compromising site” only, when he had been requested by the local representation of the US-Zionist cabal to do so..
KlagemauerTV translates to Wailing-WallTV! Very strongly assuming this is a Zionist scheme, even if the agenda is not yet clear for me..
(the scheme reminds me of the defunct “What do you believe / brianakira.worldpress.com”)
Caveman
“As you know, the modern world, especially the Western world, is highly monopolised and many Western countries – whether they want to hear this or not – have voluntarily given up a considerable part of their sovereignty. To some extent, this is a result of the politics of blocs. Sometimes we find it very difficult to come to terms with them on geopolitical issues. It is hard to reach an agreement with people who whisper even at home for fear of being overheard by the Americans. This is not a joke or a figure of speech.” (Vladimir Putin)
Delete(1) EU migrants are clearly a Nato operation: Migrants were pushed out of Nato-overseen camps in Nato state Turkey, where many jihadis for Nato-backed Syria war-making were recruited ... Turkey where all major movements in or out are under 24 / 7 Nato surveillance
ReplyDeleteHere's a shocking summary of migrant criminality & damage to European life, Germany already advising its women to dress with more skin covered, avoid going alone to train stations etc
(2) Tho migrant horrors are most prominently now in Germany, other Europeans tend to feel little sympathy for Germans, after watching 5 years of German cruelty to other EU nations above all Greece, as Germans profited hundreds of billions from euro currency exploitation ... And it was clear this was not just German elites but much of Germany's public enjoying seeing harsh abuse of Europe's vulnerable
So Angela Merkel, agent of cruel elites, now gives Germans themselves the 'Greek treatment' ... what can Germans say after dishing out cruelty to others for half a decade?
(3) Europe's alleged 'Left' is collapsing as 'leftist' leaders support migrants, indulge migrant crime, pretend Saudi-backed Islamic fundamentalists are 'normal', plus indulge banking debt-slavery crushing pensions & jobs & lives ... the farther right in Europe is increasingly perceived as the only credible set of voices protecting workers, much more 'socialist' even than alleged leftist parties -
Is this part of the plan, to pre-stage widespread far right victory across Europe by 2017-18?.
(4) Australia's former Prime Minister Tony Abbott says that Oz basically 'solved' its similar migrant problem - akin to Italy's with hundreds of thousands landing in Oz by boat. He speaks of how Australia almost entirely shut down previous flows of hundreds of thousands of migrants, simply by stopping boats, putting migrants briefly in camps, & sending most of them back, given they were not really 'refugees', as with the gangs invading Europe now.
Today, it seems, few migrants even try to approach Australia - though there are very credible allegations of Aussie cruelty & illegality in stopping the migrant flows, e.g., bribing boat captains to land their passengers in much poorer Indonesia
I'm leftist but I'm definitely against mass immigration, or too much immigration. When traditional societies, or rather local communities, get too much immigration too quickly it's hard on the local residents.
DeleteTo be a liberal, or a lefty means you are certainly not racist, and you will hate all racism, but this puts liberals in an awkward position when immigration is getting too much. I hope more of them become brave enough, like me, to so no.
There's a little bit of racism in everyone, say's my black Jehovah Witness friend, who's the only intellectual there where I work. If my high street quickly became Moroccan I wouldn't be happy. I would feel that I have lost my home, and that it was now someone else's home. Liberals are making a grave mistake. Fortunately, with the few West Indian people I have been brave enough to mention this to agree with me. The eyes lit up of one black guy who is a colleague of mine and he said, 'but we can only say this in closed rooms without anyone knowing.' We were in total agreement.
Is this part of the plan, to pre-stage widespread far right victory across Europe by 2017-18?.
DeleteI'm not a conspiracy theorist but that makes sense. Some childhood friends recently caught up with me on Facebook. I now read their posts and read their Facebook page, and I'm shocked how many of these once gentle people are now raging right wingers and UKIP supporters. I dislike how they hate immigrants getting homes, medical care, and benefits, which I don't agree with them on, but do I agree with them about too much immigration. So it seems that the far right could easily sweep across the UK and become significant in elections.
