Who Are The Illuminati?

Who Are The Illuminati?

By Richard Stone 

“A loose affiliation of millionaires and billionaires” (Paul Simon).
“The world is governed by far different personages from what is imagined by those who are not behind the scenes” (Benjamin Disraeli).
“Give me control over a nation’s currency, and I care not who makes the laws” (Mayer Rothschild).

Conspiracy theory is the theory that most of the world is secretly governed by a small group of men who operate behind the scenes. Conspiracy theory is now an accepted turn of phrase but sometimes one hears the expression, sometimes whispered rather than spoken. “The Illuminati”.

What does this mean? Who are the Illuminati? They are, in essence, a cartel of international bankers and industrialists based in Western Europe and North America. The names of certain families persist over long periods of time. Some of the most important names are Rothschild, Rockefeller, Morgan, Lazard, Warburg, Schroder and Schiff.

The pivotal family is probably the house of Rothschild, the descendants of Mayer Rothschild (1743 – 1812) of Frankfurt. The male descendants of this family, for at least two generations, generally married first cousins or even nieces. The family established banking institutions in Vienna, London, Naples and Paris as well as Frankfurt. Ever since the middle ages, these families have been building their power by lending money at rates of interest to the monarchies and governments of Europe who were forever in debt, particularly in times of war. Sooner than tax the population to raise funds, always an unpopular measure, they usually preferred to borrow money from the money-lenders. This was the birth of the concept “the national debt.” The countries of the world are forever in debt but where there is a debtor there is a creditor – who is this money owed to? It is owed to this coterie of international bankers.

By the nineteenth century the power of the Rothschild family was immense. They increased their wealth with great cunning and cleverness, while maintaining a low public profile. A notable example of their methods was their exploitation of the battle of Waterloo. The Rothschilds had spies watching the course of the battle and as soon as became evident that Wellington had won, a Rothschild agent traveled at maximum speed to London, arriving hours before Wellington’s own messenger. Rothschild received the messenger and began conspicuously selling his stocks. The whole stock exchange assumed that Wellington had lost and Napoleon had won so everybody started selling, at this point, other Rothschild agents bought up huge stocks at give-away prices. Thus an already massive fortune was massively increased.

The Rockefeller family may be equally important. The pivotal figure in this family was J.D.Rockefeller, who made his fortune out of Standard Oil or Esso in Ohio and Pennsylvania. He also controlled the railroads. When rival road transport systems were established he attempted to block them by parking his trains across the roads at level crossings. His basic business technique was the elimination of competitors at all costs, followed by the establishment of a monopoly, followed by profit taking. He rapidly gained a name for huge wealth, secrecy and hard and dirty business practice. In his later years he had a harsh and gaunt appearance, so to counter his bad “public image” JD more or less invented the PR industry. He had short films of himself made, calculated to charm the public, himself playing golf with a pretty little child for instance. This film was shown on TV recently. It has a rather false and amateurish air but was very effective with the public of the day.

The Rockerfellers currently have controlling interests in Exxon (the world’s biggest company) and the Chase Manhattan Bank, which turns over trillions of dollars a week. With so many billions in their hands already, what does more money mean? Obviously it means more power and more control over other human beings, but to what end and in whose name?

Apparently in the name of Lucifer, the fallen angel also known as the bringer of light, hence the name “Illuminati”, which means “the enlightened ones”. Lucifer is also known for the characteristics of pride, deception and impermanence. The illuminati were apparently founded in Bavaria in 1770 by one Adam Weisshaupt, a student of the Jewish philosopher Mendelsohn, and backed by the Rothschild family. The society has always been based on the lodges of Freemasonry, which was taken over at the highest levels during the course of the eighteenth century by agents of the Illuminati. Freemasonry is a very secretive institution, to the extent that members at one level do not know what members at another level are doing. Hence it is an organisation which is full of bonhomie and good deeds at the lower and middle levels, while its motives and deeds at the highest levels veer towards the dark side.

Both Freemasonry and Judaism have strong roots in the ancient Egyptian systems of religious belief, and it was this very similarity which attracted the illuminati to Freemasonry, for most of them were Jewish. It is a source of controversy today to speculate whether or not they are still predominantly Jewish. No unfair racism intended – they either are or they aren’t. Certainly there is much evidence to suggest that they are not, George Bush for instance, a prominent illuminati figure and obviously not Jewish.

The all seeing eye on the U.S. Dollar Bill

The United States of America is more or less a creation of Freemasonry. The symbol of Freemasonry was placed on the cornerstone of the Whitehouse, while the assembled Freemasons lodges stood and watched the ceremony. The famous all-seeing eye in the pyramid appears on the one dollar bill. It is one of the main symbols of Freemasonry. This bill also bears the inscription, in Latin, “1776, the year of inception of a new world order”. If one joins the dots formed by the stars of the thirteen original states one obtains an exact Star of David.

The goal of the IlIuminati is total control of the world. The only nations, which are holding out against their power, are some Islamic nations and China but this resistance is limited because the Illuminati have crushing economic power.

There are certain methods of subjugation and control which are indispensable to this power. The first is, of course, complete control over all financial systems, all borrowing and lending. All banks, all building societies, all insurance companies have to be under their control. At the lowest level even the smallest bank will be forced to toe the line. At the highest level the World Bank decides the fate of countries. It is an interesting and amazing fact that both the Federal Reserve Bank and the Bank of England are controlled by these Illuminati dynasties, in spite of the names of these banks, which suggest that they are run for public benefit. It is said that both Abraham Lincoln and John Kennedy wanted to change this system.

The second essential component is control of the media. It is controlled through business fashion. If the board meeting, or the management meeting, or the sales meeting, or the training meeting suggests that facts should be presented in a certain way, who is going to present them differently? There is an implied threat to one’s job and one’s career. Few people would gladly face demotion, retrenchment or the dole and most people are so ambitious they will do nearly anything “reasonable” to court favour with their superiors. This is how business is controlled and the media is the most important part of business, for it controls people’s minds. People are very suggestible and often lend more credence to what they see on “the box” than to what happens on their own street. The Illuminati know this and use this suggestibility factor to the full. Lenin’s key move during the Russian revolution was the capture of the radio station.

The third factor in the control system is the universities, and through them the whole education system. Particular effort is put into the schools of sociology, politics, economics and education, hence “liberal” systems of education which are often degenerate and even violent. Their men are inserted into the universities through the power of funding by big business. They then spread their influence downwards through tertiary to secondary and primary education.

The fourth factor is the enormous influence wielded by two similar organisations, The Council of Foreign Relations in the USA and the Royal Institute of International Affairs in England. These institutions are schools for statesmen, Illuminati statesmen. They are the stamping grounds of men such as Henry Kissinger, Zbigniew Brzezinksi and Lord Carrington. These two “think tanks” have a crucial influence on all US and British governments, no matter which party is “in power”. The statesmen produced by these institutions can and do decide the fate of nations.The tax-exempt foundations are also instruments of Illuminati power. The Ford foundation and the Rockefeller foundation are two prominent examples of this type of “charitable” institution. They were heavily involved in supporting various communist powers when the cold war was at its height. Communism versus capitalism arms race = more money and power for the Illuminati. So these are some of the structures through which the Illuminati work but what methods do they use?

Pitting one side against the other, using a theory devised by Hegel, which is: Thesis versus antitheses – synthesis.

Every force tends to have an opposite counterforce. The conflict between the two results in a new situation, the synthesis. The illuminati make it their business to be the synthesis. Thus no problem situation is ever “nipped in the bud” it is rather fostered and used, just as the Soviet Union was fostered and used.

The insertion of immigrant groups into countries is a variation of this divide and rule process. Each group can be played off against the other.

“Double talk” and “double think”. George Orwell knew instinctively what was going on when he invented these two expressions:
I categorically deny = it will happen a bit later.
Peace = war by another means.

To say one thing and do another is fundamental to Illuminati practice. They believe that the public will accept these lies through laziness and wishful thinking. Unfortunately they are usually correct.

“Keep them busy busy busy, back on the farm with the other animals.” We are kept so busy with business (or busyness) that we do not understand or participate in the decisions and events that will crucially affect our future.

When a real power move is made it is usually done secretly and suddenly often with the pretence that nothing has happened. There is preparation for opposition, but conflict is often not necessary as most people have been trained to be so passive that they will probably not create an effective opposition.

Use of front men in important positions. These front men have the characteristic of “servile obedience”, probably because of a blot or blots on their character which they are anxious to conceal. Most of the Presidents of the USA fall into this category. The current situation springs to mind. Behind the opponent stands the man with real power, who has long been groomed for this position. Men like Henry Kissinger, Zbigniew Brzezinski and George Bush are in this category.

The assassination of opposing leaders as quietly and as secretly as possible, so as to simulate a natural death. If this is not possible due to time constraints or other limited circumstances, surrogates are used and the lines of suspicion are covered by deception, false accusation and if necessary, multiple assassinations. Induced heart attacks, fake motor accidents and apparent suicides are also favoured methods of assassination.

Social engineering. An easily manipulated rabble is what is required. Mixed population groups with weak morals, weak traditions, low educational standards and weak group willpower are the aim. Those with special aptitudes can be taken out and trained to serve the illuminati for technical purposes, security purposes or as part of the propaganda apparatus. The middle class will become surplus to requirements and will be reduced to relative poverty.

