Sorry, you need to update your flash player to view this flash animation. You may download the flash player from here. However, you should still be able to view the rest of this page.

Below- Topless Twist in War on Gender (scroll down)

Do You Love God?

August 4, 2015


love-obey.jpg


How do you 
express 
your love
of God?





Lucifer was a rebel against God. The Illuminati are Luciferians. They want to turn God's Order upside down. But in some ways, I am a little rebel myself. I don't obey. Most of us don't. We have all been inducted into their cult. 



by Henry Makow Ph.D.

This is a question I am asking myself.  It's comforting to think God loves me, but do I love Him?

Well, I do ... but not wholeheartedly. To love is to worship, and to worship is to obey. 

I do not completely obey God. My love is half-hearted. 

Lucifer was a rebel against God. The Illuminati are Luciferians. They want to turn God's Order upside down. This is the real occult meaning of Revolution.

But in some ways, I am a little rebel myself. I don't obey. Most of us don't. We have all been inducted into their cult. 

A part of us cringes at questions like, "Do you love God?" 

We have been reformulated to reject God, to be selfish and seek money, sex and recognition before all. 

I rail against the Illuminati but I forget how the satanic agenda works on a personal level. They want your soul. 

We feel helpless fighting them in the political arena. They have all the power. 

But they're just as helpless in the personal sphere where we have the power.
They suffer ignominious defeat when we eschew the pursuit of money, sex and recognition. The sad part is that most of us don't use this power. 

In a previous article, I pointed out that 9/10 of worship is what we refuse to do:


Have you noticed that nine of the Ten Commandments are proscriptions? They tell us what we shalt NOT do. 

Surely this is an important clue. We worship God by disciplining and controlling our lower nature. 

The only affirmative Commandment is to "honor your father and mother."  The other nine are concerned with obeying, i.e. self-discipline: 

You shall have no other Gods; not make idols; not take His name in vain; not work on the Sabbath; not commit murder; not commit adultery; not steal; not bear false witness (lie) and finally, not covet your neighbor's wife or possessions.

What are positive ways we can express our love of God? I try to be a witness of Truth. But what are some other ways? Loving our fellow man? (Jesus loved the lepers.) A parent's love for children? I welcome your suggestions.

We have been brainwashed to seek happiness through money etc.  That gives us a temporary charge. 

God is Goodness. We cannot feel good permanently until we are good. Until we partake in Him.
---------

Related- Our Love Affair With God
---------------- The Illuminati's Secret Weapon- Sin
----------------  NWO- Martial Law in the Soul


First Comment from Robert K

The commandments that Jesus expressed were purely positive:  "Then one of them, which was a lawyer, asked him a question, tempting him, and saying, Master, which is the great commandment in the law?  Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets." (Matthew 22:32-7)

He warned also that "the letter killeth, but the spirit maketh alive", so he was talking about a new mode of being, superseding elitist-prescribed laws and strictures, in effect being "born again", which meant becoming, in purity of heart, simplicity of trust and lovingness, "as a little child", without which transformation, He said, one cannot enter into the kingdom of heaven.  This state (which is true freedom) is the one for which we are designed, but from which Satan would distract us with phoney burdens, woes and feelings of guilt imposed by a perverted, pharisaical money system.

Tony B:

You just hit almost every living one of us where it really hurts.  Otherwise we'd all be saints.  It's the great personal battle, more accurately, the reason we are here.  To overcome the worldly and live for the spiritual.  To understand and obey God's meaning of love, which all his rules are designed to bring about. 

Thanks for a good reminder for each of us in our worldly struggle to not get caught up in the minor problems of the world but live for the next, the one that matters.

Being for most of my life "self sufficient" in my modern day short-circuited mind, it has come hard for me to recognize that I have never done a single thing except by the grace of God.  Growing old and finding I'm not able to do many of the things I always took for granted has been my first real education on the subject.  Before that it was just words.  Words that were easily blacked out as inconvenient.

It's humbling to gain this understanding but still very hard to break the old habits and actually obey God's commands.  Like you, I fit the half-hearted category but dislike that more every day, which hopefully leads to total obedience.







You can find this article permanently at http://henrymakow.com/2015/08/do-you-love-god.html

Henry Makow received his Ph.D. in English Literature from the University of Toronto in 1982. He welcomes your comments at

Comments for "Do You Love God?"