Aangirfan will probably know more details about this. But there was once a so called 'far right' party in a Scandinavian country and their leader got assassinated by Muslim extremists. All the newspapers still today call it a 'far right party, except that it supported the welfare state and feared that too much immigration would ruin it, and its second in command was a west Indian. It may have not been a far right party at all, it was just an anti mass immigration party.
There has been a fear in Holland for some time now that the Muslims will outnumber them sometime soon and the country will change from being a post Christian liberal country to one that has a majority of Muslims with political control. That can't be right.
London has a very multicultural society which has integrated well giving an interesting vibrant mix which has remained largely 'liberal' in culture. But I think that anymore immigration will be too much, and has been to much over the neoliberal period.
"Is this part of the plan, to pre-stage widespread far right victory across Europe by 2017-18?"
DeleteI think you are correct!
- Aangirfan
I suspected that the American Chronical site that I got that excellent anti Zionist, anti Anglo Saxon ruling elite article from was libertarian so I wrote comment underneath it. Although I have edited and improved it for here.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous said...
A very good article but libertarianism is BS. It is the ruling elite's replacement after fascism failed to end democracy. The people of the US wanted something more progressive and this worried the ruling elite, so they invented libertarianism to could keep democracy at bay, or even do away with it. libertarians have been conned and there is nothing progressive in taking away ordinary people's right to vote and be able have a say in how their country is run. You've been had. Taking for a ride.
After the industrial revolution the ruling elite wanted more say in how their country was run to improve their businesses and so they wrestled some of the power away from the king. They liked democracy when only very rich men could vote, i.e., the Anglo Saxon ruling elite you mention above, but hated it when everyone else got a vote. So they used propaganda to defuse democracy and obscure the truth, as well as fund libertarian groups to fight against democracy for them.
A very good article but libertarianism is BS. It is the ruling elite's replacement after fascism failed to end democracy.
DeleteHey ho, we're back to your largely 'straw' opinions again. Do you really think there is one orthodox version of libertarianism ?
The elite like democracy. You could consider two wolves and a sheep deciding what's for lunch; or you could look up Mencken.
The people of the US wanted something more progressive and this worried the ruling elite, so they invented libertarianism to could keep democracy at bay, or even do away with it.
Tish.
libertarians have been conned and there is nothing progressive in taking away ordinary people's right to vote and be able have a say in how their country is run. You've been had. Taking for a ride.
You do know the difference between an unsupported opinion, facts, logic, etc. ? And what constitutes a strawman, yes ?
After the industrial revolution the ruling elite wanted more say in how their country was run to improve their businesses and so they wrestled some of the power away from the king. They liked democracy when only very rich men could vote, i.e., the Anglo Saxon ruling elite you mention above, but hated it when everyone else got a vote. So they used propaganda to defuse democracy and obscure the truth, as well as fund libertarian groups to fight against democracy for them.
TIsh and piffle.
Before anyone corrects me, the very rich probably started demanding more political control during the merchant period where they made their fortunes importing exotic goods and foods from outside Europe. They also made their fortune out of the 500 year slave trade. I have an interesting post to write about this when an opportunity turns up.
DeleteAll libertarianism has mainly one route, and without the Koch brother's funding libertarianism would be dead in the water. Like the Tea Party movement, it is not a grassroots movement at all, but came from the top down. The ruling class made it. And the ruling elite did something like what some Christians when put a New Testament in every hotel room in the US, they bought millions of copies of Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged and distributed them for free in the US universities.
DeleteMark Ames, who is a liberal like me, has done a lot of research on the routes of libertarianism, and the historian Eric Zeusse, who is one of today's bravest journalist for exposing the crimes of the ruling elite, wrote the book Feudalism, Fascism, Libertarianism and Economics which shows what Austrian economics is really about, propaganda for the ruling elite, after all, they paid for it.
Today, some libertarians are very progressive indeed, and the left has largely gone belly up and is not progressive anymore. Communism was shit, and the Soviet Union was a horrible, dreadful failure. With the relentless propaganda from the Right - because they have enormous amounts of money they have to spend on it - the left became discredited. And with the CIA and MI6 infiltrating left wing groups, and the unions, to paint them in a bad light - even though most of the left were never communists, they were just anti the ruling elite - most of the left eventually gave up.