Mockery and submission of the manners and morals of societies which show any resistance. Control of the media, the fashion industries and the education systems are essential components in this strategy. “Free love”, the cult of youth, mockery of the Christian and Muslim faiths also fall into this category. “I don’t give a rats ass about Jesus Christ” is one recent masterpiece from one of Hollywood’s biggest starts. He probably didn’t realise what he was saying, which makes him a “useful idiot’. A “useful idiot” is much more effective than a conscious supporter. By these means of subversion societies and nations are conquered from within and open battle is usually not necessary.

The conduct of unrelenting economic warfare. This is the real war and continues even while the bombs are falling and the bullets are flying. The important part is the control of the enemy’s economy after the conflict. The recent economic crash in the far-eastern countries is in reality an assertion of the Illuminati’s economic power, an expression of economic dominance. The Illuminati now control 10-15% of the Japanese economy. This is public knowledge, that is what has been bought at bargain prices. In reality they probably control much more.

Control and exploitation of the standards of public health. The sale of prescription drugs is a huge business generating mega profits. Medical operations and treatments can also be very profitable to big business. These extreme treatments have their place but are over-used for the sake of profit.

In fact big business, particularly the big drug companies, have a vested interest in the ill health of the population. These companies, working through the US Food and Drug Administration, have tried to suppress the health food industry. In this they have largely failed but now the game is to own it and control it so that health foods can only be afforded by the elite.

Argument through defamation of character. The factual debate is ignored while characters are defamed. This is usually a very effective technique as many human beings are very suggestible and seem reluctant to use their reasoning abilities. Thus a “smear campaign” can easily draw attention away from the facts.

To conclude, it is growing increasingly evident that a world government is developing, and many would say that it is probably no bad thing, but few have asked for what purpose this “new world order” is created. Nor have they asked themselves what the consequences will be. These consequences (or some of them) will probably be as follows:

• Increasing profits for big business, increasing poverty for the middle class (who they despise). A rapid decline in moral standards and the promotion of social decay.

• Transience. Jobs that don’t last; neighbourhoods that don’t last.

• Increasing levels of crime and violence.

• Decline and demise of public services; replacement by private enterprise – good service for the few who can afford it.

• Ongoing ill health for the bulk of the population because of stress; poor quality foods; food additives; genetic engineering; pollution and drugs. There may be good health for those who can afford it – only the rich and well informed.

• The gradual phasing out of national governments, which will have powers more like the regional governments of today.

• The formation of several conglomerations like the United States.

In time a world leader will be announced, a real one this time. A pity he will have a cynical contempt for the most of humanity. Do we deserve it?

Police treating death of Russian businessman Nikolay Glushkov as murder

Introduction — March 16, 2018


Nikolai Glushkov. Click to enlarge

Nikolai Glushkov was found dead in his New Malden home in Surrey days after the poisoning of Sergei Skripal and his daughter.
Coming so soon after Skripal’s poisoning suspicions were raised and now they’ve apparently been confirmed: police are treating the death of the 68-year-old Russian as murder.
Would the Russians really be so stupid as to kill another Russian exile and a friend of Boris Berezovsky, an outspoken critic of President Putin, so quickly after trying to kill Sergei Skripal? If indeed thay had tried to kill him. Or was Nikolai Glushkow’s death simply used to ram home the message that Western intelligence would like us to believe: namely that Putin is a ruthless tyrant? Ed.

Police treating death of Russian businessman Nikolay Glushkov as murder

ITV News — March 16, 2018

Counter-terror police are treating the death of 68-year-old Russian businessman Nikolay Glushkov as murder, Scotland Yard said.

Scotland Yard said a post-mortem examination found that Mr Glushkov’s cause of death was “compression to the neck”.

The businessman was a close friend of Vladimir Putin critic Boris Berezovsky.

The Met added: “At this stage, there is nothing to suggest any link to the attempted murders in Salisbury, nor any evidence that he was poisoned.”

Mr Glushkov’s body was found at his home in Clarence Avenue, New Malden, south-west London on Monday but police said at the time his death was “unexplained”.

The retired financial director had lived at the New Malden address for two years.

Scotland Yard said its Counter-Terrorism Command is leading the murder investigation “because of the associations Mr Glushkov is believed to have had”.


Of A Type Developed By Liars

Craig Murray — craimurray.co.uk March 16, 2018

I have now received confirmation from a well placed FCO source that Porton Down scientists are not able to identify the nerve gas as being of Russian manufacture, and have been resentful of the pressure being placed on them to do so. Porton Down would only sign up to the formulation “of a type developed by Russia” after a rather difficult meeting where this was agreed as a compromise formulation. The Russians were allegedly researching, in the “Novichok” programme a generation of nerve agents which could be produced from commercially available precursors such as insecticides and fertilisers. This substance is a “novichok” in that sense. It is of that type. Just as I am typing on a laptop of a type developed by the United States, though this one was made in China.

To anybody with a Whitehall background, this has been obvious for several days. The government has never said the nerve agent was made in Russia, or that it can only be made in Russia. The exact formulation “of a type developed by Russia” was used by Theresa May in parliament, used by the UK at the UN Security Council, used by Boris Johnson on the BBC yesterday and, most tellingly of all, “of a type developed by Russia” is the precise phrase used in the joint communique issued by the UK, USA, France and Germany yesterday:

This use of a military-grade nerve agent, of a type developed by Russia, constitutes the first offensive use of a nerve agent in Europe since the Second World War.

When the same extremely careful phrasing is never deviated from, you know it is the result of a very delicate Whitehall compromise. My FCO source, like me, remembers the extreme pressure put on FCO staff and other civil servants to sign off the dirty dossier on Iraqi WMD, some of which pressure I recount in my memoir Murder in Samarkand. She volunteered the comparison to what is happening now, particularly at Porton Down, with no prompting from me.

Separately I have written to the media office at OPCW to ask them to confirm that there has never been any physical evidence of the existence of Russian Novichoks, and the programme of inspection and destruction of Russian chemical weapons was completed last year.

Did you know these interesting facts?

OPCW inspectors have had full access to all known Russian chemical weapons facilities for over a decade – including those identified by the “Novichok” alleged whistleblower Mirzayanov – and last year OPCW inspectors completed the destruction of the last of 40,000 tonnes of Russian chemical weapons

By contrast, the programme of destruction of US chemical weapons stocks still has five years to run

Israel has extensive stocks of chemical weapons but has always refused to declare any of them to the OPCW. Israel is not a state party to the Chemical Weapons Convention nor a member of the OPCW. Israel signed in 1993 but refused to ratify as this would mean inspection and destruction of its chemical weapons. Israel undoubtedly has as much technical capacity as any state to synthesise “Novichoks”.

Until this week, the near-universal belief among chemical weapons experts, and the official position of the OPCW was that “Novichoks” was at most a theoretical research programme which the Russians had never succeeded in actually synthesising and manufacturing. That is why they are not on the OPCW list of banned chemical weapons.

Porton Down is still not certain it is the Russians who have apparently synthesised a “Novichok”. Hence “Of a type developed by Russia”. Note developed, not made, produced or manufactured.

It is very carefully worded propaganda. Of a type developed by liars.


This post prompted another old colleague to get in touch. On the bright side, the FCO have persuaded Boris he has to let the OPCW investigate a sample. But not just yet. The expectation is the inquiry committee will be chaired by a Chinese delegate. The Boris plan is to get the OPCW also to sign up to the “as developed by Russia” formula, and diplomacy to this end is being undertaken in Beijing right now.

I don’t suppose there is any sign of the BBC doing any actual journalism on this?


Hold my beer and watch this!

The Saker — March 15, 2018


Rattlesnakes have a terrible reputation.  Here were I live, in Florida, we have the biggest rattlesnakes on the planet, the Eastern Diamondback (Crotalus adamanteus).  They are huge and can reach well over 2m (6ft) in length and weigh up to 15kg (30lbs).  The Eastern Diamondback’s venom is not the most potent out there, but they can deliver *a lot* of it.  So, yes, it is a formidable creature.  But it is also a gentle creature and truly very shy one.
Eastern Diamonbacks are also a stunningly beautiful creatures.  I confess that I absolutely love them.
For all their reputation for nastiness, Eastern Diamonbacks will never ever attack you if they can avoid it.  I have seen a lot of these snakes on my hikes, I have manipulated them (with a hook), and I have seen my German Shepherd come nose to nose with one (literally) and that Eastern Diamondback did not strike.  Why?  Because these snakes will do everything they can to avoid having to bite you.
First and foremost, they hide.  Really well.  You can stand right next to a large Eastern Diamondback and never notice it.  You can walk right by, and it won’t move, or rattle its tail, and you will never know that it was there.  Camouflage is their first line of defense.
Then, if discovered, they will rattle their tails.  If needed, very loudly.  You can easily hear the rattle from an Eastern Diamondback from 5m (15ft) away.  More than enough distance to easily avoid it.
Furthermore, if given the chance, the Eastern Diamondback will retreat and hide.
Finally, when cornered a lot of them try what is called a “dry bite”: they do bite you, but deliver no venom.  Why? Because you are not prey, so what would be the point of envenomating you?  The Eastern Diamondback does not want you dead, it wants you to let it live!
I was once told by a park ranger in Arizona that the profile of a typical rattlesnake bite victim is: white, male, with tattoos and the famous last words “hold my beer and watch this!“.
Why am I telling you all this?
Because that is exactly what I see happening before my horrified eyes.
Russia is the Eastern Diamondback desperately trying to do all it can to avoid to have to strike.  The West is the drunk idiot full of hubris, arrogance and a very mistaken sense of invulnerability saying “hold my beer and watch this!“.
Keep in mind that in a confrontation with a drunken human the Eastern Diamondback is most unlikely to survive.  And it knows that, and that is why it does everything it can to avoid such a confrontation in the first place.  But if cornered or attacked the Diamondback will strike.  Hard. Want to see what such a strike looks like?  Like this:


You most definitely do NOT want to be on the receiving end of that strike!
But that’s for normal, sober, people.  When you are drunk your attitude is “hold my beer and watch this!” you “know” that you can handle that snake.
They are all at it right now.  May, Trump, Macron and Merkel, of course, but also the their sycophantic presstitutes and the herds of zombified followers.  They all believe in their invulnerability and superiority.
The terrifying truth is that these folks have NO IDEA whom they are dealing with nor do they understand the consequences of pushing Russia too hard.  Oh, in theory they do (yeah, yeah, Napoleon, Hitler, we know!).  But in their guts, they feel safe, superior and just can’t conceive that they can die and their entire society simply disappear.
I suggest that they carefully ponder the following.
In a recent interview, Putin was asked about the rationale of a retaliatory strike by Russia if she was attacked by the USA.  Putin replied the following: “Yes, for mankind this would be a global catastrophe, for the world it would be a global catastrophe, but as a citizen of Russia and as the Head of the Russian state I ask: “what need would we have a world if there is no Russia?“.
So there you have it, directly from Putin: if the AngloZionist plan is to eliminate Russia (whether physically or otherwise), then the Russian people have no need for such a world.  Consider these words as the Russian version of a very loud, almost desperate, rattle.
And look at how they are all trying to see how far they can “safely” push Russia.
I wonder if that Russian “rattle” will be loud enough to stop the West before it is too late.
I am not so sure.
The Saker


Gun Control. Again

Irish Savant — March 15, 2018

guns students

I see that there have been mass walkouts from schools throughout America in protest against gun violence. According to Vox, the students want to ‘deliver a simple message: Reducing gun violence is about more than stopping mass shootings in schools. It’s also about addressing how violence affects communities of color‘.  Are we to assume from this that gun violence is ok if the victims are White? In any event they’re ‘now calling for an end to gun violence through a comprehensive program that addresses youth unemployment, mental health services, and improved school resources‘. In other words a few more billions handed over by Whitey to ‘community organisers’ to…..well, whatever they do I’m sure every last cent will be rigorously accounted for.
So let’s take a minute to show that the gun control project is unsupported by either fact or logic and examine why it nonetheless attracts such support from our overlords.
Bad guys can always acquire a gun. Would-be murderers or terrorists can always get hold a gun or if not a weapon equally lethal. This applies especially in the USA where existing circumstances (hundreds of millions of guns in existence and Latin America lying across a porous border) render it impossible to disarm gang-bangers or terrorists.
Bad guys will ignore gun-free zone warnings. In the name of Jesus it should not be necessary to point this out but many otherwise normal people profess to think that sticking up a sign will stop would-be mass murderers. Can you just imagine Nikolas Cruz seeing that sign at the Broward school turning on his heel muttering ‘damn it, must find some other kind of weaponry!‘. It’d be comical were not lives as stake.
The ownership/murder ratio does not hold up. The ratio of gun ownership does not correlate at all with the ratio of murders. For instance Norway, Canada and Switzerland lag only slightly behind the USA in the gun ownership ratio but the gun death ratio (especially in Norway and Switzerland) is but a fraction of America’s. Same within the USA, States and cities with rigid gun control laws have the highest ratios of gun crime.
The 80/20 rule applies: Analysis of race-delineated gun deaths shows that approximately 80% of White killers kill themselves while the ratio is reversed for black killers.
Gun deaths are actually declining: Despite the opportunistic hysteria that accompanies every mass killing in the USA the number of gun deaths there has actually declined since the nineties. (Last year 12 per 100,000, 15 for most of the nineties…a 20% decline). Now apparently enhanced surgical skills (plenty of practice!) represent an important factor in the reduction. But the fact is that gun deaths are less of a problem now than they were twenty years ago.
 Legally-owned gun-holders can deter or foil attacks. Think of the football coach who valiantly threw himself in front of his students when Cruz started firing. What if he had had a powerful gun? We know what would have happened. Cruz would have been offed and the death toll drastically reduced. Note that American politicians strangely enough have no problem with guns when its their own asses being protected. The takeaway: Guns don’t murder, the people who use them do.
The nigger in the woodpile: An appropriate metaphor here because the mystery ingredient underpinning all of the anomalies above is race. As FBI statistics show, year after year, blacks murder at about six times the rate of Whites, Hispanics three to four times the White rate. If you normalise the figures, i.e. isolate the ratio of gun murders committed by Whites, you’ll see that America is little different from most European countries.
It should be clear therefore – even to a sociology professor – that the whole gun control project is based on false assumptions and contradictory data. The measures proposed are heavily skewed to disarm law-abiding Whites while making little or no impact on the overall gun murder rate. So it’s totally misdirected and count-productive.
Or is it?
I ask because the gun control project in America is absolutely dominated by Jewish interest groups*. And why would Jews would be so hostile to private gun ownership? After all, seeing as they portray themselves – ad nauseam – as hapless hard-working victims of pogroms throughout history you’d imagine they’d welcome the chance to arm themselves. In explanation I offer my Iron Law Of White Goyim Shafting. This law states the following: “If organised Jewry is lock-step in unison behind a given measure the ultimate objective of that measure is to shaft the White goyim”.
Check it out. Works every time, as consistent as Newton’s Law of Gravity or Mendel’s Law of Independent Assortment.
As an explanation for this apparent paradox I offer the experience of colonialism. Understand that every colonial power assigned top priority to disarming the colonised population. The British Empire expended enormous amounts of blood, treasure and a variety of tactics (carrots, sticks, deception) in separating the natives from their arms. Am I uncharitable in suggesting that Jews regard America as colonised territory, a territory in which their position relative to the general population is analogous to that of – for example – Whites in Kenya under colonialism? The nightmare scenario for the settler there was the prospect of being surrounded by well-armed Kikuyu or Masai tribesmen. Which explains why West Bank settlers are armed to the teeth day and night. (A practice with which Feinstein, Schumer, Schiff et al seem to have no difficulty.) So maybe in the fevered imagination of Jewish gun control advocates White Christians represent the natives outside the compound poised to slit their throats at the first opportunity.
In that case if you are the Government doesn’t it make sense for guns to be controlled by the Government?
* The Washington Alliance for Gun Responsibility represents a virtual who’s who of leading “American” Jewish organisations supporting gun control including: “The Anti-Defamation League, Bet Alef, Congregation Beth Shalom, Jewish Council for Public Affairs, Jewish Family Service, Jewish Federation of Greater Seattle, Kavana Cooperative, Kol HaNeshamah, National Council of Jewish Women, Stroum Jewish Community Center, Temple Beth Am, Temple Beth Hatfiloh, Temple Beth Or, Temple B’Nai Torah, Temple De Hirsch Sinai, Tikvah Chadashah, Herzl Ner Tamid, Temple Beth El and the Washington State Holocaust Education Resource Center.”


Escorted By Armed Guards, Bernie Sanders Attends Anti-gun March

Kit Daniels — Infowars March 14, 2018

Bernie Sanders was escorted by armed guards as he addressed an anti-gun march in Washington, DC.

Sanders live-streamed himself and his entourage of armed Capitol Police at the event on Wednesday while he waded through a crowd of gun control proponents.

At several times during the live stream, the guards blocked students from getting too close to Sanders.

Sanders likely felt well-protected by his Glock-carrying guards as he told marchers to have “courage to take out the NRA.”

It seems that Sanders wants gun control for everyone – except for his own security detail, a luxury a majority of Americans cannot afford.

Other gun control proponents also enjoy the security of armed guards, like late night host Jimmy Kimmel, for example, who actually beefed up his security over the past year due to the increasingly political nature of his show, including his demands for gun control.

“Ever since the late-night show host began crusading against the effort by President Donald Trump and congressional Republicans to repeal the Affordable Care Act, there have been ‘incidents with Trump supporters’ that have forced him to increase security at his show tapings,” reported Mercury News. “In response, ‘the show has increased personnel at both the front and back entrances. This personnel consists of highly-trained, off-duty police officers.’”

Nearly every celebrity advocate of gun control has armed bodyguards – in other words, one rule for you, another rule for them.

Hence the hypocrisy of celebrities and government officials who demand strict gun control while being protected by armed bodyguards.

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/RealKitDaniels


Student Anti-Gun Protests Orchestrated by Soros Communists

henrymakow.com — March 15, 2018


In 2015,  David Hogg, the school mass shooting extraordinaire/teen propagandist/”Gun Control” proponent, tweeted his support for pedophile satanist John Podesta’s Public “think tank,” Center for American Progress He also has a relationship with CNN which is virtually a branch of the Democratic Party. 
Communists have always operated through “popular front” movements, which pretend to be grassroots movements but are actually organized and funded by the Masonic Jewish (Communist) central bankers. Having run through women and minorities, they have recently mobilized students render patriotic Americans helpless to resist their police state.  
If we understand that Communism is really a monopoly over everything (money, power, thought) by the Masonic Jewish (Satanist) central bankers who issue our currency, you will understand that Communism has arrived and must be fought.

by Christina Marlowe — (henrymakow.com) 

One of the largest of the highly organized groups responsible for the recent engineered student demonstrations is called EVERYTOWN for Gun Safety Support Fund, a SuperPAC 501 (c)(3) that purportedly “…seeks to improve our understanding of the causes of gun violence and the means to reduce it…” Warren Buffet and NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg are among those on the Advisory Board.
EVERYTOWN is directly linked to Every Voice dot org, a 501 (c)(4) “social welfare” organization that is funded by several prominent figures, most notable Jonathan Soros and also by George Soros himself through his Open Society organization.