Michael B said (August 4, 2015):

t is because of your fallen nature that you only "love God halfhearted."

http://henrymakow.com/2015/08/do-you-love-god.html

You learn to love God fully through the grace of the Sacraments that Jesus instituted when he founded his One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church.


DD said (August 4, 2015):

Some positive ways we can express our love to God are:

-Be thankful, and thank Him both verbally and with our attitude towards Him and others.
-Compliment God. Tell HIM you love HIM.
-Be good to the poor. Giving to the poor is like giving to God.
-Encourage others and not just yourself and your family;
-Love your wife (if you have one) and your children they are both gifts from God;
-Try to enjoy your work and do it to the best of your ability
-Give more than people expect (time, money, effort,…)
-Perform random acts of kindness
-Listen
-Have self-control in all circumstances and watch how you conduct yourself. You are an ambassador for Christ.
-Share the word (in love, good attitude and no condemnation) with others when the opportunities present themselves.


James C said (August 4, 2015):

You got it right.
Who really knows what "love" is all about.
That being said, none of us humans are perfect.
But, in our imperfection, to love God we need to do our best to obey
the "rules" He gave us.


PS said (August 4, 2015):

As I became more aware of the satanic agenda, I realized our problems are too big for us, and that's what brought me back to my spiritual nature. God has wanted a relationship with us since the garden. It's just hard to remember this and to keep our focus on him with all the shiny stuff in our world.

An ongoing thought I have had regarding the "chosen people" part of the old testament was God saying I love you all so much I even love this group that continually turn their back on me and pray to anything that shines.

The meaning of the prodigal son really came home to me recently; when we turn to God, he does not stand there, he runs to us. As the story goes, as long as Peter kept his eyes on Jesus, he could walk on water. When I have my focus internally on my spiritual nature, I am not as focused on selfish pursuits.


AB said (August 4, 2015):

I’ll go along with Robert K that being born again is essential, but a question I meet regularly as a hospice chaplain is, “How do I do it?”

First off is to recognize that our own good deeds won’t make us acceptable to God, because our inborn “original sin” trips us up every time – God demands perfection, and our being born twisted disqualifies us before we even start. Therefore the sacrificial death and experience of Hell that Jesus underwent for every human being ever created (past & future) is of cardinal importance to pay for our sins.

Those who repent of their sin, ask Jesus for forgiveness and then invite Him into their lives undergo the experience of being born again (John 3:3). This forgiveness provides a ‘judicial’ righteousness to those receiving it, and it has been noted in some instances that such newly born-again believers display new personal characteristics within days or weeks of taking the step.

However, the process taking place after being born again is one that all believers encounter, and here, by a series of good and bad experiences and concomitant challenges to exercise faith in these circumstances, God slowly transforms the believer into something eventually approaching the moral rectitude attributed to him/her at the beginning – if you like, judicial righteousness becomes actual righteousness towards the end of the Christian’s life.

Finally, in response to the love of God demonstrated supremely in the death of Christ for us, His enemies, we are brought by a long and arduous process to express our love for Him in the very best way we can: as He said, “He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me:…” (John 14:21).


Al Thompson said (August 4, 2015):

Keeping God's commandments is extremely important in defeating the wing-nuts of the new world order. There is a reason for promoting sex and homosexuality: to get mankind to forget and offend the God who created us. The various governments and religions promote communism/socialism which is nothing more than an extortion racket: comply or die. The idea of taxation is a form of theft. Theft violates the commandments. Thus, to be in the government is to be a thief and a liar; and in many cases a sexual pervert.

Keeping the commandments nullifies all satanic activity and it trumps all man-made doctrines. In my opinion, writings are always to be tested for there veracity. So then, the natural laws or natural order is the standard we should use to rightly discern right from wrong. Keeping the commandments always gets good results, even if I get persecuted for it. The unrepentant sinner is the real loser as they are filled with their own disgusting arrogance. Satanists are not powerful; they are just full of crap.

The best thing anyone can do for themselves is to abide in the commandments and the results will speak for themselves.
http://verydumbgovernment.blogspot.com/2014/01/gods-world-order-new-world-order-part-1.html


Steve said (August 4, 2015):

The 10 Commandments were written to Israel. When Jesus Christ arrived he "consolidated" them to two (see Mark 12:29ff, Romans 13:9ff).

After the day of Pentecost, Acts 2, believers can now walk in agape, the love of God (Romans 5:5), and we are to walk according to the scriptures addressed to those (from both Jew and Gentile) in the "church of God" (I Corinthians 10:32).