But Noam Chomsky was someone who didn't. Now I know the Anti Semites will say that he never criticizes Israel, but no one is perfect, and his track record for exposing the crimes of the Right is still very impressive.
So, libertarianism has many strands but they all share one common ideal, and that is very little government, which means that the ruling elite can do as they please, and Austrian pure free market economics, to reverse the gains of the middleclass made this century and make them poorer and mega rich richer.
Not all sections of the ruling elite want to do away with government, the war machine is too handy for them, but neither do Koch brothers, really, they just want it discredited and ineffective so they can get the tax on them to near zero, and so they can pollute as they like without anyone being to do anything to stop it.
Many libertarian groups, like Storm Clouds Gathering, have taken on a life of their own which I suspect the Koch brothers probably never really envisaged and are probably alarmed by it. But if libertarianism were ever to become more popular you can expect the Right will destroy it because they have the enormous vast financial resources to do so. Indeed, many countries like Vietnam, Indonesia, Laos, and Cambodia, have hardly any real Left today, and the crimes that the US committed have largely been forgotten. These countries are now vassals for US corporations.
This is the power of the Right, the Western ruling class, who, even in countries that the US had committed the most heinous atrocities in, and on a diabolical scale, were able to so successfully whitewash the memory of it out. And so too many libertarians today, who might have otherwise made very good left progressives, have been so successfully brainwashed by the ruling establishment.
"The True History of Libertarianism in America: A Phony Ideology to Promote a Corporate Agenda.'
"Before Milton Friedman was earning plaudits as an economic genius, he was a shill for the real estate industry and an early pioneer for big business propaganda known as libertarianism,' Mark Ames.
http://www.alternet.org/visions/true-history-libertarianism-america-phony-ideology-promote-corporate-agenda
The Pentagram just can't stop itself.
ReplyDeleteNew Doc up our Alley:
ReplyDeleteAbout Johnny Gosch
"Who Took Johnny"
Directed By: David Beilinson, Michael Galinsky, Suki Hawley
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2704816/
http://rumur.com/johnny/
https://www.facebook.com/whotookjohnny
Crikey, there's actually a book on it. Weapons of Mass Migration: Forced Displacement, Coercion, and Foreign Policy, by Kelly M. Greenhill
ReplyDeleteThat's terrible, we just about have it nice here in Europe. The ruling class tore up the Middle East and used Islamic extremists as dirty weapons to cause mass terror and suffering to ensure there would be no liberal democracies there, and now they are trying to do the same thing here to wreck our social democracies.
They ruling class want fascism and ultra Right wing parties to spread across Europe, and that includes the pseudo fascism libertarianism. All democracies lead to liberal and very moderate left societies in the end. And so the ruling class have spent a lot of money trying to discredit liberal democracy, and hence the reason why they have pushed Ayn Rand so much in the US.
Significant sections of ruling class are pure evil, but not all of them are so bad. Jamie Johnson is heir to the fortune of one of the richest families in the world. He's a sensitive, considerate, and lovely natured guy. This is a superb documentary.
The One Percent:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HmlX3fLQrEc
This 80-minute documentary focuses on the growing "wealth gap" in America, as seen through the eyes of filmmaker Jamie Johnson, a 27-year-old heir to the Johnson & Johnson pharmaceutical fortune. Johnson, who cut his film teeth at NYU and made the Emmy®-nominated 2003 HBO documentary Born Rich, here sets his sights on exploring the political, moral and emotional rationale that enables a tiny percentage of Americans - the one percent - to control nearly half the wealth of the entire United States. The film Includes interviews with Nicole Buffett, Bill Gates Sr., Adnan Khashoggi, Milton Friedman, Robert Reich, Ralph Nader and other luminaries.
Weapons of mass migration: forced displacement, coercion and foreign policy. Listen to the 7 May seminar by Professor Kelly M Greenhill (Tufts University).
ReplyDeletehttp://www.rsc.ox.ac.uk/news/weapons-of-mass-migration-forced-displacement-coercion-and-foreign-policy-kelly-m-greenhill
There's a good part at the beginning where President Carter was pushing the Chinese government on human rights and said to them about allowing the Chinese people to emigrate if they wanted. The Chinese government then said to him, 'sure, and how many do you want, one millions, ten million, 30 million?'. Of course the US wanted none of them.