Continues …

Elected Governments Decide Nothing That Matters. Lecture at the KGB (FSB)

YouTube — Jan 28, 2018

YouTube Will Fight “Conspiracy” Videos Using Wikipedia

Vigilant Citizen — March 15, 2018


YouTube will display links to Wikipedia and other “fact-based” sites along videos about “conspiracy theories”.
After demonetizing thousands of channels (many of which were “truther” and “conspiracy”-related), YouTube is now taking further steps to fight undesirable videos. YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki announced this week that the video platform will soon begin displaying links to “fact-based” sites alongside conspiracy videos. Called “information cues”, these snippets of information will link to “reputable” articles in order to combat “hoaxes” and “fake news” stories (gotta use lots of quotation marks to highlight mass media’s biased vocabulary).
Here’s how it will work: If you search and click on a conspiracy theory video about, say, chemtrails, YouTube will now link to a Wikipedia page that debunks the hoax alongside the video. A video calling into question whether humans have ever landed on the moon might be accompanied by the official Wikipedia page about the Apollo Moon landing in 1969. Wojcicki says the feature will only include conspiracy theories right now that have “significant debate” on the platform. “Our goal is to start with a list of internet conspiracies listed on the internet where there is a lot of active discussion on YouTube,” Wojcicki said at SXSW.
– Wired, YouTube Will Link Directly to Wikipedia to Fight Conspiracy Theories

The announcement comes shortly after YouTube was blamed for the distribution of “conspiracy theory” videos concerning the Florida shooting. In the wake of the event, the top trending video on YouTube was about crisis actors (notably David Hogg) appearing on camera. The video was quickly removed from the platform.
Using Wikipedia, a text-based, volunteer encyclopedia site, that can be edited by anyone, is a rather perplexing choice. While college and university students are prohibited from using the site as an information source due to reliability issues, Wikipedia will be used as a “fact-checking” site by YouTube. Maybe that’s because most Wikipedia articles completely deny most conspiracies. Although not officially announced, expect to see Snopes as another “fact-checking” site … Despite the fact that the site has a clear pro-elite agenda.
While YouTube’s new measure still allows the viewing of conspiracy videos, elite-owned sites such as Wired are already pushing for the outright banning of conspiracy theories on the platform.

Dragons den

YouTube has also still yet to decide and implement clear rules for when uploading conspiracy theory content violates its Community Guidelines. Nothing in the rules explicitly prevents creators from publishing videos featuring conspiracy theories or misleading information, but lately YouTube has been cracking down on accounts that spread hoaxes anyway.
– Ibid.
Needless to say, media giants have been engaging in the past months on a slippery slope that is extremely dangerous, where the line between “truth” and “conspiracy”, “facts” and “fake news” can be arbitrarily determined by outside agents. While journalists used to be champions of free speech and information, they are now spineless hacks cheering for the coming of an Orwellian thought police.


Three Stunning Admissions From Top U.S. General in the Middle East

Haaretz and Reuters — March 15, 2018

General Joseph Votel. Click to enlarge

General Joseph Votel. Click to enlarge

The top U.S. general in the Middle East testified before Congress on Tuesday and dropped several bombshells: from signaled support for the Iran nuclear deal, admitting the U.S. does not know what Saudi Arabia does with its bombs in Yemen and that Assad has won the Syrian Civil War.

U.S. Army General Joseph Votel said the Iran agreement, which President Donald Trump has threatened to withdraw from, has played an important role in addressing Iran’s nuclear program.

“The JCPOA addresses one of the principle threats that we deal with from Iran, so if the JCPOA goes away, then we will have to have another way to deal with their nuclear weapons program,” said U.S. Army General Joseph Votel. JCPOA, or Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, is the formal name of the accord reached with Iran in July 2015 in Vienna.

The top U.S. general in the Middle East testified before Congress on Tuesday and dropped several bombshells: from signaled support for the Iran nuclear deal, admitting the U.S. does not know what Saudi Arabia does with its bombs in Yemen and that Assad has won the Syrian Civil War.

U.S. Army General Joseph Votel said the Iran agreement, which President Donald Trump has threatened to withdraw from, has played an important role in addressing Iran’s nuclear program.

“The JCPOA addresses one of the principle threats that we deal with from Iran, so if the JCPOA goes away, then we will have to have another way to deal with their nuclear weapons program,” said U.S. Army General Joseph Votel. JCPOA, or Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, is the formal name of the accord reached with Iran in July 2015 in Vienna.

Tillerson had joined Defense Secretary Jim Mattis in pressing a skeptical Trump to stick with the agreement with Iran.

“There would be some concern (in the region), I think, about how we intended to address that particular threat if it was not being addressed through the JCPOA. … Right now, I think it is in our interest” to stay in the deal, Votel said.

When a lawmaker asked whether he agreed with Mattis and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Joseph Dunford’s position on the deal, Votel said: “Yes, I share their position.”

Mattis said late last year that the United States should consider staying in the Iran nuclear deal unless it was proven Tehran was not complying or that the agreement was not in the U.S. national interest.

A collapse of the Iran nuclear deal would be a “great loss,” the United Nations atomic watchdog’s chief warned Trump recently, giving a wide-ranging defense of the accord.

Iran has stayed within the deal’s restrictions since Trump took office but has fired diplomatic warning shots at Washington in recent weeks. It said on Monday that it could rapidly enrich uranium to a higher degree of purity if the deal collapsed.


Votel also discussed the situation in Syria at the hearing.

During the Syrian army’s offensive in eastern Ghouta, more than 1,100 civilians have died. Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s forces, backed by Russia and Iran, say they are targeting “terrorist” groups shelling the capital.

U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley warned on Monday that Washington “remains prepared to act if we must,” if the U.N. Security Council failed to act on Syria.

Votel said the best way to deter Russia, which backs Assad, was through political and diplomatic channels.

“Certainly if there are other things that are considered, you know, we will do what we are told. … (But) I don’t recommend that at this particular point,” Votel said, in an apparent to reference to military options.

Republican Senator Lindsey Graham asked whether it was too strong to say that with Russia and Iran’s help, Assad had “won” the civil war in Syria.

“I do not think that is too strong of a statement,” Votel said.

Graham also asked if the United States’ policy on Syria was still to seek the removal of Assad from power.

“I don’t know that that’s our particular policy at this particular point. Our focus remains on the defeat of ISIS,” Votel said, using an acronym for Islamic State.

Saudi Arabia

In a stunning exchange with Democratic Senator Elizabeth Warren, Votel admitted that Centcom doesn’t know when U.S. fuel and munitions are used in Yemen.

“General Votel, does CENTCOM track the purpose of the missions it is refueling? In other words, where a U.S.-refueled aircraft is going, what targets it strikes, and the result of the mission?” Warren asked.

“Senator, we do not,” Votel replied.

The Senator followed up, citing reports that U.S. munitions have been used against civilians in Yemen, she asked, “General Votel, when you receive reports like this from credible media organizations or outside observers, is CENTCOM able to tell if U.S. fuel or U.S. munitions were used in that strike?”

“No, senator, I don’t believe we are,” he replied.

Showing surprise at the general’s response, Warren concluded, “We need to be clear about this: Saudi Arabia’s the one receiving American weapons and American support. And that means we bear some responsibility here. And that means we need to hold our partners and our allies accountable for how those resources are used,” she said.



US extremist monitor retracts article, apologies for linking journalists to Neo-Nazis

Sputnik News — March 15, 2018

A US-based organization that monitors extremist activity has apologized for linking several award-winning journalists to white supremacists and far-right groups in an article and deleted the story from its website.

A controversial article published by the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), was retracted after it received angry reactions from those involved. Prominent journalist Max Blumenthal, who was the target of the article’s ire, harshly called the story a “lie-filled, McCarthyite piece of innuendo.”

Rania Khalek, who is also mentioned in the article in a negative way, noted that the SPLC seems to be “smearing people who are antiwar as fascists.”


Continues …

The Novichok Story Is Indeed Another Iraqi WMD Scam

Craig Murray — craigmurray.co.uk March 14, 2018

As recently as 2016 Dr Robin Black, Head of the Detection Laboratory at the UK’s only chemical weapons facility at Porton Down, a former colleague of Dr David Kelly, published in an extremely prestigious scientific journal that the evidence for the existence of Novichoks was scant and their composition unknown.

In recent years, there has been much speculation that a fourth generation of nerve agents, ‘Novichoks’ (newcomer), was developed in Russia, beginning in the 1970s as part of the ‘Foliant’ programme, with the aim of finding agents that would compromise defensive countermeasures. Information on these compounds has been sparse in the public domain, mostly originating from a dissident Russian military chemist, Vil Mirzayanov. No independent confirmation of the structures or the properties of such compounds has been published. (Black, 2016)

Robin Black. (2016) Development, Historical Use and Properties of Chemical Warfare Agents. Royal Society of Chemistry

Yet now, the British Government is claiming to be able instantly to identify a substance which its only biological weapons research centre has never seen before and was unsure of its existence. Worse, it claims to be able not only to identify it but to pinpoint its origin. Given Dr Black’s publication, it is plain that claim cannot be true.