Will we screw up? Sure. But we have an advocate: I John 2.


Art from SA said (August 4, 2015):

Great stuff, man! God's about people, & people are about God.

But don't forget that Jesus said that He came for the fallen. & that was one of His running battles with the Pharisees.

If we remain uncommitted to God, we fall under Satan's order. Even though we made no choice for it.


Below- Ayn Rand- Another Communist Satanist Jew (scroll down)

Topless Twist in War on Gender

August 3, 2015


mohsisters.jpeg
These young airheads are campaigning for the right to go topless in public. Women like them march in "slutwalks" to normalize dressing like streetwalkers. Both campaigns advance an ongoing satanist objective of turning nature on its head. Bflouting natural heterosexual reactions and standards, they undermine marriage and genderTom Bothwell shows the absurdity of their argument woman should go bare chested if men can.



By Tom Bothwell
(henrymakow.com)    

For several days now, the top story on yahoo.ca has been about women going topless in public: "Rally in support of women's right to go topless takes place in Waterloo, Ont."

The protest in question was organized by the Mohamed sisters who, while biking topless a little over a week ago, were stopped by a male police officer and told that the law requires them to cover up.

The officer was in error.  Women going topless in public has been 'legal' in Ontario ever since 1996 when Gwen Jacob, who had been charged with indecency for doing just that, was acquitted by the Ontario Court of Appeal. The judge ruled that baring one's breasts was not a sexual act or indecent and that it did not exceed the 'community standard of tolerance'.

The legalization of public toplessness was, of course, largely a feminist goal and was argued for on the grounds of 'equality'. If men are allowed to go shirtless in public outdoor spaces, then women should be permitted to go topless as well! 

After all, any other arrangement would be a form of discrimination and a manifestation of patriarchal oppression, or so the argument ran.
    
protest2-edit-v2.jpg
 The basic problem with this line of reasoning is the fact that men and women may be equal, but they are not the same. 

Specifically, a woman's breasts are a private and intimate part of her anatomy in a way that a man's chest is not. 

If you were to accidentally touch a shirtless man's chest in a casual way, it is no big deal.

 Now, try touching a woman's naked breasts under similar conditions and see what happens. You're likely to be charged with assault. The woman would experience the contact as a type of violation. 

Similarly, one can ask: how many of these topless women who were protesting with their signs saying "they're just boobs" would appreciate passers-by taking photographs of their breasts and putting them up on the internet for all the world to see? 

How many of them would consider that sort of exposure 'exploitation'? They want to have their cake and eat it too - a very common problem amongst special interest groups in our degenerate age.

None of the domestic media outlets reporting on this story have released uncensored footage of the protest. Might it be that they dare not take the risk of legal entanglements? By contrast, filming a shirtless man or positing his photo on flikr would be a non-event. The double standards are numerous.

-






You can find this article permanently at http://henrymakow.com/2015/08/topless-in-public.html

Henry Makow received his Ph.D. in English Literature from the University of Toronto in 1982. He welcomes your comments at

Comments for " Topless Twist in War on Gender"

MD said (August 4, 2015):

Mr. Bothwell's explanations in this article are brilliant, as are reader Matthew's posted comments (including "men normally don't walk around topless either"). And Mr. Makow's cogent introduction is extremely powerful writing.


Tony B said (August 4, 2015):

I'm too old. Women who think and act as in this article to me are simply cock teasers. That was the common name for them most of my life.


David said (August 4, 2015):

Campaigns like this are a way for people to feel they are doing something courageous and just, while they turn a blind eye to worser evils like Israel's genocide of Palestinians, US wars without end, grand larceny on Wall Street, cops murdering innocents every day and getting away with it. The wide media coverage also distracts the rest of humanity from the real problems in this world.


Matthew said (August 4, 2015):

Anyone half awake can see from miles away, that this is another step of very many steps of our western society imploding. Surely, except on a beach, where women are scantily clad anyway, men normally don't walk around topless either. You just have to go back 100 years, and both sexes were very much dressed up all the time, even on the beach. In what way, from this perspective has it been a case of male freedom and female oppression?

Everything that feminists say is ill thought through and reactionary. It's plain to anyone that there is a constant push in whatever way, shape or form to break down society.


P said (August 4, 2015):

I think it goes deeper than that. We're seeing the evidence of the progressive slutty character of women before our eyes. The guy flesh may love it (that's how we're built), yet is nothing short of the sirens' call analogy.