The world’s international chemical weapons experts share Dr Black’s opinion. The Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) is a UN body based in the Hague. In 2013 this was the report of its Scientific Advisory Board, which included US, French, German and Russian government representatives and on which Dr Black was the UK representative:

[The SAB] emphasised that the definition of toxic chemicals in the Convention would cover all potential candidate chemicals that might be utilised as chemical weapons. Regarding new toxic chemicals not listed in the Annex on Chemicals but which may nevertheless pose a risk to the Convention, the SAB makes reference to “Novichoks”. The name “Novichok” is used in a publication of a former Soviet scientist who reported investigating a new class of nerve agents suitable for use as binary chemical weapons. The SAB states that it has insufficient information to comment on the existence or properties of “Novichoks”. (OPCW, 2013)

OPCW: Report of the Scientific Advisory Board on developments in science and technology for the Third Review Conference 27 March 2013

Indeed the OPCW was so sceptical of the viability of “novichoks” that it decided – with US and UK agreement – not to add them nor their alleged precursors to its banned list. In short, the scientific community broadly accepts Mirzayanov was working on “novichoks” but doubts he succeeded.

Given that the OPCW has taken the view the evidence for the existence of “Novichoks” is dubious if the UK actually has a sample of one it is extremely important the UK presents that sample to the OPCW. Indeed the UK has a binding treaty obligation to present that sample to OPCW. Russa has – unreported by the corporate media – entered a demand at the OPCW that Britain submit a sample of the Salisbury material for international analysis.

Yet Britain refuses to submit it to the OPCW.


A second part of May’s accusation is that “Novichoks” could only be made in certain military installations. But that is also demonstrably untrue. If they exist at all, Novichoks were allegedly designed to be able to be made at bench level in any commercial chemical facility – that was a major point of them. The only real evidence for the existence of Novichoks was the testimony of the ex-Soviet scientist Mizayanov. And this is what Mirzayanov actually wrote.

One should be mindful that the chemical components or precursors of A-232 or its binary version novichok-5 are ordinary organophosphates that can be made at commercial chemical companies that manufacture such products as fertilizers and pesticides.

Vil S. Mirzayanov, “Dismantling the Soviet/Russian Chemical Weapons Complex: An Insider’s View,” in Amy E. Smithson, Dr. Vil S. Mirzayanov, Gen Roland Lajoie, and Michael Krepon, Chemical Weapons Disarmament in Russia: Problems and Prospects, Stimson Report No. 17, October 1995, p. 21.

It is a scientific impossibility for Porton Down to have been able to test for Russian novichoks if they have never possessed a Russian sample to compare them to. They can analyse a sample as conforming to a Mirzayanov formula, but as he published those to the world twenty years ago, that is no proof of Russian origin. If Porton Down can synthesise it, so can many others, not just the Russians.

And finally – Mirzayanov is an Uzbek name and the novichok programme, assuming it existed, was in the Soviet Union but far away from modern Russia, at Nukus in modern Uzbekistan. I have visited the Nukus chemical weapons site myself. It was dismantled and made safe and all the stocks destroyed and the equipment removed by the American government, as I recall finishing while I was Ambassador there. There has in fact never been any evidence that any “novichok” ever existed in Russia itself.

To summarise:

1) Porton Down has acknowledged in publications it has never seen any Russian “novichoks”. The UK government has absolutely no “fingerprint” information such as impurities that can safely attribute this substance to Russia.
2) Until now, neither Porton Down nor the world’s experts at the Organisation for the Prevention of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) were convinced “Novichoks” even exist.
3) The UK is refusing to provide a sample to the OPCW.
4) “Novichoks” were specifically designed to be able to be manufactured from common ingredients on any scientific bench. The Americans dismantled and studied the facility that allegedly developed them. It is completely untrue only the Russians could make them, if anybody can.
5) The “Novichok” programme was in Uzbekistan not in Russia. Its legacy was inherited by the Americans during their alliance with Karimov, not by the Russians.

With a great many thanks to sources who cannot be named at this moment.


THOUGHT POLICE: YouTube to start “correcting” controversial videos with “facts” from discredited Wikipedia pages run by disinfo trolls

Mike Adams — Natural News March 14, 2018


In the latest assault on the freedom to think for yourself, YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki has announced that YouTube will begin “correcting” controversial videos with “facts” from Wikipedia, an utterly discredited disinfo propaganda website run by pharma trolls who routinely demonize holistic medicine.

“Jimmy Wales and his army of liberal trolls will determine what’s truth and anything which goes too far in countering the narrative will be banned or censored,” warns Information Liberation. Wales, of course, is the former porn king who launched Wikipedia as a thought control “Ministry of Truth” to push big pharma quack science and pro-Monsanto propaganda.

Now, YouTube CEO Wojcicki believes that video content creators who dare mention “conspiracy” topics such as mercury in vaccines, chemtrails or the globalist depopulation agenda must be “corrected” with Wikipedia propaganda. The thought police are hard at work at YouTube, banning or censoring all the videos they don’t want you to see.

The new Wikipedia “corrections” will begin appearing on YouTube videos in the next two weeks, Wojcicki said in a SXSW speech. Notice her doublespeak as she explains how this is going to work:

“When there are videos that are focused around something that’s a conspiracy — and we’re using a list of well-known internet conspiracies from Wikipedia — then we will show a companion unit of information from Wikipedia showing that here is information about the event…”

“Companion” unit of information? What she means is that the YouTube thought police will “correct” the video to make sure the techno-dictatorship properly indoctrinates the minds of viewers with the official (false) narrative on everything. No independent thinking will be allowed on any subject that matters — climate change, the federal reserve, vaccines or science — without being intercepted and “corrected” by YouTube’s thought control monitors.

Yes, George Orwell’s 1984 has arrived, and it’s called “YouTube.” (Related: Read why I’m launching Real.Video as the answer to YouTube censorship.)

YouTube rapidly becoming a Communist China-inspired thought control platform

This announcement by the propagandist-in-chief Susan Wojcicki — who is rapidly becoming the Joseph Goebbels of the internet — reveals just how quickly YouTube is following in the footsteps of Communist China to control the perceptions and thoughts of its users. All the so-called “conspiracy theories” that will be “corrected” by YouTube, of course, are determined by radical left-wing indoctrination overlords who dominate the tech platforms. To these totalitarian lunatics, the idea that the Russians stole the 2016 election is a “fact,” but the idea that geoengineering experiments are being run to alter the atmosphere is a “conspiracy theory” (even though it’s now openly admitted by science-based universities such as MIT).

Read Geoengineering.news to see an expanding collection of stories on how geoengineering is now openly admitted by scientists. In fact, they’re claiming it’s necessary to “save the planet.”

Remember the real definition of a “conspiracy theory:” it’s anything the establishment doesn’t want you to know. By simply labeling real agendas and nefarious social engineering nothing but “conspiracy theories,” the tech gatekeepers can justify censoring all videos, articles or websites that mention them. Remember when the entire media said that Hillary Clinton’s neurological problems were a conspiracy theory? Or how about all those years in which anyone who accurately stated that your TVs were spying on you was also deemed a kook? Now, it’s common knowledge. See this article: Yes, your smart TV really is spying on you: Leaked docs reveal CIA secretly turned Samsung TVs into microphones that spy on your conversations.

Despite the inescapable truth on these matters (and many more), according to the thought control police at YouTube and Wikipedia, chemtrails are a “conspiracy theory” that needs to be corrected, just to make sure nobody actually believes it’s happening (even though it is).

This move by YouTube smacks of total desperation, and it follows in the footsteps of YouTube outright banning the entire Health Ranger channel in a last-ditch effort to silence rising voices that are warning humanity about the very same mind control agenda being demonstrated every day by YouTube itself.

Quite literally, YouTube will ban accounts by claiming those content creators are promoting “conspiracy theories” that claim YouTube is censoring accounts. Seriously, this is how insane things have become now as the techno-dictatorships are running wild, crushing not just the freedom to speak, but also the freedom to think.

This brazen move by YouTube demonstrates how dangerous Google and YouTube have become to modern society, functioning as biased censors of independent news, information and independent science. This is why YouTube, Google, Facebook and Twitter must be stopped. They must be aggressively regulated to halt their selective censorship agendas that specifically target independent journalism, independent science and real investigations into the creeping totalitarianism now unfolding all around us.

Visit Real.Video to learn more about our upcoming alternative to YouTube. It may launch as soon as this summer.

Also, check out Censorship.news for daily news updates on the accelerating censorship of free speech.


Will Russia Wake Up?

Paul Craig Roberts — March 14, 2018

Russians are having a difficult time comprehending their Western enemy or even understanding that Russia has an enemy that seeks the destruction of Russia.

Has it occured to Russia that it is very strange that the UK, a country of no military significance, a country that could be completely destroyed forever in a few minutes by Russia, would concoct false charges against the Russian government, announce these charges publicly without providing any evidence whatsoever, bring the unsupported charges to the UN, issue an ultimatum to Russia, dispell Russian diplomats and seize Russian assets on the basis of mere allegations, all the while refusing any evidence and any cooperation with Russia, as required by law, in the investigation of the charges?

Russians, both government, media and youth brainwashed by American propaganda and the Washington-funded NGOs that the Russian government permits to operate against itself in Russia, seem to think that the many accusations and threats issued against Russia are some kind of mistake that can be rectified by recourse to evidence and law. Apparently, after all these years the Russians still do not understand that Washington and its vassals have no interest whatsoever in facts or law.

At the UN the Russian ambassador, in response to the evidence-free accusation by the UK prime minister that the Russian government had used a military-grade nerve agent to attempt to kill two people on an English park bench, went through all the legal reasons, including the requirement of collaboration with Russia in examining the evidence, to establish that the UK accusation was in violation of law and unsupported by any evidence.

Why do the Russians think the British government cares a hoot about law or evidence? Are the Russians really this brainwashed about the West?

The British government of Tony Blair cooperated with the George W. Bush regime in propagating the lie that Saddam Hussein in Iraq had “weapons of mass destruction.” This lie was used to invade and to destroy Iraq and to leave the country 15 years later in chaos.

The British government also supported the lies about Gadaffi in Libya and participated in overthrowing the Libyan government. The British government also supported the lie that Iran had a nuclear weapons program. There was never any evidence, but evidence was of no interest. An agenda was in motion, and the agenda was independent of evidence.

Although the British Parliament voted down British participation in Obama’s planned invasion of Syria, the current British government supports the lie that Assad is using chemical weapons “against his own people.”

By now one would think that Russians, both government, media, and public, would understand that all the West is capable of is to lie. The purpose of the lies is to demonize Russia and to set up Russia for military attack.

But somehow Russians can’t get the message. Russians think it is all some kind of mistake that facts and legal processes and diplomacy can clear up. “Please just listen to us, we can clear up all the misconceptions!” As if the West cares. Washington wants “the misconceptions.” That is why Washington creates them.

The inability of Russians to understand the West, which Russia stupidly wants to join, is the reason that World War 3 is near at hand.

What if, instead of reciting the legal process and the law governing it that the UK PM refused to follow before publicly accusing Russia without the presentation of any evidence, The Russian UN Ambassador had simply said: “If the UK exists tomorrow, it will be due entirely to the forbearance of the Russian government.”

By relying on law, about which no Western country gives a hoot, the Russian UN ambassador permitted Washington’s French puppet and other of Washington’s European puppet states to say that they supported the British charges against Russia despite the absence of evidence. Perhaps the Russians noticed that none of those European governments required any evidence that Russia was responsible. All that was required was the accusation.

In the exceptional, indispensable Western World ruled by Washington, accusation alone is proof of Russian mendacity. When British Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn asked PM May if she actually had any real evidence that Russia had tried to kill the former British double-agent, Corbyn was shouted down not only by the corrupt Conservatives but also by members of the Labour Party that he heads. How much more evidence does Russia need that facts are not important to the West?

Will Russia wake up? Or will its demented desire to be part of the West leave Russians unprepared for Washington’s nuclear strike, which is coming.

What if the Russian government simply told Washington: “If you or your terrorist mercenaries attack Syrian forces, we will eliminate your presence in the Middle East and Israel as well.” This is something that Russia can do at the drop of a hat.

What would the British and Washington do, other than wet their pants? Clearly, they would get the message and decide that peace is a better idea.

The Russian government simply does not understand that Washington regards Russian appeals to diplomacy, law, facts, evidence, as signs of extreme weakness and lack of confidence. Washington and its puppet states do not need any facts. They have an agenda. By calling for facts, the Russians show their weakness.

The Russian display of weakness encourages Washington’s aggression. Does Russia’s desire to be a part of the West exceed its desire for national survival?


WW3? the U.S. Threatens to Bomb Syria While Putin Promises to Retaliate

Mike Whitney — The Unz Review March 15, 2018


The replacement of Secretary of State Rex Tillerson with CIA Director Mike Pompeo signals a hawkish shift in the administration’s foreign policy that is clearly intended to prepare the country for a confrontation with Russia. Pompeo was not chosen for his diplomatic skills or his nuanced grasp of foreign relations but for his hardline approach to issues like North Korea, the Iran nuclear agreement, and the so-called “Russian threat”. With the nomination of Pompeo, Trump has abandoned his campaign promise to end the foreign interventions and regime change operations and has instead aligned himself with a small group of arch-neocons who are fully committed to US global domination through the application of hard power.

Not surprisingly, the right-wing Weekly Standard is already celebrating Pompeo’s nomination although his appointment is far from certain. Here’s a short excerpt from an article that TWS published on Wednesday titled “Iran-Deal Critics Praise Pompeo Nomination”:

“The Senate’s top Iran hawks heaped praise on the president’s nomination of CIA director Mike Pompeo to replace Secretary of State Rex Tillerson Tuesday, and critics of the deal on and off Capitol Hill expressed confidence that Pompeo’s presence would place renewed pressure on negotiations to fix the Iran nuclear deal—or nix it…
“Tillerson and his team really weren’t preparing for the possibility of a world without a flawed Iran nuclear deal,” the staffer continued. “But Pompeo is at least intellectually open to thinking about how does the United States prepare for a world without the Iran deal, and making sure that we prevail in such a world. He will come at the Iran issue with a fresh set of eyes.”…

“For those Europeans (and Americans) who think Trump is not serious about walking away on May 12th if there’s no agreement to fix the Iran nuke deal, I give you Exhibit A: his soon-to-be Secretary of State Mike Pompeo,” said Mark Dubowitz, CEO of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies.” (The Weekly Standard)

The Iran nukes deal or Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, as it is known, prevents Iran from building nuclear weapons and enforces the strictest nuclear weapons inspections regime in the history of the IAEA. Even so, it is despised by neocons and right-wing Israelis who see it as an obstacle to Tel Aviv’s ambitions for regional hegemony. Now, these extremists will have an ally at the State Department who will make every effort to sabotage the agreement in order to achieve their strategic objectives. (For the record, Pompeo has called Iran a “thuggish police state” and promised to “roll back” the nukes deal.)

Pompeo can also be trusted to put the kibosh on the upcoming face-to-face negotiations between Trump and Kim Jong-Un. According to the Washington Post:

“Mike Pompeo has been in sync with President Trump from day one — on North Korea in particular,” said Patrick Cronin, a scholar at the Center for a New American Security. “There has been no doubt that he has been instrumental in shaping the administration’s maximum-pressure-and-engagement strategy.”

Pompeo, like Trump, believes that talking with North Korea is pointless and that the DPRK will only respond to force. He will demand that Kim Jong-Un take verifiable steps towards denuclearization in exchange for nothing, not even minimal security guarantees that the US will not unilaterally attack the North sometime in the future. Pompeo is entirely inflexible on this issue. He recently responded to a question in a televised interview saying: “Make no mistake about it, while these negotiations are going on, there will be no concessions made.” (March 11, 2018) He also added this ominous rejoiner: “We are focused like a laser on achieving (denuclearization). We are equally, at the same time, ensuring that the — if we conclude that it is not possible, that we present the president with a range of options that can achieve what is his stated intention.” (Jan. 23, 2018)

By “range of options”, Pompeo means overwhelming military force which suggests that he will encourage Trump to preemptively bomb (nuke?) the North.

It is already clear that Pompeo will not negotiate the terms of an agreement with the DPRK, Iran, Russia, Syria or anyone else for that matter. His job at State will be to inform foreign leaders what Washington expects of them and what the consequences will be if they fail to comply.

There’s also a good chance that Pompeo will be assisted in his duties by former UN ambassador John Bolton who met with Trump last week and may soon replace National Security advisor, HR McMaster. Bolton, who served in the GW Bush administration, is a radical war-hawk who helped to build the case against Saddam Hussein and who at various times in his career supported attacks on both North Korea and Iran. He also supported the partitioning of Syria to create what he dubbed “Sunnistan” in the eastern part of the country. Here’s more on Bolton from an article at VOX:

“Bolton’s history suggests a long and storied history of cherry-picking intelligence to support his preferred hawkish policies…… Bolton drafted a five-page memo detailing his proposal for tearing up the (Iran nuclear) deal, which he then published in National Review………In a 2015 New York Times op-ed, Bolton advocated for a US and/or Israeli airstrike on Iranian nuclear facilities. “Time is terribly short, but a strike can still succeed,” he wrote. “Such action should be combined with vigorous American support for Iran’s opposition, aimed at regime change in Tehran.”…

… And in February 2018, he published an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal arguing that the US needed to solve the nuclear standoff with North Korea by force….“Pre-emption opponents argue that action is not justified because Pyongyang does not constitute an ‘imminent threat.’ They are wrong,” Bolton wrote. “It is perfectly legitimate for the United States to respond to the current ‘necessity’ posed by North Korea’s nuclear weapons by striking first.” (“John Bolton, the ultra-hawk rumored to be Trump’s next national security adviser, explained”, VOX)

Bolton believes that war is the solution to every problem, which is why Trump’s biggest supporters are likely to feel betrayed by his appointment. It’s worth noting, that “candidate Trump” cast himself as an “America First” non-interventionist not a warmongering neocon. Here’s a couple of quotes from Trump during the 2016 presidential campaign that help to illustrate why many voters thought his policies might be dramatically different than Hillary Clinton’s:

TRUMP– “We will pursue a new foreign policy that finally learns from the mistakes of the past…We will stop looking to topple regimes and overthrow governments…. Our goal is stability, not chaos because we want to rebuild our country [the United States]… We will partner with any nation that is willing to join us in the effort to defeat ISIS and radical Islamic terrorism …In our dealings with other countries, we will seek shared interests wherever possible and pursue a new era of peace, understanding, and goodwill.”