Liberal women are going to play their sexuality to the hilt as society continues to degrade. I believe that some of them may come around if they find a decent man willing to defend her. Sadly, not too many on either gender want to fill their sexual roles.

Deeply rooted broken hearts, in both genders, outwardly acting out in wild abandon.


Dan said (August 4, 2015):

We went through the late 60's and 70's rock festivals and concerts so these children think they're on the cutting edge of human possibilities. Tit flashing pre-dates Mardis Gras. That's when hundreds of fat, nerdy college girls flock to New Orleans to flash their tits, to the amusement of the local drunks. No beads for you, sunshine. Nude feminists evoke images of pig farms and cattle drives.

For nearly fifty years of feminist demonstrations, they still rely on flashing flabby tits. Is it just a cliché due to lack of imagination? Or is it pathological exhibitionism?


Below - ISIS Consilidates as Iraq Disintegates (scroll down)

Ayn Rand - Another Communist (Satanist) Jew

220px-Thepassionofaynrand_film_poster.jpg

Has anyone else
noticed that Ayn Rand's
doctrine is
characteristically Jewish?










Ayn Rand's influence is still powerful among libertarians today. They fail to see that she was created by the Illuminati to entrap them in a false dialectic.






Slightly revised from July 28, 2014
by Henry Makow Ph.D.


Recently, I dusted off my old VCR and rediscovered my collection of movies on videotape.

When I was younger I used to scour movies for meaning and direction. I went to the theater once or twice a week and would purchase copies of the few films that spoke to me. Last week, I re-watched "The Passion of Ayn Rand" (1999) and was astonished at how intelligent it was.

It reminded me that movies used to inspire and stimulate. Often, a new movie was an "event." It spoke to our condition. As Cabalist possession has taken hold, art has been replaced by occultism, predictive programming, porn and social engineering.


Real art reveals truth.
The Ayn Rand movie gave my parched soul a rinse.

aaapassion.jpg(Left. Helen Mirren and Eric Stolz. Peter Fonda and Julie Delpy complete this exquisite acting ensemble. Chris Menaul directed.)

THE PASSION OF AYN RAND


Ayn Rand didn't believe in passion. She believed in "reason." Yet she was a hypocrite. She fell in love with a disciple half her age, Nathaniel Branden, and then tried to destroy him when he dumped her for a younger woman.

The movie is based on the book by Branden's wife, Barbara. Although she too had been betrayed by her husband, she urged Rand not to destroy his career:

   Barbara Branden: I'm asking you to show compassion.
    Ayn Rand: Why?
    Barbara Branden: It's what humans do.


This cuts to the core of Ayn Rand's philosophy. She didn't believe in the existence of the soul. Our soul is our true identity. It is our connection to God, what makes us "human."

Rand didn't believe in God or religion, which she termed "the supernatural." She was a materialist. "Reason" is totally based on the senses:
"emotion ultimately derives from the thinking one has done, or has failed to do."

(In fact, reason divorced from moral absolutes is nothing but expedience.)

aaaaynrand.jpgAs a materialist, Ayn Rand (1905-1982) was identical to a Communist. Her real name was Alice Rosenbaum and she took her name from her typewriter. She could have been Ayn Remington, but that wasn't as catchy.


ANTI-CHRISTIAN

In addition to being a materialist, she was like a Communist Jew in another respect. Her whole doctrine ridiculed the Christian ethos.

Christ taught that the gospel of love is the path of human evolution. Love your neighbor as yourself. Be considerate. We are all part of one family. Personal and collective happiness require reciprocity.

Instead, Rand asked: "Why is it moral to serve the happiness of others, but not your own?"

I didn't realize that altruism had become a serious social problem.  Ayn Rand gave people permission to be selfish and greedy just like Freud allowed them to indulge their sexual libido.

A reader directed me to a 1928 journal entry where Rand exulted that the statement "what is good for me is right" expressed "the psychology of a real man."  What better description of the arrested development of the Cabalist Jew? See this solipsistic, narcissistic psychopathy operating in Israel today. They're not just God's Chosen people. They're the only people.

When are Christians going to wake up and realize that Cabalist Judaism is a satanic cult, and the NWO represents its ascendency? The Illuminati will destroy the world in their quest to be God. 

galt.jpg
(This was an advertising slogan for Rand's novel, "Atlas Shrugged", which has sold 7 million copies)

WHO IS JOHN GALT?