And there’s this: “We’ve spent $4 trillion trying to topple various people that, frankly, if they were there and if we could have spent that $4 trillion in the United States to fix our roads, our bridges, and all of the other problems—our airports and all the other problems we have—we would have been a lot better off, I can tell you that right now. We have done a tremendous disservice not only to the Middle East—we’ve done a tremendous disservice to humanity. The people that have been killed, the people that have been wiped away—and for what? It’s not like we had victory.

It’s a mess. The Middle East is totally destabilized a total and complete mess. I wish we had the $4 trillion or $5 trillion. I wish it was spent right here in the United States on schools, hospitals, roads, airports, and everything else that are all falling apart!” (Donald Trump)

The Pompeo nomination along with the possible replacement of McMaster for Bolton suggests that Trump has been swallowed up by the neocon-riddled foreign policy establishment (The Borg) and is now prepared to do their bidding. In recent days, US Ambassador to the United Nations, Nikki Haley has delivered a number of threats directed at Russia that would lead any reasonable person to conclude that Washington is laying the groundwork for a direct confrontation with Russia in the very near future. Here’s an excerpt from one of Haley’s recent hysterical performances at the UN:

“When the international community consistently fails to act, there are times when states are compelled to take their own action…..We warn any nation determined to impose its will through chemical attacks and inhuman suffering, but most especially the outlaw Syrian regime, the United States remains prepared to act if we must. It is not a path we prefer. But it is a path we have demonstrated we will take, and we are prepared to take again.”

Top Russian officials, including Army General Valery Gerasimov, are taking Haley’s threats seriously and are prepared to retaliate if the lives of their military personnel are endangered in any US-led attack.

“In the event of a threat to our military servicemen’s lives, Russia’s armed forces will take retaliatory measures to target both the missiles and their delivery vehicles,” Gerasimov said, according to the state-run Tass Russian News Agency. Gerasimov also said that Russia has hard facts about preparations for a false flag chemical weapons attack that will be followed by a US missile attack on Syrian Army positions in East Ghouta where US-backed jihadists have suffered heavy casualties lately in a major battle where their forces have been splintered into three small cauldrons that are surrounded by Syrian elite Tiger Forces that are rapidly tightening the noose. The jihadist defeat is imminent which is why Washington’s false flag operation should be seen for what it is: A last-ditch effort to assist its proxy-army of Sunni militants in their failed attempt to topple the government of Bashar al Assad. The US is desperate to reverse the course of a conflict that is clearly moving in Russia’s favor.

The situation in Syria is further complicated by British Prime Minister Theresa May’s spurious accusations that Russia was involved in the poisoning of double agent Sergei Skripal and his daughter, Yulia. Not only has May failed to produce a scintilla of hard evidence to verify her claims, she has also refused to provide Russia with samples of the prescribed substance which is required under the Chemical Weapons Convention. Russia needs these samples to acquit itself of the serious charges which May has leveled at them and to challenge her expulsion of 23 Russian diplomats who were declared persona non grata without due process and without any communication with the Russian Foreign Office. There is no doubt in anyone’s mind that May is merely following Washington’s diktats as did Tony “The Poodle” Blair in the lead up to the war in Iraq.

In response to May’s claims, the Russian Foreign Ministry has made an official statement which it posted on its website on March 14, 2018. It reads:

“The March 14 statement made by British Prime Minister Theresa May in Parliament on measures to “punish” Russia, under the false pretext of its alleged involvement in the poisoning of Sergey Skripal and his daughter, constitutes an unprecedented, flagrant provocation that undermines the foundations of normal dialogue between our countries.

We believe it is absolutely unacceptable and unworthy of the British Government to seek to further seriously aggravate relations in pursuit of its unseemly political ends, having announced a whole series of hostile measures, including the expulsion of 23 Russian diplomats from the country.

Instead of completing its own investigation and using established international formats and instruments, including within the framework of the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons – in which we were prepared to cooperate – the British Government opted for confrontation with Russia. Obviously, by investigating this incident in a unilateral, non-transparent way, the British Government is again seeking to launch a groundless anti-Russian campaign.
Needless to say, our response measures will not be long in coming.” (The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation)

The nomination of war-hawk Pompeo, the expulsion of Russian diplomats from the UK, and the tense situation developing in East Ghouta strongly suggests that the Trump administration is preparing to test Putin’s resolve and see if he will defend his Syrian allies (by retaliating against the United States) or whether it’s all just a bluff. In any event, the US is now closer to a shooting war with Russia than any time since the Cuban missile crisis only, this time, we don’t expect cooler heads to prevail. Colonel Patrick Lang, Retired senior officer of U.S. Military Intelligence and U.S. Army Special Forces (The Green Berets) who was the “Defense Intelligence Officer for the Middle East, South Asia and Terrorism”– summed it up best in a recent post at his excellent website Sic Semper Tyrannis when he said:

“Pompeo’s nomination and his eventual confirmation brings the world closer to a US-Russia war. If that happens it will be difficult if not impossible to keep the war from escalating toward the use of nuclear weapons. Israel wants war, a wrecking war with Iran. Israel wants the US to win that war for Israel. In My Opinion, Israel would be wrecked in such a war whatever the outcome. This is an August 1914 moment.”

God help us.


‘Every Laboratory in the West Has Samples of ‘Novichok’ Nerve Agent’ – Analyst

Introduction — March 14, 2018

biological warfare protective clothing

The Western corporate media has failed to ask one crucial question concerning the Skripal poisoning. What would Russia have to gain from poisoning a defector using a known Russian chemical warfare agent?
It’s such an obvious give-away that it suggests that whoever was responsible for the poisoning wanted Russia to be blamed. It’s tantamount to leaving a signed confession note at the scene of a crime.
As the following points out, Britain main chemical warfare laboratory, Porton Down, is only SEVEN MILES from the scene of the crime in Salisbury. Is that where the Novichok used to poison Skripal originated rather than Russia? Ed.

‘Every Laboratory in the West Has Samples of ‘Novichok’ Nerve Agent’ – Analyst

Sputnik News — March 14, 2018

Sputnik spoke with former Kremlin adviser Alexander Nekrassov to get insight into Sergei Skripal’s poisoning in Salisbury and to clarify the immediate response of British authorities, who appear to be ignoring the simple fact that the Porton Down chemical lab near where the incident happened stores samples of the nerve agent Novichok.

Sputnik: It seems like Theresa May rushed to throw down the gauntlet, in asking Moscow to explain the poisoning of Sergei Skripal, especially after the investigation is not complete…what effect does this have on an already volatile relationship between the UK and Russia?

Alexander Nekrassov: First of all it is very odd that the British authorities haven’t given the police and authorities evidence from their investigation. It’s important to note that investigations into chemical weapon use usually take at least a month. It was very strange to hear Theresa May coming into the commons accusing Russia and using ultimatum language such as ‘you will explain yourselves to us on the deadline on this day. If not you’re guilty’. I’m sorry this not language does not work in a modern diplomacy – this is not even civil.

The Russian government will obviously not reply and why should it. It’s not a matter for the Russian government to be concerned about. The British authorities have a situation on their territory; they are obliged to investigate it, produce some sort of proof and then come out with this proof. What we’re seeing now is a farce and especially a farce concerning the media, which is out of control in Britain.

Sputnik: Lavrov has stated that the UK should abide by the Convention on the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons and provide Russia with access to the samples of the nerve-agent which was allegedly used to poison Sergei Skripal and his daughter… will Lavrov’s words of reason resonate with Theresa May?

Alexander Nekrassov: I think Lavrov had a fair point to make that the British government if it’s already making allegations, should provide proof that this chemical was Russian made. That’s the first point, the second point is that the British government is saying that because the nerve agent is made in Russia and therefore Russia is behind the incident. I’m sorry but every laboratory in the West including Porton Down which is only 7 miles away from Salisbury, has a sample of this so-called ‘Novichok’, Newcomer, as they called it.

They use these samples to produce the antidotes, so why isn’t this Porton Down facility being investigated? Why aren’t the people who work there being investigated and asked if they have lost a sample of this weapons-grade chemical? This is very bizarre for the British government to come up with this ultimate without a single ounce of proof saying its highly like, and I must stress ‘highly likely’ that Russia is behind this… I’m sorry this is childish. This isn’t propaganda is some petty bitterness I would say.

Sputnik: Is there a likely explanation for this attack which isn’t just simply pointing fingers at Russia without any solid evidence?

Alexander Nekrassov: There are so many options. In a civilised manner, the police and the intelligence services should have said they were looking at different options. That is the civilised way. There are rogue agents of a different nation that have gotten access to this particular nerve agent and used it for some sort agenda such as slander and tarnish Russia or cause friction between Britain and Russia.


‘One of the Great Hoaxes’: Skripal Poisoning Evokes ‘Deja Vu’ of Iraq War Run-up

Sputnik News — March 14, 2018

Forensic investigations at the scene of the crime in Salisbury, Wiltshire. Click to enlarge

Forensic investigations at the scene of the crime in Salisbury, Wiltshire. Click to enlarge

Prominent anti-war activist and former UK parliamentarian for both the Labour and Respect parties George Galloway warned Radio Sputnik that the UK’s response to the poisoning of a former Russian double agent on its territory is similar to its headlong rush to war with Iraq in 2003.

Earlier in March, former British spy in the Russian military Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia were poisoned in Salisbury, England. The case abounds with mysteries and contradictions — and the British government is pointing the finger at Moscow.

I think this will go down with the Gulf of Tonkin incident as one of the great hoaxes, with the most serious implications in all of history,” Galloway told Brian Becker and John Kiriakou of Radio Sputnik’s Loud & Clear. “The Russian president is facing reelection, the people of the world are headed to Russia in the summertime for the World Cup.”