This explains Ayn Rand's "success."

She was part of the Illuminati dialectic. On the one hand, they constructed Communism and socialism, "collectivism;" and then they used Ayn Rand to posit its dialectic opposite, Rand's "Objectivism"  a form of individualism. While individualists and collectivists fight it out in aPunch and Judy Show, they don't see the puppet masters.


This dialectic is largely specious. Both reject God and the existence of the soul. "Collectivism" is simply a means to win popular support for a totalitarian government run by Illuminati Jews and their Masonic fart catchers. Objectivism releases these billionaire Illuminati psychopaths from conscience or any social obligation.

The Cabalist Jew believes that God is formless, unknowable and not even in the world. The Cabalist Jew alone is human, and channels God's Will.

aaaatlashrugged.jpegAtlas Shrugged is a novel about business titans like John Galt who go on strike because they are hampered by government regulation.

Who is John Galt?  He is Ayn Rand. He is the Cabalist Jew who demands the world accept him as God. He is Rothschild and Rockefeller.

He is the Illuminati.

--------------------

Has anyone else remarked that Ayn Rand's doctrine is
Cabalist Jewish (and satanic)?


Only Christopher Jon Bjerknes.

Ayn Rand Backs Israel as does her namesake Rand Paul (Thanks Annette)

Background on Rand-Rosenbaum from Jewish Journal

See this interview with the engaging Nathaniel Branden who covers the same period in his book Judgment Day (1989.) The book reveals that Ayn Rand and was addicted to amphetamines which she began taking as a young woman as a weigh-loss remedy.

Makow- Cabalist Doctrine of Destruction is cause of human malady.
John Todd's Reference to "Atlas Shrugged" as Illuminati Codebook

First Comment by Dan: 

The tenants of Ayn Rand's 'Objectivism' are identical to those of Satanism.   Don't take my word for it;  Anton LaVey himself said her 'philosophy' was a source of inspiration writing 'The Satanic Bible'.  Levey boiled it down to a set of Satanic 'commandments' to spread the 'doctrine' to a broader masses of adolescent and/or lazy readers.

Henry's right that Rand's hypocrisy was noticed - she didn't meet her own dispassionate standards.  LeVey corrected her error by simply flipping it.

"Satanists see that Objectivism has enthroned reason above the individual as opposed to utilizing this sole means to knowledge as a tool to achieve a purpose. Satanism enthrones the individual as a whole, not reason, as the supreme standard to determine the value of actions (ethics)."

Of course that's how Rand actually lived anyway.

http://www.churchofsatan.com/satanism-and-objectivism.php

Unfortunately, Rand's mind set has become the de facto religion of Big Government, whether in Washington DC, Ottawa, enshrined in every state or province capitol building.
----





You can find this article permanently at http://henrymakow.com/2015/08/ayn-rand-just-another.html

Henry Makow received his Ph.D. in English Literature from the University of Toronto in 1982. He welcomes your comments at

Comments for "Ayn Rand - Another Communist (Satanist) Jew"

LM said (August 4, 2015):

I think her book brings out good points regardless of what people really think,of her.

Endless ever increasing government regulations and stifling bureaucracies are real, negative things. Government has been used to attack industries in the past and currently. Government plays favorites with businesses and targets those it hates.

The idea of withholding something useful from government and the people to effect change and get people to see how important certain things are to them, is effective if you sre not getting any help and especially if you are being demonized by government. It sure beats civil war.

It is like the gun makers refusing to sell to government because they keep demonizing guns as the problem. Or when the gun owners/companies move to friendly states and they take their profits away.


Tony B said (August 4, 2015):

Yeah, Henry, made that connection many, many years ago. She was just too obvious.

The Libertarians, who spew the worst type of unbridled, cut throat capitalism, are totally the same thing. When Ron Paul says he did not name his son after her, he lies. No two ways about it.


Jennifer said (August 4, 2015):

Unfortunately, my communist mother was a fan of Ayn Rand. I only read The Virtue of Selfishness. Whatever failures I've had in my life, my mother chided me saying, 'I was stupid because I wasn't selfish enough!' But how does selfishness play into Love? In my 20s in South Hampton NY, I met some people who were among the Ayn Rand posse. They mentioned how friendly and supportive Ayn was to some beautiful young woman in their group but she turned acid mean and ugly when some man chose the beauty over her. They said that Ayn thought her intellect could woo any man… She had a rude awakening. Her selfishness couldn't get her Love.


Robert K said (August 3, 2015):

Ayn Rand's philosophy is the same as that of Aleister Crowley: "Do as thou wilt shall be the whole of the law". She was an advocate of reason, but reason, becoming rationalization as a cover for pursuing a goal arising from emotion, can be shaped to take you to any conclusion you want.

In effect, these people are claiming god-status for humans.

Compare this position with the one G.K. Chesterton put in the mouth of one of his fictional characters:

"...believe me, the worst and most miserable sort of idiot is he who seems to create and contain all things. Man is a creature; all his happiness consists in being a creature; or, as the Great Voice commanded us, in becoming a child. All his fun is in having a gift or present, which the child, with profound understanding, values because it is 'a surprise.'

But surprise implies that a thing came from outside ourselves; and gratitude that it comes from someone other than ourselves. It is thrust through the letter-box; it is thrown in at the window; it is thrown over the wall. Those limits are the lines of the very plan of human pleasure." (The Poet and the Lunatics, p. 104).

The fact that the clique at the head of Rand's purportedly individualistic philosophy called themselves "The Collective" leaves the impression that they were playing their followers for fools.


Larry C said (August 3, 2015):

Henry, as usual you claim "Christ taught that the gospel of love is the path of human evolution." when according to all versions of the New Testament, Christ taught that the gospel of love is the path of human redemption. (John 14:6)

Remember in previous discussions we learned, Satanism is "defined as the evolutionary development of the human soul." Satanism, Concise Dictionary of the Occult and New Age, p.229


Larry C said (August 3, 2015):

Henry, as usual you claim "Christ taught that the gospel of love is the path of human evolution." when according to all versions of the New Testament, Christ taught that the gospel of love is the path of human redemption. (John 14:6)

Remember in previous discussions we learned, Satanism is "defined as the evolutionary development of the human soul." Satanism, Concise Dictionary of the Occult and New Age, p.229


Richard Evans said (August 3, 2015):

"Her 'Objectivism' was an attempt to make a philosophy of psychopathy."

Rand swiped the maxim "What is good for me is right" from a young man whose exploits exhilarated her during 1928. She even started a novel about him titled, 'The Little Street'. Probably her handler or publisher told her the public wasn't ready for that stage of enlightenment yet. Her inspiration was William Edward Hickman - very famous that year for kidnapping a 12 year old banker's daughter from school under the pretense that her father had been injured and the girl was needed at the hospital immediately. When the father met Hickman, he could see his daughter in Hickman's car, so he gave him the money, but Hickman drove off and dumped the girl's corpse at the end of the block. He'd wired her eyes open to trick her father into thinking she was alive.

Rand's journals, published after her death, reveal her "passion" for the charming, cunning psychopath Hickman. She wrote, "A wonderful, free, light consciousness" born of the utter absence of any understanding of "the necessity, meaning, or importance of other people."

William Edward Hickman was no more Jewish than Ted Bundy. He was a psychopath. So was Ayn Rand. Her 'Objectivism' was an attempt to make a philosophy of psychopathy. But I believe what John Todd said about it - she wasn't a solitary 'genius' who popped out of Russia with a new Promethean teaching from Mt. Olympus. She was an Illuminati agent, given her mission during a sexual affair with Philip Rothschild. Nobody seems to have traced the genealogy of this women, but isn't there a very strong sense of generational Frankist 'pragmatism' in her persona?


anon said (July 31, 2014):

If nutty philosophes exist, few get air time. How many frequented both Phil
Donahue (left-wing) and Firing Line (right-wing)? Enter Ayn Rand.

Wm. F. Buckley (CFR, CIA, Skull and Bones, Knights of Malta) interviewed Ayn
Rand on PBS. The interviews were adversarial, but each was phony.

Buckley's CIA job was herding right-wingers into big government world empire.
Buckley was notorious for duplicity in right-wing circles. His left-wing counterpart,
Noam Chomsky, was also CIA deep cover, according to MI-6 agent John Coleman
(coleman300.com).

Buckley and Tavistock behind him used Rand as foil. She played scarecrow. Inhuman
evil awaits the fall of big government. Boo!

Think tanks also knew her cartoons gave left progressives a cherished Emmanuel
Goldstein portrait of right 'crazies.' If she scared right-wingers into Tavi-think,
how much more progressives.