“These two people were clearly of no consequence — if the Russian state wanted to kill them, they could have killed them entirely inexpensively at any time. [Yulia Skripal] actually lives in Moscow, so if they wanted her dead, she could have been murdered in an alley with her scarf. [Sergei Skripal] could have been murdered in prison when he was jailed as a traitor to the Russian Federation — and he got a very light sentence, which seems to suggest they didn’t take him seriously even back then.”

“In broad daylight, in public, this mastermind, capable of rigging the American elections, rigging Brexit, rigging the Catalan independence struggle and God knows what else, is stupid enough to attack with a nerve agent invented by Russia with Russia’s signature on it. In my opinion, you’d have to be crazy to believe that — but a large number of people, certainly in the media and even more depressingly in the Parliament, do,” Galloway said.

Galloway compared the UK Parliament’s reaction to the Skripal poisoning in the lead-up to the invasion of Iraq in 2003. In 2016, a Parliament-commissioned report known as the Chilcot Inquiry argued that the UK rushed into war with Iraq, that the evidence presented that Iraq was a threat to the UK was insufficient and that British intelligence misled the government and people of the UK with false reports that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction.

And yet, he said, despite the Chilcot Inquiry, parliamentarians are still treating “intelligence briefings given to the prime minister… as if they were carved in stone and just brought down from Mount Sinai. It’s deja vu.”

“The only person in Parliament who tried to stand up against this was Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn and he was barracked and rubbished mainly by his own side, the remaining Tony Blair supporters. He’s being assailed as unpatriotic, as a Putin stooge, and so on. It is profoundly dispiriting that journalists by the hundreds are accepting at face value that Russia would do such a self-harming thing for no purpose that anyone has even yet speculated upon.”

Becker and Galloway discussed the bizarre circumstances of the case: Skripal and his daughter were found unconscious in public and the UK claimed that they were poisoned with the nerve agent Novichok, originally engineered in the Soviet Union in the 1970s. The toxin was also found in Skripal’s house and a British police officer who searched the house is gravely ill as a result.

But no Novichok remnants were found at the restaurant where the Skripals ate or the pub where they drank. It didn’t infect the paramedic who tried to give Sergei mouth-to-mouth resuscitation for half an hour. And, while it means little on its own, the site of the poisoning is just seven miles away from Porton Down, the British government’s chemical weapons research lab.

“These are big unexplained mysteries,” said Galloway. “If I just give you a hypothesis, only a hypothesis, I’m not saying it’s true, but it would be entirely possible that the nerve agent was being kept in the house of Skripal and it was somehow released. It affected the couple and the police officer, all three of whom became gravely ill in the ensuing hours — but that, too, is a mystery.”

“This agent is supposed to act within seconds, that’s what it says on the tin, that’s how they sell it. Within seconds, it will wipe you out completely — and yet didn’t it didn’t wipe out any of the people affected. Some of the people who got closest to the victims are unaffected entirely.”


EXCLUSIVE: Lauren Southern Breaks Silence on Detention under the Terrorism Act

Tommy Robinson Online — March 13, 2018

Extreme winter weather becoming more common as Arctic warms, study finds

Oliver Milman — The Guardian March 13, 2018

Gore Climate change

The sort of severe winter weather that has rattled parts of the US and UK is becoming more common as the Arctic warms, with scientists finding a strong link between high temperatures near the pole and unusually heavy snowfall and frigid weather further south.

A sharp increase in temperatures across the Arctic since the early 1990s has coincided with an uptick in abnormally cold snaps in winter, particularly in the eastern US, according to new research that analyzed temperature data from 1950 onwards.

Extreme cold winter weather is up to four times more likely when temperatures in the Arctic are unusually high, the study found. Researchers compared daily temperatures from across the Arctic region with something called the accumulated winter season severity index, which grades winter weather based on temperature, snowfall and snow depth, across 12 US cities.

“There’s a remarkably strong correlation between a warm Arctic and cold winter weather further south,” said Judah Cohen, a climatologist at Atmospheric and Environmental Research. “It’s a complex story – global warming is contributing to milder temperatures but is also having unforeseen consequences such as this.”

The Arctic has just experienced its toastiest winter on record, with parts of the region 20C (68F) warmer than the long-term average, a situation scientists have variously described as “crazy,” “weird,” and “simply shocking”. The far northern latitudes are warming around twice as quickly as the global average, diminishing glaciers and sea ice and imperilling creatures such as polar bears.

Two large winter storms recently swept the US east coast in less than a week, unloading up to three inches of snow per hour in places, resulting in several deaths, thousands of cancelled flights, closed schools and snarled traffic.

The cold front even reached Florida, contributing to a recent surge in manatee deaths. So far this year, 166 of the marine mammals have been found dead off the state’s coast, with stress from the cold the leading cause of mortality. “Manatees may join polar bears as one of the first iconic victims of extinction in the wild from climate change,” said Jeff Ruch, executive director of Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility.

The US storms follow freezing winds from Siberia – dubbed the ‘beast from the east’ – that battered parts of Europe, with the British army, deployed to help liberate hundreds of stranded drivers on UK motorways.

“This winter is a great example of what we can expect from climate change,” said Cohen. “In the US we had the ‘bomb cyclone’ in January, followed by July-like warm weather in February that I’d never seen before. And now we’ve had a parade of powerful winter storms and the beast from the east. It’s mind-boggling.”

The research didn’t look at the reasons behind the trend of see-sawing temperatures between the Arctic and areas to the south but Cohen said it was consistent with the theory that the polar vortex – which shot to public consciousness during a 2014 cold spell – is being disrupted as the earth heats up.

The polar vortex is a low-pressure system that swirls around the polar region. Sometimes it can stray further south, bringing cold Arctic air with it. There is continuing conjecture over the impact climate change is having but some scientists believe warming temperatures could be weakening the polar vortex’s flow, allowing it to meander towards the equator.

This nuanced picture of the consequences of climate change has been derided by Donald Trump, with the president using Twitter to mockingly reference cold weather during almost every winter in recent years. In December, Trump tweeted that “perhaps we could use a little bit of that good old Global Warming” amid plunging temperatures.

Scientists say this stance overlooks the complicated changes underway in the environment as the world warms due to human activity, by an average of around 1C over the past century. This temperature rise hasn’t been uniform across the globe and has fueled an array of conditions, from increased flood risk in some areas to drought conditions and heatwaves in others.

Richard Alley, a leading glacier and climate expert at Penn State who was not involved in Cohen’s research, said the study is “fascinating” and “important” but added the discrepancy between Arctic temperatures and winter weather elsewhere could have other drivers, such as a warm Gulf of Mexico feeding extra energy into storms along the US east coast.

“The broadest picture is that we are indeed warming the world’s climate, primarily from carbon dioxide release from fossil-fuel burning, and this will impact us and other living things,” said Alley.

The Arctic’s role is seen quite differently by some other scientists, however, who point out that occasional outbursts of cold weather haven’t altered the trend that winters in the US northeast have been getting warmer, particularly since the 1970s.

“There have always been cold outbreaks. The cold air has to go somewhere,” said Kevin Trenberth, senior scientist at the National Center for Atmospheric Research.

“The issue is whether the air stays put or gets loose. Some years it is contained, other years it breaks out. The question is where and what is the cause. This study reaffirms the relationship but not its cause. The Arctic likely plays a modest role in terms of feedbacks but it is unlikely it is a cause.”



Outlawed: Pursuing a Woman

henrymakow.com — March 14, 2018

 50 shades scene

“What many women and men privately know, but are now too afraid to admit — the same truth that the success of “Fifty Shades of Grey,” tells: Many women like to be dominated in bed.”
The series sold 125 million copies; the movies grossed $1.3 billion.
In general, most women want to accept their husband’s leadership. Heterosexuality involves pursuit: Overcoming a woman’s resistance and winning her trust and acquiescence. As the article below suggests, the #MeToo psyop has given heterosexuality a case of arthritis.  


  1. The Illuminati manipulate society by using the hysteria surrounding a staged event to produce the desired outcome. Thus the phony 9-11 attack led to endless Zionist wars and the staged school shootings led to the Jewish banker-led gun-ban outcry. In the case of sabotaging heterosexuality, they sacrificed Harvey Weinstein and launched a #MeToo movement that would make any man think twice before so much as complimenting a woman.
  1. The sex act is an act of female surrender and male possession and ownership. Thus promiscuity is psychological poison for both males and females. Sex must be exclusive because that is what it is meant to signify. Sex is ultimately about procreation. The man must be confident that children he raises are his.  The Illuminati push promiscuity because they want to destroy the family unit and ultimately conceive and raise children industrially.
  1. The reason so many young people today are lost is due to the Illuminati’s destruction of the family ethos. If a man and a woman make raising their children their main priority, everything else falls into place. I credit Owen Benjamin’s video, What Women Actually Want in a Man by Owen Benjamin for reminding me of this.

How Does Submissive Sex Operate in the Age of #MeToo

by Hayley Phalen — (Excerpts by henrymakow.com) 

Like all of us in the throes of #MeToo, I have been taking rigorous inventory of my sexual history, rolling back the tape on past highs and lows: the disturbing teenage experiences no longer chalked up to miscommunication, those times I gave in because it was easier, some unwanted advance successfully fended off.

Continues …

Russia Issues Warning to US! DO NOT ATTACK OUR TROOPS, We WILL Respond

Russia Insight — March 13, 2018