The premise of Atlas Shrugged is false. Big Business does not despise Big Brother
as in that silly book. (Yes, I read it.)

Name it: Big Banks; Big Ag; Big Med; Big Pharma; Big Retail; Big Oil.

Now think. Look around. What do you see?

No patient or doctor wrote ObamaCare. Big Med wrote it, Big Brother signed
it, and his court rubber-stamped it with tortured legal theory.

Big Banks got beaucoup bucks from Big Brother (TARP I, II, III, QE I, II, III
...).


Transhumanism: The History of a Dangerous Idea by David Livingstone

August 2, 2015

transhumanis.jpg

Transhumanism: The History of a Dangerous Idea 
by David Livingstone

Transhumanism is a recent movement that extols man's right to shape his own evolution, by maximizing the use of scientific technologies, to enhance human physical and intellectual potential. While the name is new, the idea has long been a popular theme of science fiction, featured in such films as 2001: A Space Odyssey, Bade Runner, the Terminator series, and more recently, The Matrix, Limitless, Her and Transcendence.

However, as its adherents hint at in their own publications, transhumanism is an occult project, rooted in Rosicrucianism and Freemasonry, and derived from the Kabbalah, which asserts that humanity is evolving intellectually, towards a point in time when man will become God. Modeled on the medieval legend of the Golem and Frankenstein, they believe man will be able to create life itself, in the form of living machines, or artificial intelligence.

Spearheaded by the Cybernetics Group, the project resulted in both the development of the modern computer and MK-Ultra, the CIA's "mind-control" program. MK-Ultra promoted the "mind-expanding" potential of psychedelic drugs, to shape the counterculture of the 1960s, based on the notion that the shamans of ancient times used psychoactive substances, equated with the "apple" of the Tree of Knowledge.

And, as revealed in the movie Lucy, through the use of "smart drugs," and what transhumanists call "mind uploading," man will be able to merge with the Internet, which is envisioned as the end-point of Kabbalistic evolution, the formation of a collective consciousness, or Global Brain. 

That awaited moment is what Ray Kurzweil, a director of engineering at Google, refers to as The Singularly. By accumulating the total of human knowledge, and providing access to every aspect of human activity, the Internet will supposedly achieve omniscience, becoming the "God" of occultism, or the Masonic All-Seeing Eye of the reverse side of the American dollar bill.
-----
Buy the Book



Canadian currency update for the times

July 19, 2015

Latest News-

currency.jpg

Alex Jones - Zionist Shill by Bob

alex.jpg
Alex Jones - Zionist Shill- email from Bob


At various times you have expressed skepticism and/or outright scorn regarding the true nature and mission of Alex Jones and his Infowars organization. I would like to share my own observations and recent experiences with same. 

I never bought the official 911 story - right from the very moments the various events of the day occurred, it was clear that the emerging story in the media didn't add up i.e. it was clearly a cruise missile that hit the Pentagon; steel-reinforced concrete buildings don't dissolve to dust in mid-air; there was no reason for Building 7 to simply collapse the way it did unless by controlled demolition, etc, etc, etc. and so on.... 

However, it's only been in the last year or so that I've become convinced of the Mossad's definitive role in the planning and execution of 911. It really was obvious all along when you look at the facts that were available from the beginning - but like most things that stare us in the face, I just couldn't see the forest for the trees until recently... 

Rebekah Roth's book provided new facts and helped connect more of the dots (God bless her but it's a dreadfully written novel - oiks! :))   I was already pretty much convinced of Israel's culpability by that point, though, and began posting terse but respectful comments to this effect on various websites including Infowars articles related to 911.  Some of these comments made it through, but many of them were blocked by moderators.  The last comment I made to this effect a couple of weeks ago on Infowars.com did not make it through and I've just discovered that I have now, in fact, been BANNED from making any further comments on the website..  

It all fits now.  Despite the overwhelming evidence pointing to a Zionist global cabalistic conspiracy, Jones has always refused to name the real culprits.  And despite the overwhelming evidence implicating Israel in 911, he will only point the finger at U.S. government ' insiders'.  I've also become aware that Jones is married to an Israeli Jewish woman which, despite Jones' posturing of being a nominal Protestant Christian, make his children officially Jewish according to Judaic rules of bloodline. 

None of this is news to you, I'm sure.  But I just wanted to share my direct recent experience with you as further confirmation that suspicions about Jones' true nature and mission are well founded.